You are on page 1of 11

PROJECT ON

The Right to Fair Compensation and


Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013 (section 1-10)

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY
Miss.sudeepa SAHIL JINDAL
ROLL NO:-77/13
CLASS-B.A/L.L.B
6th SEM
SECTION:-B

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I HAVE WRITTEN THIS PROJECT TITLED The Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 UNDER THE
SUPERVISION OF MISS.SUDEEPA FACULTY OF UILS, PANJAB
UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH.
THE VALUABLE SUGGESTIONS OF MY SUPERVISOR NOT ONLY
HELPED ME IMMENSELY IN MAKING THIS WORK, BUT ALSO
IN DEVELOPING AN ANALYTICAL APPROACH IN WORK.
I FOUND NO WORDS TO EXPRESS MY SENSE OF
GRATITUDE FOR DIRECTOR OF OUR INSTITUTE FOR
ENCOURAGEMENT AT EVERY STEP.
I AM EXTREMELY GRATEFUL TO LIBRARIAN AND
LIBRARY STAFF OF THE INSTITUTE FOR THE SUPPORT AND
COOPERATION EXTENDED BY THEM TIME TO TIME.
ALSO, MY FATHER AND MOTHER CONTRIBUTION ,
SUPPORT AND COOPERATION IN THIS WORK IS BEYOND
WORDS.

-SAHIL JINDAL
CONTENTS OF PROJECT REPORT.

S.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

1 NEED FOR I.C.C 4-5

2 STRUCTURE 6

3 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ICC & ICJ 7-10

4 FEATURES OF I.C.C 11-12

5 JURISDICTION OF I.C.C 13-14

6 ADMISSIBILITY 15-19

7 I.C.C TODAY, CONTROVERSY AND 20-24


FUTURE

8 BIBLIOGRAPGHY 25
INTRODUCTION
I would like to share with all a story when i was a kid. My father and I once went in
the evening to the lake side of my city Bathinda( recognized by the state as the city
of lakes). As inquisitive the kids are i promptly asked my father about how these
lakes come into being and make the city so beautiful. I was quite surprised when he
said most of those water bodies were man made. He said a few generations ago
many of them were homes and villages that the government took to build the lakes.
My father corrected me on the point that they do definitely add on to the scenic
beauty of the state but also enable multi pronged utility services to the region to
make it a prosperous one. Quoting Jawaharlal Nehru that if dams are the temples of
modern INDIA, these lakes are the mini temples of modern India he explained me
what they are all about. What the government did then was probably painful to a few,
but overall it helped everyone as the thermal power plants(also acquired by the state
from people) to provide electricity to the entire region was generated, water plants
were setup(also for the same purpose), employment generated. Even our city
Chandigarh needed 58 villages for acquisition which meant a complete replacement
of 6228 families. It resulted in a massive agitation. The activists built up an Anti
Capital Committee and started to campaign fervently. This made the construction
work bogged down and it took two long years for the government to come to a final
decision.

To benefit the society as a whole we need to build large infrastructure projects such
as lakes, dams, power plants, roads, factories, warehouses and so on. That is the
only way out of poverty. There is not a single developed nation that climbed out of
poverty without building industries. The question is how do we get the lands to build
those projects. Almost every piece of land is occupied. Thus, you need to acquire the
land for these projects from someone. Given the highly fragment land ownership in
India, you need to deal with not just 1 big land owner, but 1000s of small ones.

To clear all my childhood queries related the to land acquisition its History, Objects,
Scope, Applicability and Salient Features of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 i
specially took up this topic. This topic further attracts me as India is now discussing if
it should follow the developed world in creating an eminent domain policy to simplify
land acquisition and the ruckus created by its discussion in peoples court(
parliament) and articles and documentaries at length debating the cause of land
acquisition in INDIA.

India has about 2.9 million square kilometres of land area [rest is inland water
bodies]. Of these 2.9m, 1.62m square km is in agriculture and about 0.66m square
km under forests, leaving less than 0.6 million sq km for other uses - homes, roads,
railways, airports factories, markets etc. Forest area (% of land area) in India. In this
remaining 0.6 million sq km a lot of it is unusable waste land such as the Rann of
Kutch and many inland deserts. Every other piece of usable land is already
occupied.
Thus, the only way we can build new homes and jobs for millions of our people is by
taking agricultural land, sometimes even prime, irrigated agricultural land.

