TEXT :
15.23 hrs.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, the House will take up item no.24. Shri Varkala Radhakrishnan.
SHRI VARKALA RADHAKRISHNAN (CHIRAYINKIL): Mr. Chairman, Sir, it is an admitted fact that the present Land Acquisition Act of 1894 is defective in many ways. The first thing which I would like to point out is regarding the compensation awarded for the land acquired. There is a lot of delay in getting awards for compensation. Now, the Collector is the competent authority and the procedure adopted there takes months and even years to complete it. Then, the reference to the civil court for further compensation also involves a number of years. So, the result is that the poor farmer is put to difficulties. He cannot get compensation at the proper time and he has to wait for years. So, this cumbersome procedure will have to be prevented and it has to be avoided so that the peasant, who is aggrieved, may get the compensation at the proper time. So, for that purpose, we will have to simplify the procedure that is available in the present Act.
Then, the solatium granted for the improvement made in the property is also delayed. He cannot get it at the proper time. Even the compensation that is taken into consideration is very less and the solatium that is determined by the Revenue Officer is also far less than the market value. That will also result in loss to the poor peasant who has effected valuable improvements in the property. So, all these things require some drastic changes.
I would support the Bill provided these provisions are made therein.
Then, I would like to point out another aspect. Now, there is a provision for taking an advance possession of the property. When it is required for a public purpose, the Government or the acquiring authority can take possession of the property even without payment of compensation. That also leads to some difficulty because the land is taken possession of. The concerned revenue authorities do not take any interest in doing justice to the farmer, that is, the person who has lost his property. Such a situation should not continue for ever. That will have to be eliminated.
For that purpose, I would suggest another aspect. Once an advance possession has been taken, the land is kept idle for years. I know of instances where the revenue authorities, after obtaining possession of the property, have been keeping the property idle without doing any improvement on the property for even 15 to 20 years. The property is kept idle or fallow. No cultivation is possible there. In the end, the acquiring authority may say that the property is not required. Then, it has to be returned to the owner without any improvement. So, this process of delay should be prevented. Once the property is taken over, the Government or the acquiring authority must make it sure that the property will be required for the purpose for which it has been acquired. But that is not done. There should be a time-limit for taking advance possession of the property. Rather their taking over the property by advance possession and keeping it idle for a number of years is really doing injustice to the person who is aggrieved. So, I would suggest that there must be a time-limit. It can be one or two years and not more than that. Such an indefinite period of keeping the possession of property without doing anything is detrimental not only to the interest of the farmer - the owner - but is also a national waste even if it is done by the Government. At any rate, the possession of the property should be taken for any public purpose and the public purpose should be achieved within a short time without which there is no justification for continuing the process for a long time. This is another aspect which will have to be looked into by the concerned authorities. So, in these matters, the present law requires some changes.
I know there were municipal acquisitions of landed property. But the municipality will do nothing. They would not take possession of the property. They would not even deposit money in the Treasury for being given to the person who is aggrieved. The municipality or the local body, whichever is applicable, will remain silent for a long time. They will keep it idle for a long time without paying, to some extent, the money required. That will also lead to substantial loss to the farmer whose land is acquired. So, such an uncertain situation should not exist. These are some of the difficulties which are experienced by the farmers at large in our country. In order to obviate these difficulties, it would be better if the present Act is amended in such a way to suit the present conditions.
With these observations, I support the Bill introduced by my friend. I do agree in every way that the present statute will have to be amended. It is only just and proper that he has brought the Bill forward.
But I do not agree with the observation made by the mover of this Bill. That is not good.
With these observations, I support the Bill and the concerned Minister may take all these matters into consideration and bring a new Bill so that in the changed circumstances, the requirements of the nation as well as the requirements of the farmers could be met.
With these words, I conclude.
SHRI P.C. CHACKO (IDUKKI): Sir, I support the Bill moved by Shri Bhagwan Shankar Rawat. Probably some of the legislations which are centuries old are still remaining on our Statute Book. The amendment to the Land Acquisition Act -- I think according to my memory the latest amendment came in 1984 -- was to rectify some of the anomalies that crept into the Act or which required timely changes which should have been affected into the Act. But the fact still remains that this statute requires a lot of amendments and in a developing society like ours for various reasons the Government will have to acquire land. And the Collector who is empowered according to the Act to acquire land does so by the discretionary powers. In fact, when the Collector or any other authority whoever it may be, has got very vast powers which are beyond all definitions, probably, this is causing a lot of hardships to the land owners.
In fact, the fact still remains that this has become a racket of late. We all know that for Government purposes land is being acquired. And today because of the recessionary trends in the economy, land sale has come to a grinding halt. Land valuation is also dipping and land is not very appreciating commodity nowadays. But the fact remains that three times or four times of the value of the land is being awarded by the courts and I cannot say here in Parliament that there are some malpractices or corrupt practices in the courts. Probably in Parliament if I say that corrupt practices are there in the courts, it may not be correct. But we all know the tactics applied by the interested parties, that with the connivance of the lawyers as well as of the courts unreasonable compensation in many cases is being awarded to the land owners and land acquisition cases have become a very fertile ground for many of the lawyers.
I am not blaming anybody. But the fact is that the kind of cases which are pending for years together in the courts and the compensation the Government is giving is beyond all reasonable limits which is happening on the one side. On the other side what is happening is that whatever is the malpractice or the reasonable price, three or four times of it is awarded. by the courts and whatever is awarded by the court is considered as sacrosanct and there is no question also. The Government is shelling out money and this has become a very lucrative business in many cases.
