Â
Parameter |
Land Acquisition Act 1894 |
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 |
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2015 |
Public Purpose |
Several uses including development and housing projects, infrastructure
etc., are Inclusive of use by certain companies under certain conditions. |
No changes. |
Exclusion of land for private hospitals and private educational
institutions. |
Consent from Affected People |
No such clauses within the Act. |
Consent of 70% of people for Public-Private Partnerships; Consent of 80%
 of displaced people for acquisition of private companies. |
5 categories mentioned which are exempt from the Act: 1) Defence 2)
Affordable Housing 3) Rural Infrastructure 4) Industrial Corridor 5)
Infrastructure |
Social Impact Assessment |
No Provision |
Has to be taken for every acquisition. |
The above 5 categories are exempt from this however, there are limits
added on irrigated land. |
Market Value |
Intended use of land is expressly prohibited in determining the market
value and is based only on the current use of land. |
Value specified in the stamp duty and the average of 50% recorded price
in the vicinity in sale of land |
Same as the 2013 Act. |
Compensation |
Based on market value. |
Two times the market value in Urban areas; Four times the market value in
Rural areas. |
Same as 2013 Act. |
Rehabilitation and Resettlement |
No provision |
R&R necessary for all affected families; Minimum R&R to be
provided to each family plus employment to the affected family. |
R&R award for each affected family with a mandatory employment of at
least one member of the affected family. |
Food Security |
No provision |
Acquiring multi-crop last is only the last resort. If acquired under
special circumstances, the States have a duty to cultivate an equal area of
land elsewhere. |
No limit on the above mentioned 5 categories. |
Â
Problems |
Description |
Forced Displacement |
Forced displacement occurs when
individuals or communities are compelled to leave their homes or land against
their will due to land acquisition projects. This can lead to social,
economic, and psychological hardships for affected populations, including
loss of livelihoods, disruption of social networks, and loss of cultural
heritage. |
Inadequate compensation |
Inadequate compensation refers to
situations where affected landowners or communities receive compensation that
does not adequately reflect the true value of their land, assets, or
livelihoods. This can result in financial hardship, inequality, and resentment
among affected populations, undermining the legitimacy and fairness of the
land acquisition process. |
Environmental concerns |
Environmental concerns arise when land
acquisition projects pose risks to ecosystems, natural resources, and
biodiversity. These concerns may include habitat destruction, deforestation,
pollution, water contamination, or disruption of ecological balance.
Environmental impacts can have long-term consequences for local ecosystems,
wildlife, and human health. |
Lack of transparency |
Lack of transparency refers to a lack of
openness, accountability, and information sharing in the land acquisition
process. This can manifest as insufficient public consultation, limited
access to project information, opaque decision-making processes, and a lack
of clarity regarding project objectives, costs, and benefits. Lack of
transparency can erode trust, foster suspicion, and contribute to conflicts
and grievances among affected stakeholders. |
Â
Risks of Displacement, Rehabilitation and Resettlement: By recognizing these
multidimensional risks and losses, policymakers, development practitioners, and
stakeholders can better understand the complex impacts of displacement and
design interventions that address the diverse needs and vulnerabilities of affected
populations. Effective mitigation measures should aim to safeguard human
rights, promote social justice, and support sustainable development outcomes
for displaced individuals and communities.
Risks |
Descriptions |
Economic Losses |
These include tangible
economic impacts such as loss of assets (land, property), livelihoods,
income, and opportunities for economic advancement. Displacement can disrupt
sources of income and result in reduced economic well-being for affected
individuals and communities. |
Social Losses |
Social risks and losses
encompass disruptions to social networks, relationships, and community
cohesion. Displacement can lead to the loss of social ties, support systems,
and traditional community structures, resulting in social dislocation,
isolation, and marginalization. |
Cultural Losses |
Displacement often
entails the loss of cultural heritage, traditions, knowledge, and practices
that are integral to the identity and well-being of affected communities.
