Pushing through its more industry-friendly amendments to the Land Acquisition Act of 2013 has proved to be the NDA government’s biggest policy battle in its one year in power. The level of opposition to the move, both in the Rajya Sabha where it is constricted by numbers and also from its own allies and parivar affiliates, is something the BJP-led dispensation wouldn’t probably have imagined when it initiated the exercise. Within a month of the new government taking charge, and barely six months after the notification of the legislation brought in by the UPA regime towards the end of its ten-year rule, the then rural development minister, Nitin Gadkari, called a meeting of state revenue ministers. Based on their inputs, he then prepared a report recommending sweeping changes to the 2013 Act. That included doing away with the need for taking prior consent from 70 per cent of affected families in case of land acquired for public-private-partnership (PPP) projects and also undertaking a mandatory social impact assessment (SIA) study within a six-month time frame. These changes were demanded by even by states ruled by the Congress - an argument that the Modi government was to use repeatedly in future. The ordinance amending the UPA government’s Act, brought in on December 31, 2014, went on to expand the list of projects to be exempted from the consent clause and SIA requirements. Besides, it diluted the provisions for return of acquired land to the original owners if not utilised after five years, while also making it harder to prosecute civil servants in case of violations under the Act. [related-post] However, under Opposition fire, the NDA government subsequently relented partially to drop an amendment extending the relaxations to even land acquired for private hospitals and educational institutions. In all, nine amendments were made in the Bill introduced in Parliament to replace the ordinance, but no concessions were made on the most significant prior consent and SIA clauses. While the Centre did manage to pass the contentious Bill in the Lok Sabha, its numbers in the Rajya Sabha — where it encountered an unexpectedly united Opposition — have proved to be a hurdle. The Bill has since been referred to a joint committee of Parliament, whose report is expected in the first week of the monsoon session. The ordinance which was repromulgated on April 3, meanwhile, lapses on June 4. While the future path remains unclear, the BJP leadership does not, on the face of it, seem keen on relenting significantly on its Bill, whose passage — along with that of the goods and services tax legislation — is being viewed by India Inc and foreign investors as a test of the Modi government’s reform mettle. This, even though the current rural development minister Chaudhary Birender Singh is believed to be not too comfortable with the extent of changes made to the 2013 Act. Singh has been a reluctant communicator on the issue, except while having to speak in Parliament. He was, in fact, not even present when three ministers — finance minister Arun Jaitley and law minister Sadananda Gowda, apart from Gadkari — met President Pranab Mukherjee to explain the need for moving the ordinance, despite the matter pertaining directly to his ministry. According to sources, some sections of the government are mulling over the option of enhancing compensation levels — from the existing provision of four times the market value in rural areas and two times in urban areas — in a bid to blunt the Opposition’s attack. Another option the government may consider is narrowing down the list of exempted projects and making their definitions, which critics allege are now open ended and all-encompassing, more pointed and specific.
