Land is needed for all
infrastructure projects. Highway projects require more land in the cities and
road side (for expansion) compared to other infrastructure projects and hence
Land Acquisition is the main reason stated for delay in highway projects.
In India, land is considered as a source of livelihood and identity as majority of the people are
agrarian. Many argue that it would not be fair on the government to rip this
resource from the poor for the sake of infrastructure development. So, there is
a need to balance the objectives of development and social justice. With
this aim, the government took a step to replace the 120-year old prevailing
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. This act came
into force on 1st Jan 2014.
Some of the key reforms
and issues in this act are as follows.
Reforms
|
Issues for implementation
|
There is a minimum consent to sell
from land owners. This is fixed at 70-80% for projects involving private players.
|
Lands in India are highly
fragmented. It is said that 12,000 owners were there in 1,000 acres to be
acquired by Tata motors for Singur plant (West Bengal). It is difficult to
get consent from these many owners.
|
Market value of land fixed based
on consent of land owners, average prices of recent transactions in the
vicinity, etc.
|
-Effective compensation becomes
2-4 times than before. Huge concern for Investors.
-Definition of recent transactions
and vicinity not given.
-Since consent of owners are
required, they would escalate costs to high values.
|
Gram sabhas, Panchayat and
Collector are involved in decision making process.
|
-Sequential time would be 48-60
months from inception to payment of award
-Since more levels of approval, there is scope for misuse of powers (corruption)
|
These new reforms are applicable
for projects of 100 acres in rural and 50 acres in urban
|
Rather than land area measurement,
the number of people displaced would have been a better criteria
|
The Act is criticised to
be favouring land owners and not favouring new projects in this infrastructure
deficient country. This also puts a lot of pressure on the government as it
promises land owners so many benefits like 4X land value, Job to family
member, house of 50 sqm. plinth area etc.
Rather than giving
owners all these benefits, it would be better to give Land bonds (Infrastructure
bonds) as currently practised in many countries. These land bonds would
reduce upfront costs of payment to owners, would be a livelihood for owners who
lost land and land owners would not delay the process as they are also
stakeholders of the project.
TOI - Land Bonds
6 comments:
I think that the first step the government needs to take is to educate people to register their lands at the correct value. In many cases the poor are unwilling to part with their land because of the negligible compensation that they get.
Yes, it is necessary that people register the lands by paying the proper registration cost.
But, India being a socialistic country (at least as per the constitution), government needs to support the poor. When the poor loses his land, he loses not only his land (which can be compensated by money) but also his livelihood. Hence, Government needs to support the person with another job. This job should be such that it just gives sufficient income to a family and so the 'looters of the poor' would not be after it.
While I agree that educating everyone to register land at the correct value is something that needs to be done, it isn't exactly the most practical option.
So during the time when we run this education campaign and hope that over the next few generations we will have all land in the country registered at its actual price, I do feel that the employment provision option is a good temporary solution. Moreover, I think that this employment can be provided through the project itself by employing the displaced in various capacities during the construction phase. A certain percentage of these people may even be retained for the operation phase as well, which sort of makes the whole thing a sustainable model.
Indeed the right to fare compensation and transparancy in land aquisition act by UPA govt: is widely criticized.
It is reportd to have elevated land costs from 5- 40%(http://www.ibtimes.co.in/land-acquisition-act-may-be-amended-without-compromising-farmers-interest-603270)
The present NDA govt: is planning to ammend this act by removing several clauses to make it more investment friendly. Few of them are listed below -
1. The consent clause, requiring 80% consent for Private projects and 70% for PPPs might be reduced to just 50%.
2. The mandatory social impact assesment will be scrapped for smaller projects to avoid delays. Currently around 265 projects worth ₹75,000 crore and 142 projects costing ₹35,000 crore are blockd due to clearence issues.
3. The clause to compensate livelihood losers is expected to be removed but fare compensation as in UPA's ammendment will be retained for farmers/ land owners
4. There is a retrospective clause in UPA's amendment allowing the land to be taken back if compensation has'nt been paid or land aquired within specified time. This has caused widespread concerns and will be scrapped as per the plans of NDA govt:
5. The clause preventing aquisitoon of multi crop land for infrastructural activities will be also scrapped.
The above mentioned pro investor amendment is expected to be made soon by introducing it to parliament in its Winter session.
source: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/govt-seeks-to-make-it-easier-to-acquire-land/
http://www.ibtimes.co.in/land-acquisition-act-may-be-amended-without-compromising-farmers-interest-603270
Indeed the right to fare compensation and transparancy in land aquisition act by UPA govt: is widely criticized.
It is reportd to have elevated land costs from 5- 40%(http://www.ibtimes.co.in/land-acquisition-act-may-be-amended-without-compromising-farmers-interest-603270)
The present NDA govt: is planning to ammend this act by removing several clauses to make it more investment friendly. Few of them are listed below -
1. The consent clause, requiring 80% consent for Private projects and 70% for PPPs might be reduced to just 50%.
2. The mandatory social impact assesment will be scrapped for smaller projects to avoid delays. Currently around 265 projects worth ₹75,000 crore and 142 projects costing ₹35,000 crore are blockd due to clearence issues.
3. The clause to compensate livelihood losers is expected to be removed but fare compensation as in UPA's ammendment will be retained for farmers/ land owners
4. There is a retrospective clause in UPA's amendment allowing the land to be taken back if compensation has'nt been paid or land aquired within specified time. This has caused widespread concerns and will be scrapped as per the plans of NDA govt:
5. The clause preventing aquisitoon of multi crop land for infrastructural activities will be also scrapped.
The above mentioned pro investor amendment is expected to be made soon by introducing it to parliament in its Winter session.
source: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/govt-seeks-to-make-it-easier-to-acquire-land/
http://www.ibtimes.co.in/land-acquisition-act-may-be-amended-without-compromising-farmers-interest-603270
There is huge hue and cry amongst the people when they hear about the land acquisition bill and when it comes to give their lands for developments basis, the major reason for this is the lack of confidence amongst the rural people towards the government and the real state owners because of their past records and their delays in granting compensation. People have not yet received land and job compensation from 15 years in damoday valley project so definitely it’s the lack on the side of government which is not able to make the process simpler and convenient for the people, in turn people are not willing to give their lands for development.
So before blaming the people for the delays government and real state owner should see from their side what is wrong.
Post a Comment