Land Acquisition Bill might open a Pandora's Box of litigation

A provision in the law is going to impact a large number of people who have been protesting against acquisition of land for decades

The land Bill to be tabled in Parliament this week would renew hope for ‘victims’ of many a pending land acquisition case, forcing project owners to pay fresh compensation to evacuees. It is also feared that it would open a Pandora’s Box of litigation, as well as reopen cases that are decades old.

The provision in Clause 24 of the law is going to impact a large number of people who have been protesting against acquisition of their land for decades, in places such as Chhindwara and the Narmada valley in Madhya Pradesh and also in Odisha, not to mention Uttar Pradesh’s Bhatta-Parsaul, a place whose cause was taken up by Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi himself. Hence, the Bill is set to be a pre-election bonanza for many aggrieved people.

The clause is even being referred to as the Chhindwara clause or the Kamal Nath clause by Congress insiders, suggesting the parliamentary affairs minister wanted it inserted to woo angry voters in his constituency. The other view is that the clause was inserted in spite of Nath’s opposition to it.

A month ago, Chhindwara had been turned into a police fortress as protests peaked against the transfer of land — acquired for a thermal plant and an irrigation project — to the Adani Group. It could help Nath earn brownie points in his constituency, activists from the area say.

In Bhatta Parsaul, land from farmers was acquired for building townships along the Yamuna Expressway, under a public-private partnership, despite their protests.

Similarly, protests have marred the acquisition of land in Haryana, with farmers refusing to allow possession of acquired land in places such as Palwal, where 883 acres are under dispute.

The retrospective clause in the Bill, renamed The Right to Fair Compensation, Resettlement, Rehabilitation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Bill, would apply in all cases where acquisition is disputed or compensation is pending or disputed .

The clause provides the new law will apply to all ongoing land acquisitions where no award has been made under the existing Land Acquisition Act of 1894. It further says the compensation package in the new law would also apply where payments have been announced but possession not taken or compensation not paid or accepted under protest.

Acquisition would be considered lapsed if possession of land was not taken or compensation not paid for five years before the new law comes into force.

This clause could help 30,000 farmers in three villages of Chhindwara, who gave up 750 acres in 1986 to the government but protested after the acquired land was handed over to Adani Group three years ago for a 1,300-Mw power plant.

But farmers in the area feel identifying the deserving beneficiaries and reopening or cancelling existing projects may just lead to a spurt in litigation.

“We will have to run from pillar to post to prove that we deserve to be covered under the law. It is meant to turn us into beggars pleading for the promises the law has made,” said Rajesh Bhatti, a farmer activist from Haryana.

Madhuresh Kumar, an associate of Medha Patkar, said the move could open a Pandora’s box of disputed cases, which would be hard to cope with.

One case the Bill would certainly help is that of land acquired in Nangdi in Jharkhand, causing protests and arrest of activist Dayamani Barla. In this case, people have not given possession and their compensation is still with the treasury.

While Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh refused to speak to the media on the Bill, he chose the platform of a Congress workers’ meeting to unfold details about the Bill today, underlining the political nature of the legislation.