Why can't we just buy the normal way?

As I mentioned for each project we have to deal with 100s or even 1000s of sellers.
That produces a complex dynamic. What if 990 sellers agree to sell the land and 10
sellers hold out? That would block the project preventing the 990 sellers from having
good value for their land as well as not allowing the society to progress.
Why don't those 10 people sell at the market price like the others? There could be a
variety of reasons:

(1) There might be property disputes in the family and no one in a position to call
the shots.

(2) They might be obstinate or otherwise too sentimentally attached to that piece
of soil.
(3) There could be caste, religious or other clashes that would prevent the 1000
farmers from dealing with the same buyer.
(4) Most importantly, they might be asking for ransom in what the economists call
the Holdout problem. That guy with a small land in the centre could say that I
would give up my land only if you pay me 100 crores. At that point would you
either stop the project or pay the ransom? Either thing is unfair to the other
people selling at market prices.

In summary, it is not always possible to acquire land for major projects by getting
everyone agree. This brutally painful process has made India a very difficult place to
run business. India ranks at the rank bottom when it comes to ease of doing
business currently ranked at disappointing 130th rank out of 189 countries.
This means, unlike China India doesn't get enough industrial development from both
local investors and foreign investors. Tata had to painfully invest abroad as the
domestic investments often get bogged by land acquisition. Despite having a large
market, India continues to not have industrial development and that prevents us from
getting people out of poverty. Remember, the only real way to get people out of
poverty is by building industries.
Now, we have two choices:

1. Go ahead with the project by forcefully acquiring land from the minority of
holdouts.
2. Abort the project and get back to poverty.

We have been doing #2 for a long time and have seen China & other countries jump
past us. Almost every good economy has a policy for forcefully acquiring land. But
this is not the only side of the coin and it has a GREY AREA as well which haunts
the very process of development in the country due to some vested interests of the
golden class.
HISTORY OF LAND ACQUISITION IN INDIA
Land acquisition refers to the process where a government acquires land from land
owners for any purpose. Generally, the purpose is related to development projects
conducted either by PSUs (Public Sector undertakings) or the private sector.

Land acquisition in India has been since the concept of rulers and being ruled came
into India but in uncodified form. It was the RAJ era where codification of laws in
India started to reap the benefits of its initiative of 1st industrial revolution and this
lead India into Economic Colonialism. The timeline is as follows:-

1824: The British government in India enacts the first land acquisition legislation. It is
called the Bengal Resolution I of 1824 and applies to the entire Bengal province
subject to the presidency of Fort William. The law allows the government to obtain
land or other immovable property required for roads, canals or other public purposes
at a fair valuation.

1839: The Bombay presidency enacts an act similar to the Bengal Resolution I. (The
Bombay presidency in those days included parts of the present-day states of
Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Karnataka.)

1850: The British government implements Act XLII of 1850 in the country to acquire
land for building a rail network.

1852: The Madras presidency passes Act XX of 1852 to facilitate the acquisition of
land for public purposes. (The Madras presidency then included the present-day
states of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, parts of Odisha, Kerala, and Karnataka,
and Lakshadweep.)

1857: The government enacts legislation that brings the whole of British-ruled India
under one uniform land acquisition law. Act VI of 1857 removes all previous
enactments relating to land acquisition. Under this act, the collector has the power to
fix compensation for the acquired land, while disputes have to be referred to
arbitrators, whose decision would be final.

1861: The 1857 legislation is amended owing to unsatisfactory settlement,


incompetence and corruption.

1870: A new act replaces arbitrators with civil courts for resolving disputes.

1894: The act of 1870 is found to be unsatisfactory, which leads to the government
passing the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. This act allows the government to forcibly
acquire land from private landholders for projects of public purpose. The price for the
land is determined by the government.

1948: The Indian Independence (Adaptation of Central Acts and Ordinances) Order,
1948, adopts the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 after replacing the words the whole of
British India with all the provinces of India. The British-era act is used in the same
form for several decades.

