Dharmashastra National Law University, Jabalpur

2020-2021

Subject
LAW OF PROPERTY

p project topic

A critical analysis of the land acquisitions laws in India.

Submitted by Submitted to
Anoop Kumar Bardiya I Mrs. Veena Roshan
BAL/015/18, Sem.– 5th Assistant Prof. Of Law
DNLU, Jabalpur DNLU, Jabalpur

1|Page Anoop Bardiya

 Acknowledgment

God gives us life to decorate it with knowledge. Life without knowledge is like a
river without water.

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to our Hon’ble Vice-

Chancellor Prof. Shri Balraj Chauhan sir as well as our Head Of Department
Shilpa Jain and my subject teacher Mrs. Veena Roshan mam who gave me the
golden opportunity to work on this great or wonderful Project of the subject and only
just Because of this project I got the opportunity to understand how to do the A
critical analysis of the land acquisitions laws in India research on the topic and how
to collect the data and how to arrange the data in research.

Secondly, I would like to express my special thanks to my mentor Mr. Ashit sir,
Animesh Jha sir, and to my University. And I also want to thanks to my friend
Balram Jat, who help me a lot to research in my project.

Anoop Kumar Bardiya

BAL/015/18
DNLU, Jabalpur
Cont. No. 8435381296
Anoop015-18@mpdnlu.ac.in

2|Page Anoop Bardiya

 Index

Contents

1. Introduction......................................................................................................................................4
2. Eminent Domain Acts in India.........................................................................................................6
1.Land Acquisition Act, 1894...........................................................................................................6
2. Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.................................................... 7
3. Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2015 (amendment in act of 2013).......8
3. COMPARISON.............................................................................................................................. 10
4. CASE LAWS..................................................................................................................................11
 The first being Tata Nano Project in Singur;...........................................................................11
 The second being Noida Development Gujarat...................................................................... 12
 Third being Koyambedu Market, Chennai. ............................................................................12
5. CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................13
Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................15

1. Introduction

3|Page Anoop Bardiya

Eminent domain law is the essential power of the State to take hold of citizen’s private property,
take away it, or the seizure of a citizen's rights in property with due monetary compensation, but
without the property owner's consent. It is considered to be one of the most controversial and
politically superficial instruments of exercising State power which is used in several parts of the
world. However, implementing the eminent domain law is not easy task and it is very tough to deal
with ground level issues. The execution of eminent domain (or, compulsory acquisition of land) by
the State often results in various social, cultural, economic and psychological pains for the affected
communities i.e. land and property owners. Such acquisition and the consequent displacement not
only lead to loss of economic assets, habitat and livelihood but also disrupts the communities, social
relationships, cultural identities, local markets for goods as well as labour, consequently placing the
ousted in a “spiral of impoverishment”. In view of such painful consequences, a legal rule
representing eminent domain needs to restrict its application only to the cases of ‘compelling public
interest’ and further minimise (or, compensate suitably for) the socio-economic costs of land
acquisition and consequent displacement of property owners. Moreover, it is also necessary that
such rule also include provision for a fair reconstruction of standards of living, community relations
and production systems enjoyed by the affected persons prior to land acquisition so that the
community moves on an ascent path1.

Depending on how the eminent power is used, it can clear the way for rapid economic growth,
technological progress and infrastructure development; otherwise, it can infringe upon property
rights, the economic interests of poor and vulnerable groups, and fundamental principles of justice
(Gupta 2014). In India, the legal foundation for eminent domain was established by colonial era law
- the Land Acquisition Act 1894, which continued to prevail and served the purpose until 2000s.
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 allowed government to acquire private land for public purposes
after paying a government-fixed compensation to cover the losses incurred by landowners from
surrendering their land to concerned public agency.2 This act was criticized for its tough nature i.e.,
the State was authorized to acquire the land even without the willingness of land owners to part
with it. Yet it survived over a very long time due the simple process and also due to undeveloped
land markets in an agrarian dominant economy.3

In the last few years, the Government of India has understood the need for bringing up new acts
rather than making small changes so that land acquisition can be achieved while protecting some of
the rights of its own citizens. In the process, the Land Acquisition Act has been modified and
brought out in the form of a new legislation Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
4(LAR&R) Bill, 2013; it has been further been subject to some more changes and to be brought out

as Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LAR&R) Ordinance, 2015. The implications
of the changes in land acquisition act are not fully understood by various stakeholders both legally
and operationally. Therefore, this case paper attempts to bring out the major legislative changes in
the form of a comparative analysis of the provisions of these acts in the next section. The
implications of the changes in the provisions are then brought out in the form of select cases, each
of which brings out these changes in a comparative manner. Finally, the case paper concludes with

1 Dr Chetan Upadhyay “Research Paper on Land Acquisition in India” Vol 5 No 6,2015 South Asia Journal of
Multidisciplinary Studies available at www.gjms.co.in/index.php/SAJMS/article/view/1098.
2 Ibid
3 Ibid
4 Act VI of 1857.
4|Page Anoop Bardiya
the implications of the Land acquisition act changes with reference to the case projects and also
spells out the major learnings.5

5 Maitreesh Ghatak, Parikshit Ghosh “The Land Acquisition Bill: A critique and a Proposal” Vol XLVI No 41, October
8 2011, Economic & Political Review, Pg. 65
5|Page Anoop Bardiya
 2. Eminent Domain Acts in India

There are three eminent land acquisition laws in India, which are:

1. Land Acquisition Act, 1894

2. Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
3. Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2015(amendment in act of 2013)

