In
a post put up on his facebook page today, Union Finance Minister, Mr. Arun Jaitley, launching
a staunch defence of his Government’s recent promulgation of an ordinance to
effect amendments to the Land Act, has explained the necessity of amending the Right
to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Resettlement and
Rehabilitation (Amendment) Act, 2013 through the ordinance route, instead of
routing it through Parliament.
Acknowledging
the reality that the 1894 Act had become obsolete and needed amendments, and stating
that the 2013 Act provided for higher compensation coupled with a
rehabilitation and resettlement package, Mr. Jaitley said that he supported the
2013 Act on that ground.
 |
| File Picture: Arun Jaitley |
Explaining
the reason for promulgating the ordinance, he said that Section 105 of the 2013
Act empowered the Government to issue a notification directing ‘any’ provision
of the Act relating to compensation or R&R to be made applicable to the
exempted acts (13 in number) which were put in the Fourth Schedule of the Act,
but that the “Proposed” notification had to be placed before Parliament for a
period of 30 days and Parliament was expected to approve, disapprove or modify
the said proposed notification . He said
that the necessity for an ordinance arose “because
such a notification would have to be put before Parliament in the Budget
session itself in July-August, 2014 and the approval or disapproval taken
accordingly. 31st December, 2014 being the last day for such a notification,
the Government decided to amend the Section 105 and apply all the compensation
and R&R provisions of the 2013 Act to the thirteen exempted laws.” He
said that if the Government had not issued such an ordinance, it
“would have been in default of the complicated approval provisions outlined in
the 2013 Act.”
Mr.
Jaitley held out a word of assurance to the farmers of the country by stating that
as a result of the amendments brought about, the present ordinance would ensure
that they would get higher compensation if land is acquired under any of the
exempted laws. “It goes a step further
than the 2013 Act itself. he said.
Defending
the amendments, Mr. Jaitley said, “When
the 1894 law is amended in the 21st century, it must provide for a 21st century
compensation and cater to the developmental needs of the 21st century. It
cannot completely ignore the developmental needs of the society and mandate
that India does not grow.”
He
said that the amendment which carves out five exceptions for which the
complicated process of acquisition would not apply, namely defence and security
of India, rural infrastructure, affordable housing and housing for poor, Industrial
corridors and infrastructure and social infrastructure projects,would benefit
rural India. “They would enhance the value of land, create employment and
provide rural areas with better infrastructure and social infrastructure. This
is in addition to the enhanced compensation and R&R provisions being
expanded to the thirteen exempted acts”, claimed Mr. Jaitley.
He
said that the amendment balances the developmental needs of India, particularly
rural India, while still providing enhanced compensation to the land owners.
Mr.
Jaitley also stated that the 2013 Act had over 50 drafting errors, which would
be cured thanks to the provision with regard to the rectification of the said errors
in the amendment brought about as a result of the ordinance. “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. Creation of smart cities, townships, industrial corridors, business
centers, defence projects, cantonments, ports, nuclear installations, building
of highways, irrigation projects, dams have a long gestations period. They
cannot be completed in five years. If the earlier provision is to be effected,
we would be a nation of incomplete projects on account of defective legislative
drafting", said Mr. Jaitley, elucidating his point about the 2013 Act having
errors, with a specific example.
Pointing
out another instance of an error that had crept into the 2013 Act, Mr. Jaitley
said: “The draft provisions of the 2013
Act enthusiastically provide that no part of an acquired land could be used for
a private educational institution or a hospital. How will new smart cities and
townships come up? Will they only have a civil hospital and a Government
school/ college and no other healthcare and educational institutions will be
allowed to be established there? The ordinance permits hospitals and
educational institutions to be established on an acquired land. That is the
purpose of acquisition for townships. A township without a social
infrastructure would be inherently incomplete.”
Slamming
the opposition parties for criticizing the Govt move to introduce the ordinance,
Mr. Jaitley throwing down the gauntlet to them, asked, “Will
the State Governments ruled by political parties, which are opposed to this
ordinance, publically declare that they will not use the law which provides for
enhanced compensation in the case of exempted acts and acquisition process
which balances the developmental needs of society, particularly those of poor,
weaker sections, rural India alongwith defence requirements of the country?”
He
said that 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”, added Mr. Jaitley, while concluding his facebook post.
