Tag Archives: Land Acquisition

Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition

Posted on by
Reply

The “Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013,” also known as the Land Acquisition Act, 2013,” the LARR Act, or the RFCTLARR Act, was enacted by the Central Government and took effect on January 1, 2014, repealing the colonial Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (the “Old Act”).  

Act’s necessity 

  • Fair compensation is required to protect the property rights of people whose land is purchased, as it ensures people receive fair compensation for the value of their land and any potential damage to their livelihood. 
  • Preventing Exploitation: Transparent procedures and just compensation help to protect landowners, especially those who may be in financial difficulty or are unaware of the value of their property. 
  • Protecting Social Justice: A strong emphasis on social justice principles to prevent evictions of vulnerable populations. It necessitates the implementation of appropriate rehabilitation and resettlement procedures, providing impacted individuals with alternative means of support, housing, and other facilities. 
  • Fostering Public Trust: Transparent and accountable processes increase public trust in the government’s decision-making. When land acquisition procedures are transparently and equitably, the government, landowners, and impacted communities can avoid problems. 

Features 

  • Application to Private Players such as Industrialists: Land can be purchased for “public purposes” as defined by the Act, such as infrastructure projects, public-private partnerships, and military, navy, and air force strategic goals. To purchase land for public-private co-ops or on behalf of private companies carrying out public functions, the government must obtain approval from 70% and 80% of the affected households, respectively. The rule on rehabilitation and resettlement must also apply if private actors acquire land above the amount set by the relevant government through informal negotiations. 
  • Rehabilitation and Resettlement: The Rehabilitation and Resettlement Package under the Acts is more comprehensive with its components. In addition to monetary compensation, it includes provisions for employment, the allocation of alternative housing units, another piece of land, and other entitlements. It also refers to infrastructure facilities at the new location. In addition, when property purchases of more than 100 acres occur, a Rehabilitation and Resettlement Committee consisting of representatives from various stakeholders is formed to oversee and carry out the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Clause. 
  • Compensation: As the title suggests, the most prominent aspect of the New Act is fair pay. The act establishes a system to ensure a minimum level of compensation, which includes payments of 1 to 2 times the market value of the real estate, the value of the asset tied to the land, and Solatium. Solatium refers to the sum paid in addition to the compensation, which is 100% of the Compensation Amount. The initial landowners must receive a minimum payment under Section 26 of the Act. This compensation involves calculating using a multiple of market value. Depending on whether it is rural or urban, the market values the cost of living one or two times. However, the amount of compensation is far more than under the Old Act. 
  • Consent: When the government purchases land for public use and directly operates the land bank, the landowners’ participation or approval is not required. When purchasing property for the start-up of private companies, the consent of at least 80% of the affected families is essential. In a public-private partnership, 70% of the affected families must approve the land purchase process. The statute requires that 20% of the proceeds from the sale of the acquired land or any part of it be paid to the original landowner or their legal heirs to prevent profiteering. 

The Act’s Drawbacks 

  • High Compensation Costs: The Act requires that compensation for land acquired be at least four times the market value in rural areas and twice the market value in urban areas. It can be a significant financial burden for the government and cause delays in land acquisition projects. 
  • The Act is a complex and lengthy process that can make it difficult for the government to acquire land quickly and efficiently. It can also cause delays in infrastructure projects. 
  • Lack of Transparency: The act fails to provide adequate transparency in the land acquisition process. It can lead to corruption and abuse of power by government officials. 
  • Inadequate rehabilitation and resettlement: The act doesn’t provide adequate recovery and resettlement for those displaced by land acquisition. It can cause social unrest and conflict. 
  • The Act fails to consider the social and environmental consequences of land acquisition. 
  • The Act does not provide adequate safeguards for tribal and other marginalized communities’ rights. 
  • The Act does not address the judiciary’s role in land acquisition disputes. 

The Future 

  • Involvement of impacted communities, landowners, and other stakeholders in decision-making: The government can ensure that communities, landowners, and other stakeholders participate meaningfully in decision-making. Holding public hearings, meetings, and consultants to gather feedback, resolve issues, and incorporate them into land purchase and resettlement plans. 
  • Run education campaigns and activities to assist government officials, affected communities, and other stakeholders to enhance their capacities. Inform them of their rights and entitlements as the procedures for acquiring, rehabilitating, and resettling land. Improve understanding of the obligations for transparency and equitable remuneration. 
  • Tracking and Appraisal: Implement a dependable auditing and appraisal mechanism to ensure that the requirements for transparent hiring and remuneration are met. Regularly assess the status of land acquisition initiatives, rehabilitation efforts, and compensation payments. Any discrepancies or flaws need to be rectified with corrective action and accountability. 
  • Technology: Use technological platforms and digital tools to improve transparency, streamline procedures, and expedite the land purchase process. Implement online portals for information distribution, application submission, and compensation payment tracking. 
  • Law Review and Amendment: Conduct a thorough examination of the current land acquisition laws and regulations to identify any flaws and potential areas for change. In light of the review, consider amending the legislation to improve the clauses relating to transparency and equitable pay. 