1998: A new government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party proposes to amend the
existing land bill.

2007: The Congress party-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government


decides to amend the land acquisition act and introduces a bill in the parliament. The
bill calls for a mandatory social impact assessment. It also proposes that the
government, while acquiring the land, has to pay for loss or damages caused to the
land and has to provide compensation as per prevailing market prices. A Land
Acquisition Compensation Disputes Settlement Authority is to be set up at the state
and central levels.

2008: The bill is subsequently referred to a standing committee on rural development


and cleared by the group of ministers, set up by the UPA government, in December
2008.

2009: The Lok Sabha passes the 2007 amendment bill as the Land Acquisition
(Amendment) Bill, 2009 in February. The government introduces the bill in the Rajya
Sabha but is unable to ensure its passage. The bill lapses with the dissolution of the
14th Lok Sabha.

2011: After winning the general elections in 2009 once again, the UPA government
introduces the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011a new
bill which traces its roots to the 2009 version.

According to the bill, for a private project, land can be acquired only if 80% of the
affected families agree to its acquisition. For a PPP project, 70% of affected families
must agree. It also proposes that compensation for those affected would be set at
four times the market rate in rural areas and two times the market rate in urban
areas.

2013: The bill is passed.1

After 2013: There has been a proposal to amend the act of 2013 and replace it with
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
and Resettlement (Amendment) Bill, 2015, however due to some issues of concern
coupled with disruptive politics strategy of the opposition the bill has resulted only
into ordinances( which is also an issue of debate) and no concrete law.

Prior to the passage of the act of 2013 we had the Land Acquisition Act of 1894
which was imposed in India since the time of British rule. Under this Act, the
government could acquire any land as it wishes to, in the name of "public purpose".
The British had never defined the words "public purpose" in a straightforward
manner, which meant that in theory as well as in practice, a government could

1
http://qz.com/471117/timeline-200-years-of-indias-struggle-with-land-acquisition-laws/ on 14/02/2016 at
6:00 p.m
acquire land for any purpose they wanted, and term their purpose "public purpose".
The Land Acquisition Act 1894 had various shortcomings:

Forced acquisitions were allowed No real appeal mechanism to stop the


acquisition.
No provisions for resettlement and rehabilitation of the displaced
Urgency clause authorities could take away the land citing an urgency
without initiating provisions for rehabilitation or compensation
Compensation was low and based on outdated circle rates

After independence, this practice continued whereby Indian governments, both at the
central and at the state level, acquired large amounts of land for various kinds of
development and infrastructure projects, such as roads, highways, ports (air and
sea), power projects (thermal, hydro and nuclear) etc. During 1947 till 1991, most of
these acquisitions had been done by agencies or units in the public sector. After
1991, when liberalization had taken place, most of the land acquisition was done by
the government to provide land for the private sector, either for private sector
projects (infrastructure projects like power, roads etc.) but also for housing projects.

There were many issues against this modus operandi of land acquisition in India:-

a) No one, be it the land owners whose land was acquired (mostly farmers), nor
those who may not have owned the land but whose occupations were dependent on
the land acquired (mostly agricultural laborers), were compensated monetarily or
otherwise as per this Act. No attempt was made for the rehabilitation or resettlement
of those who had been affected by such land acquisition either.

b) There was no requirement of any prior consent of the affected parties (those who
will lose their land and/or their occupation or be affected by the pollution or
environmental impacts of these infrastructure projects in future as they live
nearby)for constructing any of these projects.

c) Also, land could be acquired with just a notice by the Collector within a very short
time frame where people who would be affected neither had a chance necessarily to
challenge the acquisition legally, nor had a chance to find some alternate occupation
or arrangements for their own. The government could acquire land in a manner it
thinks fit.

d) Most of the land was acquired in the name of India's development, but the local
people found very little stake or benefits in the project. Not only were they not given
much compensation or rehabilitated, they also did not get employment opportunities
(which in many cases were promised to them) in the name of development of the
area. In many cases, educated people from outside were able to get these jobs,
while the local people did not get any kind of benefit. Once liberalization came in,
companies which used to spend on health and education in the name of Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR) outside the areas affected by their projects, were not
willing to spend on health and education of those affected by their own projects the
same money. Many of them refused to take consideration of the externalities like
pollution imposed by their own projects, while the local people also did not receive
any training in many cases to be fit to be employed in these development projects as
well, either by the government or the project-owner (be it private or public).

