Critical Analysis on Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013

Critical Analysis on Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013

Author :- BC ARYAN , Student , Symbiosis Law School , Pune

aryanbc01@gmail.com

Introduction

The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013 (also known as the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 or the LARR Act or the RFCTLARR Act is an Indian Parliament Act that lays out the procedure and rules for granting compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement to the affected individuals in India. Fair compensation for those whose land is taken away, transparency in the acquisition of land for factories or buildings, infrastructure projects, and rehabilitation of those impacted are all included in the Act. The Land Acquisition Act, passed in 1894 under British rule, was superseded by this new law.

Highlights of the Bill

• The Bill makes land acquisition, rehabilitation, and resettlement. The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 is repealed by it.

• A survey of the Social Impact Assessment, a preliminary notification of the intention to acquire the land, a declaration of acquisition, and compensation to be paid by a certain date are all part of the land acquisition procedure. The individuals impacted by an acquisition must be provided with rehabilitation and relocation services at all times.

• Remuneration for the proprietors of the gained land will be multiple times the market esteem in the event of provincial regions and two times in the event of metropolitan regions.

• The consent of 80% of the displaced people will be required if private businesses or public-private partnerships acquire land for use. Acquisition of enormous parcels by privately owned businesses will require arrangement of recovery and resettlement.

• Acquisitions made in accordance with 16 existing laws, such as the Special Economic Zones Act of 2005, the Atomic Energy Act of 1962, the Railways Act of 1989, and others, are exempt from the provisions of this Bill.

Analysis and Key Issues

• It is unclear whether Parliament has the authority to impose requirements for rehabilitation and resettlement on private purchases of agricultural land.

• Without a minimum threshold, every acquisition may require a Social Impact Assessment, which may delay the implementation of some government programs.

• The consent of 80% of those impacted is required for projects that involve the acquisition of land and are carried out by private businesses or public-private partnerships. PSUs, on the other hand, do not require this kind of consent.

• Recent reported transactions serve as the foundation for the market value. The amount of compensation is calculated by multiplying this value by two in rural areas. An accurate correction for the possibility of underreporting prices in land transactions may not result from this method.

• Land can be temporarily acquired by the government for a maximum of three years. In such circumstances, there is no provision for rehabilitation or relocation.

Need The Indian government was of the opinion that public concerns regarding land acquisition were growing in India. Despite numerous amendments to India's Land Acquisition Act of 1894 over time, the absence of a unified national law that addressed equitable compensation for private land acquisitions for public use and equitable rehabilitation of landowners and those directly affected by loss of livelihoods was particularly concerning. The Forty-Fourth Amendment Act of 1978 omitted Art. 19(1)(f), resulting in the following: "The right not to be deprived of one's property save by authority of law has since since become no longer a fundamental right." The Government of India believed that a combined law was necessary, one that legally requires rehabilitation and resettlement necessarily and simultaneously follow government acquisition of land for public purposes. The 44th Amendment to the Constitution states, "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." 10.6.1979). The amendment ensured that the right to property is now a constitutional, legal, or statutory right rather than a fundamental right. In the event of a violation, the High Court established by Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, not the Supreme Court established by Article 32 of the Constitution, provides the aggrieved party with a remedy.

In addition, no one can question the reasonableness of any restriction enacted by the legislature to deprive a person of their property.

The state must compensate at the market value for the land, building, or structure it acquires (inserted in the Constitution by the Seventeenth Amendment Act of 1964). Similar provisions were made in earlier rulings when property rights were fundamental rights (for example, 1954 AIR 170, 1954 SCR 558, which stated that the word "Compensation" used in Article 31(2) implied full compensation, which is the property's market value at the time of acquisition). "ensure that what is determined as payable must be compensation, that is, a just equivalent of what the owner has been deprived of," the Legislature must ensure. In another case, on July 7, 1983, in State of Maharashtra v. Chandrabhan Tale, Justice O Chinnappa Reddy ruled that the fundamental right to property had been abolished due to its incompatibility with social, economic, and political goals of "justice," "equality of status and opportunity," and the establishment of "a socialist democratic republic, as contemplated by the Constitution." In order to eliminate the remnants of the laissez-faire philosophy and establish a new oligarchy in the name of efficiency, a new property concept should not be adopted in its place. "One is yet to discover an infallible test of efficiency to suit the widely differing needs of a developing society such as ours," according to 1983 AIR 803, 1983 SCR (3) 327) (Dey Biswas 2014). Efficiency has many facets.