National Highway Land Acquisition Notification 2022

Posted on by
Reply

This appeal is filed on behalf of the unsuccessful original petitioners to review the order issued by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad on February 28, 2020, in WritC No. 7310 of 2020, by which the High Court rejected the appellants’ writ application, holding that the District Magistrate is competent to investigate the legality and validity of the order issued by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. 

ACTUAL MATRIX 

  • In using its authority under Section 3A(1) of Act 1956, the Central Government sent a notification on January 23, 2015, proposing to acquire a few parcels of land in the District of Mau to widen National Highway No. 29 to four lanes. The land with Gat Nos. 158, 160, and 161 of the village Ahirani Bujurg, District Mau (UP), was included in the notification. 
  • In the previous setting, a further notification was issued under Section 3D of Act 1956, declaring that specific property was for public use. Upon issuance of such a notification, the land becomes the property of the Central Government. 
  • The competent authority, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, determined the compensation to be paid to the landowners (parties before us) for the acquired land in an award dated November 28, 2016, passed under Section 3G of the Act 1956. The relevant portion of the competent authority’s award is as follows: 

Using the stamp rate of Rs. 4,50,00,000.00 as a basis, compensation for the land measuring 3.269 hectares in the village Ahirani Buzurg that was bought comes out to Rs. 14,71,05,000.00, double the amount of which happens to be Rs. 29,42,10,000.00, and compensation for the structure and tree comes out to Rs. 8,01,582.00, totaling Rs. 15,29,06,582.00. 

The value of 100% Solatium on this sum is Rs. 30,00,11,582.00.  Additional compensation of Rs. 3,16,66,953.00 is payable at a rate of 12% from the day of the last publication of Section 3A on March 6, 2015. 

As a result, the total compensation amount is Rs. 63,16,90,117.00, for which I declare the award. By recovering land acquisition expenses of Rs. 6,31,69,021.00 from the Acquiring Authority at a rate of 10% of the total amount of compensation and 100 times the registered values of less land revenue, the amount will be put in the prescribed Account head. 

As a result, a notice will arrive at the relevant Tehsil for entry proceedings. While sending one copy of the Award Order to the Indian National Highway Authority in Gorakhpur, it is necessary to write requesting that the entire amount covered by the Award in question be made available.”

The competent authority is required to determine the shares of the landowners in the compensation by the legislative scheme, Section 3H(3) of the Act 1956. In these cases, the competent authority requested a report from the revenue authorities. The revenue authorities reported the appellants’ and respondents’ shares in their report dated 11.04.2019. This report favored appellants. The relevant portion of the provided reads thus: 

Khasra No. 1353  mentions Gata No. 213, which has the present number of 232/51 minutes, Gata No. 213 B has the offer number 232/183, and Gata No. 213 is the current code of 232/519. Similarly, Gata No. 233 currently has 214/644 acres and is described as “Bagh Digar”. Furthermore, the present number of Gata No. 208 is 227/1.440 acres, in which “Bagh Digar” is mentioned.

The names of Mahadev Shahi, son of Sitaram Shahi and Bholanath, son of Ganga and Saryu, son of Brijrnohan, Caste Kandu, are found in Khata No. 46 of Copy of Khatauni for the crop year 1348, Ahirani  Buzurg, in which Gata No. 232 acres appear, and the name of Mahadev, son of Sitaram Shahi and Bholanath, son of Ganga and Saryu, son of Brijmohan, Caste Kanu, appears in respect of Gata No. 128 for the crop year 1348. Khata No. 92 mentions Gata No. 232/ 0.284 acres and the names of Mahadev, son of Sitaram Shahi, and Bholanath, son of Brij Mohan, Caste Kandu. It refers to Gatas 232/0.539 and 233/0.644, two Gatas totaling 1.163 acres, which is correct. 1348 is the crop year, also known as Jamman 12. 

The allocation was based on 12 equal shares in Gata No. 227/1.440 and an equal share of Salum in Gata Nos. 232 min./0.551, 232/0.183, 232/0.539, and 233/1.624. Because the road connects Hashiya Doharighat and Gazipur, the applicant owns a third of Gata Nos. 232 and 233. 

