Jaitley also dared opposition-ruled states not to implement the Ordinance, saying they will lose out in the era of "competitive federalism".
Justifying the Ordinance, Jaitley said it has been brought after extensive consultations with the state governments of most political parties supporting the changes.
"The amendment... Balances the developmental needs of India, particularly rural India, while still providing enhanced compensation to the land owners," he said in his Facebook post titled 'Amendments to the Land Acquisition Law - The Real Picture'.
"The amendment ordinance is based on extensive consultations where State Government of most political parties supported these changes. Those who are opposed to it can certainly mandate their party's State Governments not to use the provisions of the ordinance. History will judge how these States will lose out in the era of competitive federalism," he said in his post.
More From This Section
He criticised the Congress saying the 2013 Act brought by the UPA regime had drafting errors and was "clearly defective" and said that the amendments in the Act brought through the ordinance would ensure higher compensation to land owners while fulfilling developmental needs of the nation.
"Some are being cured through this ordinance which alters the earlier mandate of the 2013 law that unused land has to be returned five years after the acquisition. The earlier provision was clearly defective," he said.
Jaitley said the needs of a modern growing and developing India need a balanced approach.
"Development and justice to the land owner must coexist. One cannot be done at the cost of the other.
Jaitley said the need to amend this Act was due and that it had been repeatedly mentioned that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 had become obsolete and needed amendment.
The decision of the Cabinet to adopt the Ordinance route to push changes in the land acquisition laws evoked sharp reaction from former minister and Congress leader Jairam Ramesh who had described the amendments as "disturbing" saying they would encourage forcible eviction.