Cultural losses can include the erosion of language, customs, rituals, and
connection to ancestral lands. |
Losses in Cash and in Kind |
These refer to both
tangible (cash) and non-tangible (in kind) losses experienced by displaced
individuals and communities. Tangible losses may include the monetary value
of assets lost, while non-tangible losses may encompass intangible aspects
such as emotional well-being, dignity, and quality of life. |
Loss of Opportunities |
Displacement can result
in missed opportunities for education, employment, social advancement, and
economic development. Displaced individuals may face barriers to accessing
opportunities for personal and community growth, hindering their ability to
rebuild their lives in resettlement areas. |
Loss of Power |
Displacement often
exacerbates existing power imbalances and inequalities within society.
Vulnerable groups, such as women, indigenous peoples, and marginalized
communities, may experience a further loss of power and agency in
decision-making processes related to development projects and resettlement
plans. |
Â
Comparative Analysis of Key Clauses in a Concession Agreement in Road
Projects: risk-sharing
in a concession agreement for road projects involves allocating
responsibilities between the authority and the private party based on their
respective roles and expertise. This ensures that risks are managed effectively
and the project is completed successfully.
Sr. No. |
Project |
Key Consideration/Clauses |
Description of key |
Risk Share b/w the Authority and the
Private Party |
1.     |
NHAI Model Concession Agreements in
Design Build Finance Operate and Transfer (DBFOT) mode |
Force Majeure and Termination |
This clause covers unforeseeable events
beyond the control of either party, like natural disasters or wars. The risk
is usually shared between the authority and the private party, meaning both
sides are responsible for dealing with the consequences of such events. |
Shared Risks |
2.     |
Changes in Law |
This clause addresses the risk of changes
in laws or regulations that could affect the project. The authority usually
bears this risk because it's responsible for ensuring compliance with laws
and regulations. |
The Authority |
|
3.     |
Concessionaire event of default |
If the private party fails to meet its
obligations under the agreement, such as failing to complete construction on
time, it bears the risk of default and may face penalties or termination of
the agreement. |
The Private Party |
|
4.     |
Government event of default |
If the authority fails to fulfil its
obligations, such as providing necessary permits or land acquisition on time,
it bears the risk of default, and the private party may seek compensation or
termination of the agreement. |
The authority |
|
5.     |
Delay in land acquisition |
If there are delays in acquiring land
required for the project, the authority typically bears this risk, as it's
responsible for securing the necessary land for construction. |
The authority |
|
6.     |
Financial risks |
Risks related to financing the project,
such as fluctuations in interest rates or availability of funds, are usually
borne by the private party, as it's responsible for arranging financing for
the project. |
The private party |
|
7.     |
Regulatory approvals |
Obtaining necessary permits and approvals
from regulatory authorities is the responsibility of the private party, so it
bears the risk associated with meeting regulatory requirements. |
The private party |
|
8.     |
Design risk |
The private party is responsible for the
design of the project, so it bears the risk if there are any design flaws or
errors that affect the project's performance or completion. |
The private party |
|
9.     |
Construction risk |
Similarly, the private party bears the
risk associated with construction, including delays, cost overruns, and
quality issues. |
The private party |
|
10.  |
Concessionaire risk |
This refers to risks specific to the
concessionaire's business operations, such as market demand for toll roads or
revenue generation from the project. The authority typically bears this risk. |
The authority |
|
11.  |
Risks associated with operation and
management |
After construction, the private party is
responsible for operating and maintaining the road project, so it bears the
associated risks, such as traffic management or maintenance costs. |
The private party |
|
12.  |
Technology – related risks |
If the project involves new or innovative
technologies, the private party bears the risk associated with technology
failures or obsolescence. |
The private party |
Â
The consequences of land acquisition in India are
manifold. The empirical and theoretical studies on displacement through the
acquisition of land by the government for development projects have so far
focused on the direct and immediate adverse consequences of land acquisition.