Another thing which is happening is that as mentioned by my hon. friend Shri Radhakrishnan, what is the public purpose and what exactly is the extent of land required for a public purpose. Without looking into all these aspects the whole area is frozen. In fact, at many places, it is happening that land acquisition is done without going into the exact requirement of the land by the Government, whether it is for an industry or for any Government purpose, how much land is required, even without making a preliminary study or an exact study, one whole area is frozen. So, what is happening is ultimately the poor owner of the land cannot do any important thing if anything is needed because the whole area is frozen. One does not know how much time is going to be taken up. Here Section 28-A takes about the minimum price. That is very relevant according to me because the requirement of the Government or of the public purpose, for an industrial purpose, that can be gone into at a local level.
It is in the sense that what exactly is the requirement of that particular industry or that particular public purpose can be very well defined. If 10 acre of land is required for a purpose and if the whole area is frozen, the casualty is the owner of the land. The owners, in many cases, may be poor or holders of five cents or ten cents like that. In many other industrial areas, what is happening is that the land which is in the periphery of the industrial area is always under a constant threat. They cannot do any improvement in their land. They cannot construct any building in their land because every time the threat is that this may be taken for an expansion. So, it is basically infringing into the fundamental rights of an individual. So, land acquisition has to be rationalised and it has to be scientifically defined. That is why, this Land Acquisition Act needs a lot of amendments. Probably, an amendment should have been placed before this House officially by the Government. Shri Bhagwan Shankar Rawat has taken pains to bring some very good amendments for rationalising this old statute. I feel that many more such amendments can bring this legislation up-to-date, and which can rectify many of the lacunae or deficiencies which are existing in this law.
Some of the amendments being proposed will definitely make this law more progressive or more up-to-date. So, with that, the limited intention can be achieved by passing this Resolution. Of course, very often the Private Member's Resolution is being accepted in this House. The Government takes a view that it is after all a Private Member's Resolution. When a Resolution is being accepted, probably, it becomes almost mandatory on the Government. I do not know whether I can use the word `mandatory'. But the Government has got a responsibility and it has to look into the sentiment and the opinion that is being expressed in this House. So, here without any dispute, none of the Members who participated in the discussion said that these proposals cannot be supported. So, this shows the unanimity, the urgency or the necessity of the amendment in such an Act. So, a very few amendments have come for the Land Acquisition Act which is a century old. Only once it had come and very minor amendments were proposed.
Now as a Private Member, the amendment moved by Shri Bhagwan Shankar Rawat brings to light the urgency of the situation as to how and what kind of changes are required in this kind of a statute. Probably, in a society like ours, developmental purpose has to get some priority because there has to be some powers vested with the authorities. Otherwise, probably, the individual's freedom and the public purpose will come into clash. So, naturally, the public purpose or the public interest has to get precedent. So, in that kind of a situation, the authority with the Collectors or with the concerned officers is a must. Probably, they cannot do away with it. At the same time, it should not infringe beyond a reasonable level into the freedom of the individual. Here is a situation where the individuals are constantly at threat or justice is delayed to them because today it is prescribed in this amendment that if it is not used for 10 years, it can be taken back. Even 10 years is too long a period. So many things can happen in 10 years' time. How much does the property value go up if the economy is in a vibrant state? We have seen that in the past. In five years' time or in ten years' time, the property value goes up by three or four times like that. I do not think that will happen if the BJP Government is continued because the property value is going down. The economic condition as a whole is going down.
PROF. P.J. KURIEN (MAVELIKARA): The value of human life is going down.
SHRI P.C. CHACKO : Everything is going down. As Prof. Kurien said, even the value of human life is also going down. I do not know whether Major General Bhuvan Chandra Khanduri is aware of that. This danger is not there because even if the whole land is frozen, as long as your Government is there, there is no harm for the land owners. But if in a situation where the economy is to grow at a reasonable level, the land prices will increase manifold. In two or three years' time, it is going to be 100 or 200 per cent like that. Freezing the land to the disadvantage of the poor landholders is a great injustice. So, Shri Bhagwan Shankar Rawat has suggested 10 years' period as a limitation period. If it is not used, then you please give it back with the improvement charges. I feel let the collective wisdom of the House prevail and it should see, there is a time limitation. That will send a good message. Individual's freedom is the most important thing in our society, in our Constitution.
18.12.98 Uncorrected/Not for Publication ###
)) That is always our plus point in our society. Individual freedom should not be allowed to infringe upon in an unlimited manner by the overriding powers of the Government or by the authority. That situation should not happen and, in that aspect, I wholeheartedly welcome this Bill. If that limitation can be further reduced to a period of five years or for three years or some reasonable period like that, it will be more useful to the people.
As public workers in day to day life, we come across a number of instances where such things are happening. It is a famous dictum in our legal system that justice delayed is justice denied. After 15 years, if justice is administered to somebody who is going to benefit? Administration of justice is inordinately delayed. It is happening in all these types of cases. Probably these minor amendments which are being proposed can be taken by the Government. A very responsible Member from the ruling party has moved this motion. Sometimes if it is a Private Member's Bill and if it is passed, what will happen to the Government? Then it is binding on the Government. All these kinds of things are there. We have attained flexibility in the system. So, there is no harm in Government accepting this Bill. If this Bill is passed by this House, I do not think it is going to do any harm. It is a custom in this House that the Minister will make a request or with all good intentions we discuss and we say we withdraw the Bill and that chapter is over. If there is