Property Prices Set to Soar in Twin Cities

Posted on by
Reply

The lands in Noida and Greater Noida will make houses costlier in both cities. Out of 54 villages in Noida, 40 have been agitating for plots for years. So, more land is still required. There will be no land left for allotment to developers. Demand for land is ever increasing; land prices are bound to go up considerably. Apart from 10,000 odd farmers who are seeking developed land plots, about 4500 farmers in 11 villages of Noida, whose land was acquired before 1997 have also launched an agitation.

The authority says in order to meet the demand the option of raising floor area ratio that allows construction of bulkier buildings. But this alone can’t solve the crisis. The land rates have to go up.

In Greater Noida, the situation is different. Here, two court decisions have quashed forcible acquisition of about 750 hectares of land in two villages. Other villages have also moved court. The process of out-of-court settlement is on. If the farmers are paid more, land prices automatically will go up. If there is no out-of-court settlement, land has to be reacquired under the state’s new acquisition policy, which leaves less saleable land with the authority.

Talks Fails, GNIDA CEO faces ‘Hostile’ Crowd.

Posted on by
1

Greater Noida: 11 days left for the state government to work out an out of court settlement with Noida Extension farmers, the GNIDA has rushed talks but without success. The discussion between authority and the farmers of Patwari village failed on the issue of compensation, because back to back court orders quashing forcible land acquisition. The fate of 1 lakh houses in Noida Extension hangs in the balance.

The CEO of GNIDA Rama Raman, faced a hostile crowd of farmers, who said if the authority could not hike the compensation then there is no point of holding this discussion. They also accused the authority of trying dividing farmers by giving rehabilitations and other benefits to selected farmers, to weaken the movement against land acquisition.

Farmer leader said the authority is trying to play divide and rule policy by keeping land of some influential farmers. He told CEO, no out of court settlement could be reached out without hiking the compensation. The CEO said 4 bighas of land belonging to the village head would be regularized and not termed as encroachment.

The discussion between the authority and the Patwari village’s farmers failed on the issue of compensation. The authority wants to acquire the land and pay according to new acquisition and rehabilitation policy which allows the authority to give farmers bigger developed land plots, Rs 200 more per sqm as cash compensation, besides annuity payouts.

Farmers should be Given Right to Sell 100% of their Land – BJP

Posted on by
Reply

The BJP has said that the draft Land Acquisition and Resettlement and Rehabilitation Bill 2011, which is now in public domain, is good but cannot be accepted in its existing format.

Sangh Priya Gautam, the former Union minister said, farmer should be given the right to sell 100% of their land. In Greater Noida, the Formula 1 racetrack required only 1000 acres of land but 2500 acres were acquired and allotted to a private builder by the government.

Land should be taken on lease from farmers. The ownership should remain with farmers, said a BJP leader. Another major aspect of the centre’s draft is that the urgency clause can be imposed only at the time of natural calamity or can be imposed in case of national security.

Gurgaon Farmers Plan to Move Court for Trust Land.

Posted on by
Reply

Gurgaon: Farmers of Ullawas village decided to move to High court of Punjab and Haryana to reclaim land leased for 33 years to the Rajiv Gandhi Charitable trust in 2009. The land was leased for setting up a charitable eye hospital on 5 acres of Panchayat land. They have also decided to move court to reclaim an acre of land leased to another social organization, the Church Gate Medical Society, for setting up a dental facility.

We will also file a petition against government officials who were instrumental in pressuring the panchayat head and members to pass the resolution and sign lease deeds in favor of these societies. The deputy commissioner on the direction of Harayana Government threatened to dissolve the panchayat and dismissed sarpanch, forcing them to pass the resolution and sign the leads.

However, Prakash the Sarpanch, refused the allegations of pressure on the Panchayat by the deputy commissioner. A bunch of politically ambitious farmers are trying to flare up the issue to gain political mileage.

Real Estate Suffers due to Regional Laws

Posted on by
Reply

3D Realty Handshake
In past few years, the realty sector has shown tremendous growth but according to experts, it may still remain a regional play in the country. The underlying reason is that different regions have different laws.

JLLM,Jones Lang LaSalle Meghraj, a property consultant firm’s  Country Head and Managing Director Anuj Puri said that developers experience difficulties in having a pan-Indian presence due to the different procedure and different laws in every state for acquiring land, property taxation and approvals for projects.

Since there is a need of understanding local dynamics for developing realty projects, many developers take property sector as a regional business.

The problem for developers of having a pan-India presence cannot be helped until there is in land acquisition process and regulatory approvals are the belief of many consultants and developers.