Most of the analytical as well as the descriptive accounts of the immediate
consequences of land acquisition for development projects draw heavily from
Michael Cernea's ‘impoverishment risk model’, which broadly enumerated eight
‘risks’ or ‘dimensions’ of development-induced displacement. These eight risks
are very direct and basic which are:
(i)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Landlessness,
(ii)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Joblessness,
(iii)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Marginalization,
(iv)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Loss of access to common property resources,
(v)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Increased morbidity and mortality,
(vi)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Food insecurity,
(vii)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
Homelessness and
(viii)Â Â Â Â Â Â
Social disarticulation
Recently L.K. Mahapatra has added ‘loss of education’
as another impoverishment risk in situations of displacement[1].
Reason |
Description |
Opposition from farmers and landowners |
Farmers and landowners may oppose land
acquisition projects due to concerns about losing their land, livelihoods, or
cultural heritage. They may resist the project through protests, petitions,
or legal challenges, citing issues such as inadequate compensation, lack of
consultation, or disruption to their way of life. |
Legal challenges and court orders |
Land acquisition projects may face legal
challenges from affected parties, environmental groups, or other
stakeholders. These challenges can result in court orders halting or
modifying the project, pending resolution of legal issues related to
compliance with land acquisition laws, environmental regulations, or
procedural requirements. |
Environmental concerns |
Land acquisition projects may raise
environmental concerns related to habitat destruction, deforestation,
pollution, or disruption of ecosystems. Environmental activists,
conservationists, and local communities may oppose the project on grounds of
environmental conservation, seeking to protect natural resources,
biodiversity, and ecosystem services. |
Delay in finalization of compensation
rates |
Delays in finalizing compensation rates
for affected landowners and farmers can stall land acquisition projects. Negotiations
over fair compensation, valuation of land, and disagreements over
entitlements may prolong the process, leading to delays in project
implementation and increased costs. |
Non-cooperation from some landowners and
farmers |
Some landowners and farmers may refuse to
cooperate with land acquisition authorities, impeding access to their land
for surveys, negotiations, or project implementation. Resistance from these
stakeholders can disrupt the acquisition process and lead to conflicts or
legal disputes. |
Technical challenges related to land
acquisition and survey |
Technical challenges such as inaccurate
land records, boundary disputes, or land tenure issues can complicate the
land acquisition process. Surveying land parcels, verifying ownership, and
resolving technical discrepancies may require time-consuming and resource-intensive
efforts, contributing to project delays and complexities. |
 |
 |
Â
A reviewed the four provisions of the Land Acquisition
Act, namely, public purpose, compensation, the procedure of acquisition and the
urgency clause, which had been altered by the LARR Act, and that had been the
subject of intense contestation prior to and at the time of drafting of the
LARR Act.
The emerging narrative is that the claims before the
Supreme Court have been largely brought by two categories of land losers.
1.   Â
Those who accept the legitimacy of
the acquisition process but seek fair compensation
2.   Â
Those who question the legitimacy
of the acquisition process and are unwilling to give up their land
Figure: Distribution
of challenges to fair compensation, till 2016
Â
Figure: Distribution of challenges to improper
exercise of executive authority, till 2016
Case Name |
Factors |
Description of factors |
               Tata Motors (Nano) Project, Singur  [Kedar Nath Yadav vs State of West Bengal
& Ors on 31 August 2016] |
  Land Acquisition    Compensation
Issues    Tata Motors
Pulls Out   Problems
Revealed      Reasons for
Failure |
The government of West Bengal took nearly
1000 acres of farmland in Singur in 2006 so, Tata Motors could build a car
manufacturing factory. They did this without asking the people who owned the
land, which made the locals unhappy. They protested against the government's
decision, especially with the help of the opposition party. Â The government offered compensation to
landowners, but not to agricultural workers who lost their jobs because of
the land acquisition. This caused more problems, leading to protests and
violence. Â After two years of protests and problems,
Tata Motors decided to cancel their plans to build the factory in West Bengal
and moved to Gujarat instead. Â A survey showed that many farmers were
not compensated fairly, and the land records were wrong, which made matters
worse. Workers struggled to find new jobs, and some were paid less than
others who weren't affected by the land acquisition. Â The old land acquisition law from 1894
didn't consider important things like getting permission from the people
whose land was taken, conducting a Social Impact Assessment (SIA), and
providing proper compensation and rehabilitation (R&R) to those affected.