There were huge protests on account of these issues, where people decided to
squat illegally on government land because they had been displaced by
development projects but were not rehabilitated, resettled and/or adequately
compensated in any manner. In some cases like those displaced by the Hirakud dam
project, there was no rehabilitation or compensation given of any sort whatsoever to
these people.

On account of protests over the years against many such development projects, be it
the protests against Tehri Dam, those against Sardar Sarovar dam, those against
Singur or Nandigram, and many others which failed in preventing land acquisition,
there were growing demands from not just the activists, but also to an extent from
the corporates for a transparent and accountable land acquisition process so that
while the people could get adequate compensation and would be suitably
rehabilitated, corporates do not have to face delays on account of protests against
land acquisition.

Thus The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,


Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into being. Some of its features
are:-

Compensation: Four times the market value in rural areas and twice the
market value in urban areas. There is a compensation for those who are
dependent on the land.
Resettlement and Rehabilitation: processes (and entitlements) for
resettlement and rehabilitation is laid out and the benefits are outlined. No
acquisition before the payments are made and alternate sites are allotted for
rehabilitation.
The Bill applies retrospectively to cases where no land acquisition award has
been made. If the acquisition was made five years ago but compensation has
not been made fresh acquisition process has to be started.
Participation of local Panchayati Raj institutions
No acquisition in scheduled areas without the consent of the Gram Sabhas.
Consent of at least 80% for private projects and 70% for PPP projects is
required
If the acquired land is sold to a third party for a higher price, 40% of the profit
has to be shared with the original owners.

Provisions to ensure food security

Multi-crop land to be acquired only as a last resort.


States to impose limits on the area of agricultural/ multi-crop land that can be
acquired in a State.
If agricultural land is acquired, the state has to cultivate an equivalent area of
land elsewhere.
OBJECTIVES and SCOPE of the ACT
The aims and objectives of the Act include:

To ensure, in consultation with institutions of local self-government and Gram


Sabhas a humane, participative, informed and transparent process for land
acquisition for industrialization, development of essential infrastructural
facilities and urbanization with the least disturbance to the owners of the land
and other affected families
Provide just and fair compensation to the affected families whose land has
been acquired or are affected by such acquisition
Make adequate provisions for such affected persons for their rehabilitation
and resettlement

Purpose and scope:

The Act aims to establish the law on land acquisition, as well as the rehabilitation
and resettlement of those directly affected by the land acquisition in India. The scope
of the Act includes all land acquisition whether it is done by the Central Government
of India, or any State Government of India, except the state of Jammu & Kashmir.

The Act is applicable when:

Government acquires land for its own use, hold and control, including land for
Public sector undertakings.
Government acquires land with the ultimate purpose to transfer it for the use
of private companies for stated public purpose. The purpose of LARR 2013
includes public-private-partnership projects, but excludes land acquired for
state or national highway projects.
Government acquires land for immediate and declared use by private
companies for public purpose.

The provisions of the Act does not apply to acquisitions under 16 existing legislations
including the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005, the Atomic Energy Act, 1962, the
Railways Act, 1989, etc.
Bibliography
1) Brownlie Ian, Principles of Public International Law, 7th
edn., Oxford University Press.
2) Verma S.K. , An Introduction to International Law, Eastern
Economic Book Co.
3) Ramanathan Usha, India and the ICC, 3 Journal of
International Criminal Law (2003).
4) Shabas A William, Introduction to the International
Criminal Court, Cambridge University Press.
5) www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php
6) http://forumias.com/portal/difference-between-icc-and-
icj-all-that-you-need-to-know/
7) http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/international-
criminal-court-overview

8) http://www.icc-
cpi.int/en_menus/icc/about%20the%20court/icc%20at%20a
%20glance/Pages/how%20the%20court%20works.aspx.