‘Land law changes balance development and justice’

Just a week after Parliament adjourned after its Winter Session, the government had on December 31, 2014, promulgated the ordinance to amend some provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation (Amendment) Act, 2013.

While President Pranab Mukherjee is understood to have enquired into the urgency for the ordinance before signing it, the move was also opposed by Opposition parties with Congress leader Jairam Ramesh describing the amendments as “disturbing” as they would encourage forcible eviction.

However, the finance minister brushed aside criticisms and said that the amendments were based on “extensive consultations with states” and were necessitated as a proposed notification on compensation and resettlement and rehabilitation (R&R) could not be placed before Parliament for approval before the deadline of December 31, 2014.

“31st December, 2014 being the last day for such a notification, the government decided to amend the Section 105 and apply all the compensation and rehabilitation and resettlement provisions of the 2013 Act to the thirteen exempted laws… This also explains the urgency of issuing the ordinance on the last day of the year since otherwise the government would have been in default of the complicated approval provisions outlined in the 2013 Act,” he said.

The compensation provisions in the 1894 Act were highly inadequate, Jaitley said, adding, “It was desirable that higher compensation coupled with an R&R package be provided. The 2013 Act did that. I support the 2013 Act on that ground.” But, thirteen Acts of Parliament, which provided for land acquisition, were put in the Fourth Schedule of the Act, he said.

Section 105, which provided that the government could issue a notification and direct ‘any’ provision of the Act relating to compensation or R&R would be made applicable to the exempted Acts.

Defending the government’s move, he further said, “Those who are opposed to it can certainly mandate their party’s state governments not to use the provisions of the ordinance. History will judge how these states will lose out in the era of competitive federalism.”

Further, the 2013 Act had over 50 drafting errors, he said, adding that some of these are being “cured” through this ordinance, such as the earlier provision that unused land has to be returned five years after the acquisition or barring the building of private educational institutions or hospitals on the acquired land.

“How will new smart cities and townships come up? Will they only have a civil hospital and a government school/ college and no other healthcare and educational institutions will be allowed to be established there?” he said. A larger public interest always prevails over private interest, he added.