Also, the land records were messed up, leading to farmers not getting enough
money for their land. Plus, the land taken was used for farming, causing food
production problems. |
           Koyambedu Market, Chennai  [Chennai Koyambedu Market vs The
Government Of Tamil Nadu on 21 December 2018] |
  Purpose    Size and Layout    Land
Acquisition        Success Factors |
The Chennai Development Authority set up
the Koyambedu Wholesale Market Complex to ease congestion in the city center.
The market is conveniently located outside the busy areas but is still easily
accessible to residents. It's well-connected by highways to the bus terminal,
railway stations, and the airport. Â The market covers a vast area of 295
acres, divided into different sections for fruits, vegetables, and flowers.
It's a bustling hub, with around 100,000 people visiting every day. Â Unlike the old 1894 Act, the Chennai
Development Authority went beyond the usual methods for land acquisition.
They paid landowners cash compensation based on the current market value of
their land, including any crops they had at the time. Additionally, they
offered a 12% interest rate for the period between notifying landowners and
acquiring the land. They also made sure to properly relocate families
affected by the project. Â The project's success can be credited to
the fair compensation calculations, which looked at recent sale prices of
similar lands. Additionally, implementing the rehabilitation and resettlement
(R&R) process, even though it wasn't required by the 1894 Act, helped
smoothen the acquisition process despite the additional costs involved. |
Narayan Prasad v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2017
SCC OnLine Chh 1226 |
Case Background          Key Issues                  Court's Decision       Significance of the Case |
In this case, the Supreme Court of India
addressed issues related to land acquisition for public purposes under the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the subsequent amendments made to it. The
case specifically dealt with the acquisition of land by the State of
Chhattisgarh for public infrastructure projects.  1.    Validity of Land Acquisition: The primary
issue before the court was the validity of the land acquisition process
undertaken by the State of Chhattisgarh. The petitioner, Narayan Prasad, challenged
the acquisition on various grounds, including procedural irregularities and
inadequate compensation.  2.    Compensation for Landowners: Another
crucial issue was the adequacy of compensation offered to landowners affected
by the acquisition. The petitioner argued that the compensation provided by
the state was insufficient and did not reflect the true market value of the
land.  3.    Compliance with Legal Requirements: The
case also raised questions regarding the state's compliance with legal
requirements such as conducting Social Impact Assessments (SIAs) and
obtaining consent from affected landowners, as mandated by the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act). Â The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the
petitioner, Narayan Prasad, and set aside the land acquisition proceedings
conducted by the State of Chhattisgarh. The court held that the acquisition
was vitiated by several irregularities, including failure to conduct SIAs,
obtain consent from affected landowners, and provide adequate compensation. Â The case of Narayan Prasad v. State of
Chhattisgarh underscores the importance of adherence to legal procedures and
principles of fairness in land acquisition processes. It highlights the need
for state authorities to comply with the provisions of the RFCTLARR Act,
including conducting SIAs, obtaining consent, and ensuring fair compensation
for affected landowners. |
           NHAI v. M. Hakeem (2017) |
Facts of case        Key Principle
set by the Judiciary |
A landmark case that pertains to
compensation claims filed by landowners whose properties were acquired by the
National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) for the construction of highways.
