Letters: An Act of displacement

This refers to the article “The lie of the land” (March, 30) by M J Antony. It is a fact that the Land Acquisition Act enacted in 1894 and amended in1984 needs changes. The amendments made little difference to land losers, because “eminent domain” continues to be its guiding principle. This Act was designed to serve as an instrument to create enabling conditions for exploiting Indian resources and never for its development. Thus, this presents a definite and strong case for a revision in the antiquated law structure, procedural framework and delivery mechanism. Above all, it is necessary to lay down certain cardinal principles, which may include (a) transparency; (b) participatory decision-making; (c) shared benefits of growth with the affected people; (d) gradual shift from involuntary to voluntary acquisition and (e) protection and enhancement of the quality of affected people. These principles appear missing from the inception of the legal process. The term “public purpose”/“eminent domain” needs redefining in the light of the constitutional provisions.

 

The Constitution promises a social economy, political justice, equality of status and opportunities to all citizens. It is a fact that the paradigm of development has taken away what the constitution bestows so liberally. Compensation procedures under the Act invited court’s intervention to provide facilities that are not envisaged in land acquisition. The government would solve many of its problems by not entering into the business of land acquisition in cases like in development of industries, houses and markets, which should be left to market forces. Acquisition should be confined to essential activities for the government, backed by strong measures as defined in cardinal principles.

Sushil Bakliwal, on email