UT has different standards on different land acquisitions

The Chandigarh Administration acquired a piece of land measuring 37.55 acres,falling in the Revenue Estate of Manimajra village,for public purposes “for the development of a residential-cum-commercial complex,Scheme No. 2,Pocket No. 2,of the Notified Area Committee,Manimajra (vide notification dated October 19,1989). For the land acquired under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894,compensation was also awarded to the area inhabitants on February 2,1990. But the administration could never take physical possession of the land.

In February 2009,on instructions issued by General Rodrigues,the Chandigarh Administration ordered,“On persistent demand from the affected persons,the Chandigarh Administration has decided to withdraw from the acquisition of the land,which is under heavy habitation.”

“Now,therefore,in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894,the Administrator,UT,is pleased to withdraw from acquisition of the land measuring 6.11 acres mentioned in the schedule below,which was acquired vide Award No 416,dated February 5,1990,” the order added.

The same administration is taking so long in deciding on the land acquired for the third phase of IT Park. In fact,the affected persons whose land has been acquired by the administration had moved Punjab and Haryana High Court. The case is pending and both the Chandigarh Administration and Ministry of Home Affairs had been asked to clear their stand on the issue. However,both had been shirking away from taking a call.

While the UT Administration awaits instructions from the MHA,the MHA has now said that the Administrator has the powers to take a call. “Two independent and impartial inquiries/ special audits by MHA have concluded that the land acquisition for the third phase of the IT park is totally unjustified. Union Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal,who is also a local MP,has categorically stated that the land should be released to the land owners. Recently,the MHA mentioned that the UT Administrator is the competent authority to take a decision in the matter. We earnestly call upon the UT Administrator to scrap IT Park phase-III and denotify the land in the interests of hundreds of affected families”,said H S Johl,President,Manimajra Farmers Welfare and Environment Protection Society.

On the other hand,none of the officers of the Chandigarh Administration were willing to say anything on the issue.

The acquisition saga

*Chandigarh Administration acquired land on orders of UT Administrator for developing third phase of Rajiv Gandhi Chandigarh Technology Park.

*After anomalies & irregularities were highlighted in media,MHA ordered special audit on various projects conceptualised and allotted by Chandigarh Administration

*Special audit raised serious objections to land acquired for third phase of IT Park and called acquisition “unjustified”. Same special audit report was submitted in court as well

*Courts asks both UT Administration and MHA to clear their stand on land acquisition.

*While UT has been consistently passing buck to MHA for taking a decision,MHA had been reverting the matter to UT,saying only the Administrator has powers to take a call

The posers

*If UT Administrator has to take call on land acquisition,he has already done so and acquired the land. Then what significance does the special audit report,in which MHA has called acquisition “unjustified”,hold?

*If MHA has raised objections and called acquisition “unjustified”,why doesn’t MHA take call and order UT Administration to release the land?