In the Lok Sabha, the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Bill of 2011 was presented. In 2007, two similar bills were introduced in the Lok Sabha. The 14th Lok Sabha's dissolution resulted in the expiration of these bills. Discussion of the bill's provisions Definition of public purpose Section 2(1) of the Act defines the following as the public purpose for land acquisition within India: For strategic purposes relating to the Union's naval, military, air, and armed forces, including central paramilitary forces, or any work essential to India's national security or defense, State police, or people's safety; or Railway for corridor purposes Infrastructure projects, such as the following:

excluding private hospitals, private educational institutions, and private hotels, all activities or items listed in the notification of the Government of India in the Department of Economic Affairs (Infrastructure Section)

• Projects that involve agro-processing, the supply of agricultural inputs, warehouses, cold storage, marketing infrastructure for agriculture and related activities like dairy, fisheries, and meat processing, and are owned or set up by the appropriate government, a farmers' cooperative, or a statutory institution;

• National investment and manufacturing zones, as defined by the National Manufacturing Policy, project for industrial corridors or mining activities;

• Structures and sanitation for water harvesting and conservation;

• Project for educational and research schemes or institutions aided by the government;

• Project for sports, medical services, the travel industry, transportation of room program;

• any infrastructure facility that the Central Government notifies in this regard, following its presentation to Parliament;

• Project for families impacted by the project;

• Project for housing or income groups as specified by the appropriate government on occasion;

• Project for arranged advancement or the improvement of town locales or any site in the metropolitan regions or arrangement of land for private purposes for the more vulnerable segments in provincial and metropolitan regions;

• Project for the housing of the poor, those without land, people who live in areas affected by natural disasters, or people who have been displaced or affected by any scheme implemented by the government, a local authority, or a state-owned or controlled corporation.

The owner's consent is not required when the government declares a public purpose and directs control over the land. However, before the government uses its power under the Act to acquire the remaining land for the public good, at least 80% of the project's affected families must consent through a prior informed process. In the case of a public-private project, at least 70% of the affected families should consent to the acquisition process. The Act includes an urgency clause for expedited land acquisition. The urgency clause can only be used for national defense, security, and the rehabilitation of people who have been affected by emergencies or natural disasters.

Definition of "land owner": According to the Act, a "land owner" is a person whose name appears in the records of the authority as the owner of the land, building, or part of it; or a person whose forest rights are recognized by the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act of 2006 or another current law; or on the other hand individual who is qualified for be allowed Patta freedoms on the land under any law of the State including alloted lands; or any person who has been declared to be so by a court or Authority order; Acquisition restrictions The Act prohibits the acquisition of land that includes multi-crop irrigated area. However, such an acquisition may be permitted in exceptional circumstances, subject to a cumulative upper limit set by the State Government for all projects in a District or State. Notwithstanding the above condition, any place multi-crop inundated land is procured an identical area of cultivable no man's land will be created by the state for rural purposes. In other sort of rural land, the all out procurement will not surpass the breaking point for every one of the ventures in a Locale or State as told by the Proper Power. Linear projects, such as those for railroads, highways, major district roads, power lines, and irrigation canals, are exempt from these restrictions. Compensation Under this Act, compensation is provided for the resettlement and rehabilitation of people who have been displaced and who have acquired land under the act.

Conclusion

The new law stipulates the same procedure for all land acquisitions, regardless of the type of land or number of stakeholders involved, which discourages private players and state governments from participating in the cumbersome process. A law ought to be straightforward enough to entice stakeholders to adopt it.

For instance, in the event of an obtaining under Barren Land or Waste Land, the procurement system will be straightforward and efficient in contrast with Provincial Land or Horticultural land.