Land Law in Search of Dumping Ground
Land cannot be left to the states without legislation
The strategy to let the states devise their own ways to acquire land, hinted at by the government after the meeting of the Niti Aayog governing council, might seem attractive in principle but resolves nothing in practice. As of now, the 2013 Act is in force. For a new regime to take effect, whether the 2015 law or of the new strategy of leaving everything to the states, the 2013 law will have to be repealed or superceded. That calls for legislation, with both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha agreeing to make the change. Since this agreement is missing, all that the government's new so-called strategy amounts to is political disowning of a hot potato, putting any amendment to the law in cold storage for an indefinite period.In the meantime, it is to be noted that some significant acts of land acquisition have taken place or are taking place in some states. The government of Uttar Pradesh has acquired sufficient land to build an expressway between Agra and Lucknow. The Chandrababu Naidu-led government of Andhra Pradesh is acquiring land for a new capital city with relative ease. When farmers see value in giving up some land, they do it with gusto. After initial setbacks, the Mayawati government in Uttar Pradesh, too, had arrived at a method of acquiring land that was agreeable to farmers, involving upfront compensation, annuities over an extended period and return, in developed form, of about an eighth of the acquired land to the farmer. The previous Haryana government led by Hooda, too, had arrived at a similar compensation package.
This newspaper has long advocated a model of lease, instead of total alienation of land and one-time compensation, so that the farmer remains a stakeholder in the value created by the new, non-farm use of his land. It is better to let different states find their own methods of releasing land for industry , without a straitjacket imposed by the Centre. No law can refuse to accept that farmers, too, have property rights and a right to fair compensation. The effort should be to work for consensus on this principle. That calls for engagement, not subterfuge.
This newspaper has long advocated a model of lease, instead of total alienation of land and one-time compensation, so that the farmer remains a stakeholder in the value created by the new, non-farm use of his land. It is better to let different states find their own methods of releasing land for industry , without a straitjacket imposed by the Centre. No law can refuse to accept that farmers, too, have property rights and a right to fair compensation. The effort should be to work for consensus on this principle. That calls for engagement, not subterfuge.