The case is significant as it clarified the principles and factors to be
considered in determining compensation for land acquisition. Â The court's ruling in NHAI v. M. Hakeem
(2017) emphasized several key principles governing the determination of
compensation for land acquisition: 1.    Market Value: The court stressed the
importance of assessing the market value of the acquired land to determine
fair compensation. Market value refers to the price that a property would
fetch in the open market under normal conditions. 2.    Solatium: The court highlighted the
provision of solatium, which is an additional amount payable to landowners as
a form of consolation or solace for the compulsory acquisition of their land.
Solatium is typically calculated as a percentage of the market value of the
land. 3.    Interest Rates: The court addressed the
issue of interest rates applicable to delayed payment of compensation. It
emphasized that landowners are entitled to receive interest on the
compensation amount for the period of delay in payment, based on prevailing
interest rates. Â Underscored the importance of ensuring fair and just
compensation for landowners whose properties are acquired for public
infrastructure projects such as highway construction. The case clarified the
legal principles and factors to be considered in determining compensation,
including market value, solatium, and interest rates. By providing clarity on
compensation standards, the ruling aimed to uphold the rights of landowners
and ensure equitable treatment in land acquisition processes. |
Aligarh Development Authority v. Megh
Singh (2016) |
Principle gives by court |
Come and get – NO Go and Give – YES Â
Compensation of Land Acquisition |
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal
|
Court was considered |
“Possession or Compensation†is replaced
by “Possession and Compensation†and must be lapse of one then it will be
consider as a lapse of land acquisition. |
Â
The original Constitution of 1950 had safeguarded the property
right, and recognized the same under part III of the Constitution. However,
soon after the Constitution of India came into force a long-drawn-out battle
commenced between the persons who were sought to be deprived of their property
and the legislature and executive until its final culmination. Ultimately by
the forty-fourth constitutional amendment right to property as originally
envisaged by the 1950 Constitution was deleted and only a small fraction of the
right was retained in Article 300-A as a constitutional right. The whole
genesis of the dispute over the property right was the unwillingness of the
legislature and executive to pay full compensation or full market value for the
property acquired. The Constitutional obligation to pay compensation underwent
massive changes because of the word ‘compensation’ used in Article 31(2). Hence
tussle between the parliament and the judiciary as a result of which brought a series
of constitutional amendments to property rights.
The landmark LARR Act was designed by the then
Rural Development Minister, Dr. Jairam Ramesh, to be a pro-poor legislation.
There is no doubt that the LARR Act inculcates the three essential requirements
of ‘eminent domain’ within its fold: authority of law, public use and just
compensation. However, this Act has inadvertently severely strained India's
infrastructural and manufacturing potential. As has been discussed in detail,
the provisions of this Act have regressive impact on developmental activities. Very
recently, the Ministry has bowed to the pressure imposed by business and
investor lobbies, and promulgated the pro-industrial amendments to the LARR
Act. The authors have consistently maintained that the Ministry must undertake
dilatory amendments to restore industry's confidence in India's developmental
potential. The authors would nevertheless caution and advice the Ministry to
maintain the fine balance between facilitating land acquisition for industries
with adequate protection for landowners. The Ministry must make the most of
this opportunity to also strengthen the structure to cater to the land owners
without impacting developmental activities. The recent amendments must be
followed by another set of reforms to tweak the current R&R framework and
construct a system that is considerate to the social, religious, cultural and
socio- economic ethos of the displaced persons. These changes will help restore
confidence of those displaced, and they will complement the developmental
activities to be undertaken by the project company.
Â
Â
Â
Â
Author:
Abhishek Jaiswal, LL.M, Student of Department of Law, School of Legal Studies, Central
University of Tamil Nadu. Email – [email protected]
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
[1] Guha, A. (2012); Social Impact Assessment in the Draft Land
Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011: A Critical
Overview’. In ‘Anthropological Impact Assessment of Development Initiatives’,
(2012) Eds. A.K. Danda, K.K. Basa, K.K. Misra. Jhargram: Indian National
Confederation and Academy of Anthropologists
How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...
It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...
One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...
The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept that proposes the unification of personal laws across...
Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy, and the legal i...
Please Drop Your Comments