You might Not be the Owner of the Land Registered in your Name – The Land Acquisition Act says so

Do you know a 100 year old Act may deprive you of your property in a couple of days?

The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 gives considerable power to the government to to acquire any land for “public purposes”. The Act is being misused by both State and Central governments to acquire multitude of lands specially in the rural areas in the illusion of development and urbanization.

Purpose of the Act

Acquisition of land was a primary requirement of the British in order to carry out some of their most ambitious projects such as railways, rural planning and development, construction of public offices, building establishments required by corporations and providing residence to the poor. Thus they enacted a draconian piece of legislation known as the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Features of the Act

1. After the amendment of 1984, the act applies to whole of the country except the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Prior to this amendment; Rajasthan, Nagaland, Kerala and J&K had similar but separate land acquisition Acts.

2. The government may also acquire land under other certain acts such as Coal Bearing Act, Forests Act, Slum Areas Act, Delhi Development Act and Maharashtra Industrial Development Act.

Procedure under the Act

1. The government through publication notifies that the land in a particular locality is needed or may be needed for a public purpose or for a company. S. 4(1).

2. Authorized officers ascertain whether the said land is suitable for the purpose in view S. 4 (2).

3. Persons interested in the property may file their objections which would be enquired by Collector. S. 5-A.

4. Declaration and publication of intended acquisition by Government. S 6

5. The land is to be marked, measured and planned under the supervision of the Collector. Sections 7 & 8.

6. Issuance of public and individual notices to interested persons who may file their claims for compensation. S. 9.

7. Claims are to be enquired by the Collector. S. 11

8. Collector to award adequate compensation which would be awarded after the possession of land by the collector. Present Scenario The Act was heavily amended in 1984 by the Central Government. On one hand, amendment made provisions for efficient and adequate compensation but on the other it widened the scope of Sec.17 of the Act which deals with acquisition of land by companies. It is easier for government companies to acquire land vis-a-vis private enterprises.

The governments have always construed “public purposes” in liberal sense. They have succeeded in classifying any acquisition of land as being in public interest. With the emergence of SEZs and public-private partnerships eminent domain is being abused on a vast scale.

Unfortunately, the people who loose their lands have never been reasonably compensated. They are generally poor and uneducated and have no means to fight their cause. Ironically, the cost of development is borne by people who can hardly afford it.

Instances

1. Tata Nano Project:- After the protests Tata shifted its Nano Plant to Gujarat. But it still holds the lease of the disputed land for another 99 years.

2. Sanand The fertile land in Gujarat is being acquired to make space for the small wonder Nano. The government has already taken 5000 acres of land under its control.

3. Posco The iron-mining project has been delayed for 5 years as the farmers in Orissa are reluctant to surrender their fertile lands. Most of them have been killed or injured during the protests.

4. Reliance SEZ The Supreme Court rejected its special leave petition of Reliance to seek a stay order for land acquisition in Raigad, Maharashtra. However, it was able to acquire 1,150 Hectares of land near Navi Mumbai to accomplish its industrial and residential plans.

5. Arcelor Mittal Thousands of villagers of Jharkhand have contended that the government is selling land of tribals to non-tribals which violates the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act.

Deficient Bills

The government intends to amend the Act. The pending bills propose a number of changes such as re-defining ‘public purpose’; reduction in acquisition of land by private parties; formulation for Social Impact Assessment and establishment of National Rehabilitation Commission.

Although all references to companies have been deleted in the Amendment Bill, 2007; the new definition of “public purpose” includes acquisition for “a person” (Company is regarded as a person in law). The Rehabilitation Bill also has a number of flaws. The language of the bill gives discretionary powers to the government. The bill doesn’t impose only sanction on non-compliance of its laws. Conclusion

In India land is equity. People spend their entire life-savings to purchase a small piece land or any land for sale. Land resources are required by nations to progress. But at what cost? U.S.A and other countries follow a relatively more transparent procedure than India.

The powers of the government need to be restrained. The farmers should be given economic rights in their lands. If they are deprived of their lands, they must be recognized as stakeholders in the projects. Alternatively acquisition of land for commercial purposes must be discouraged. The Act must be abrogated and replaced by a new transparent legislation which sympathetic towards the land owners.

“The act empowers the government to transform an owner into a landless laborer overnight.”

I dedicate the post to my father Mr. A.K. Agarwal, who not only suggested the topic but also helped in research.

Read more

A Raging Cold War between China and United States – Two of World’s Biggest Diplomats

China US Cold War - World's DiplomatsThe prospective meeting of two Nobel peace prize laureate has threatened the China’s peace of mind. Where the meeting of US president Obama and Dalai Lama has brought a ray of hope for Tibetians, the Chinese have taken it as a sign of interference. U.S. has been warned that their association with the Buddhist monk would “seriously undermine the political foundation of Sino-US relations” and “it will certainly threaten trust and cooperation between China and the United States”.

The starting of 2010 also witnessed the Google controversy in China. Google declared that it was no longer willing to continue censoring its results on Google.cn. It was also alleged that the Chinese government might have used Google to spy on human rights activist.  China responded to the controversy saying that the acquisitions are baseless and the foreign companies are required to follow the local laws. Whether or not Google would cease to operate in China is not yet decided but it surely strained the relation between the two countries.

Like Tibet, Taiwan has also been declared an autonomous entity within China itself. However, the independence enjoyed by them is only nominal. Japan and US support complete independence of Taiwan which is considered a threat to national integrity and sovereignty by China.

In 2008 US expected to sale Taiwan Black Hawk helicopters and anti-missile batteries which had created tension between the two. Moreover USA support to Human Rights in China is also considered interference in the internal affairs of the country by the latter. Not only this the trade and economic relationship is also strained between the two. There have been disputes related to tires, steel pipes and even over valuation of Chinese currency.

US owes nearly a trillion-dollar debt to China. One of the major reasons for the Copenhagen deal failure was that a junior official was send to a meeting with Obama in place of Hu Jintao, China’s president. The conflict is not only on political front but also ideological, where one is a strong protagonist of communism the other supports consumerism. In one country the press is given absolute freedom but in other media censorship laws are very stringent.

But in spite of these differences both are diplomatic friends on the world forum. USA is being continuously pressurized by its Asian partner. Its not only because of debt but also because a majority of its population is dependent on cheap Chinese goods. China has emerged a strong nation in due course of time and USA’s current economic condition would make it difficult for US to wage a war against it.

Ironically all prospective candidates for presidents post in the country wanted to be ‘tough on China’ on election but rather it is seen that both Helary Clinton and Obama both have amenable attitude towards China. Not only this Obama was also criticized for avoiding a meeting with Dalai Lama on his China visit. Now if Obama meets his holiness in spite of China’s warning the rift between the two nations would widen. Where his holiness expects support from US in his middle way approach, Chinese want non-interference

Read more