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 as per the new law. But it is also feared that it would open a Pandora's box of litigation as well as reopening of cases that are decades old.
The provision contained 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 like Chindwara and Narmada valley in Madhya Pradesh and Orissa, not to speak of Bhatta Parsaul in Uttar Pradesh a place whose cause was taken up by Congress General Secretary Rahul Gandhi himself. And hence it is all set to be a pre-election bonanza for many aggrieved people.
The clause is even being referred to as the Chindwara clause or the Kamal Nath clause by insiders in the party suggesting that the Parliamentary Affairs Minister wanted the clause inserted to woo angry voters in his constituency of Chindwara. The other view is that the clause was inserted in spite of Nath's opposition to it.
A month ago, Chindwara had been turned into a fortress with police forces as protests peaked against the use of land acquired for a thermal plant and an irrigation project being transferred for the private power plant of Adani. It may help Kamal Nath score a brownie point there, say activists from the area.
In Bhatta Parsaul in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh land from farmers was acquired for building townships around the Yamuna Expressway, under a public private partnership despite their protests.
Similarly, protests have marred acquisition of land in Haryana with farmers refusing to allow possession of acquired land in places like Palval where 883 acres are under dispute.
The retrospective clause in the Bill renamed as The Right to Fair Compensation, Resettlement, Rehabilitation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Bill, would apply in all those cases where acquisition is disputed, or compensation is pending or disputed.
The clause provides that the new law will apply to all ongoing land acquisition where no award has been made under the existing Land Acquisition Act of 1894. It further says that the compensation package of the new law would apply also where payments have been announced but possession not taken, or compensation not paid or accepted under protest.
Acquisition would be considered as lapsed if possession of land has not been taken or compensation not paid for five years before the new law comes into force. This latter clause could help 30,000 farmers in three villages of Chindwara who gave up 750 acres in 1986 to the government but protested after the latter handed over the land to Adani three years ago for a 1,300 MW power plant.
But farmers in the area feel that 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 that if true then it would 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 today he chose the platform of a Congress workers meeting to unfold details about the Bill on Friday, underlining the political nature of the Bill.