1.Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Land Acquisition Act 1894 (LAA 1894) is a well drafted and well served piece of legislation that
served land acquisition purpose for more than a century. In general land acquisition is composed of
three macro-processes (Mahalingam and Vyas 2011):
• First, affected parties and their land ownership are to be identified.
• Second, fair processes by which stakeholders are notified of the acquisition and are given a
chance to voice their views followed by the declaration.
• Finally, an acceptable compensation package to be arrived upon and distributed. On the face
of it, the LAA 1894 seems to take all these three issues into consideration (GoI 1985).
The Act contains a definition of “persons interested” in the project which is intended to be used to
determine groups affected by the acquisition of the land, essentially the owners of property i.e.,
farm or non-farm land. A detailed land acquisition process consists of public authorities required to
notify land owners prior to acquiring the land and giving the affected stakeholders with an
opportunity to contest both the acquisition of land (on the grounds, for instance, that a particular
parcel of land is not wholly or in part needed for the project, that due process was not followed, or
the purpose of acquisition is not for public good)6, and determining the amount of compensation
that is to be paid to them. Here again, LAA 1894 defines several ways by which compensation can
be awarded-including a consideration of the market value of land, assets present on the land,
income derived from the land and a solatium for compulsory acquisition (GoI 1985), which is based
on the commonwealth experience7.

However, there are several shortcomings in the practical implementation of the Act (Raghuram,
Bastian and Sundaram 2009):
• First, there is no clear basis as to how affected parties can be determined and the e iXsting
definition is imprecise. Very often, only the minimum subsets of landowners who are
affected are identified. 8Encroachers, sharecroppers, landless labourers and so on, who have
an interest in the land, are not compensated. Several people practising agriculture are not
legally registered and are thus not eligible for compensation, leading to widespread unrest.

6 Supra 5
7 Supra 5
8 Ibid
6|Page Anoop Bardiya
 • Second, the process of acquisition is very time-consuming and can take up to three years
even if implemented without undue resistance. Further, although the broad steps of the land
acquisition process are outlined in the Act, an enormous amount of discretion is vested upon
the district collector and deputy collector (or tehsildar), who effectively adjudicate on
several objections related to the acquisition as well as on the compensation to be provided.
This often leads to decisions and awards that are ad hoc and are not readily accepted by the
local community.9
• Finally, no clear formula is given as to how compensation must be calculated. Government
officials often consider the least value derived from all possible compensation approaches
and as a result the final compensation arrived at is often an order of magnitude lower than
that expected by landowners. T10he real value of this compensation is further reduced due to
the time lag between determining the compensation and awarding it to project-affected
parties. Project-affected stakeholders then need to seek recourse to the judiciary. The
unfairness of the compensation amount has been demonstrated in several cases, where, the
courts have ruled that the government pay compensation more than three times the original
amount, to affected parties. Nevertheless, the process of obtaining such an award is
extremely lengthy and in the interim, affected groups are effectively uncompensated and
landless.

2. Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

The RFCT LAR&R 2013 had introduced some significant changes to India’s land acquisition law.
The primary among them is the vastly increased compensation for the land owners, who were also
recognised as urban and rural land owners. The law therefore distinguished the operation of
differential forces of land markets operating in urban and rural setting while determining land value.
Therefore, the cash award required was raised to be at least four times the estimated local market
value of land in rural areas, and at least twice in urban areas. The act also mandates that all affected
parties be paid a Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) package in addition to the cash
compensation for lost assets so that the displacement costs are met by projects. The scope of
‘Affected parties’ was also expanded to the persons and families whose primary source of
livelihood was the land that is being taken, which therefore includes the intended beneficiaries as
tenants of property, sharecroppers and agricultural workers who were employed on the seized land
(Bedi and Gangwani 2015).11
The stipulated R&R package for affected community includes a variety of entitlements, including
transportation and resettlement allowances, a monthly stipend for one year, and a job for one family
member which can be exchanged for a lump sum payment. The compulsory R&R benefits may add
up to the cash value of nearly Rs. 6.5 lakhs for every affected family (Bedi and Gangwani 2015),
which were ignored so far. There are, in addition, conditional benefits to be provided to affected
families, such as the provision of constructed housing (with different built space entitlement for

9 Nandal Vikas, “Land Acquisition Law in India: A Historical Perspective”; Vol.3 Issue 5, 2014 International Journal of
Innovative Research and Studies, Pg. 468
10 Ibid
11 Ibid
7|Page Anoop Bardiya
rural and urban areas) when there is loss of homestead, some land-for-land in the case of irrigation
and urbanisation projects, and a share of capital gains if the land is resold undeveloped. Even
industries buying land on the open market will have to meet R & R obligations if the procured area
is 100 acres or more (50 acres in urban areas).12
The RFCT LAR&R Act 2013 requires that a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) be conducted to
identify the affected families and calculate the social impact when land is acquired. A committee of
independent experts examines the SIA and approves the social impact assessment of the project, an
administrative committee reviews if it serves the public interest and also if the benefits outweigh the
costs, and the disputes are to be referred to a specially constituted body instead of civil courts.
Multi-cropped land is proposed not to be acquired except under special circumstances, and, even
under such, land acquisition must not exceed 5% of the cultivated area in the district.13
The RFCT LAR&R Act 2013 required that if land acquired under it remained unutilised for five
years, it would be returned to the original owners or the government land bank. The Ordinance
states that the period after which unutilised land will need to be returned will be five years, or any
period specified at the time of setting up the project, whichever is later.14
The RFCT LAR&R Act 2013 also states that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would continue to
apply in certain cases where an award was made under the LAA 1894. However, if such as award
was made five years or more before the enactment of the RFCT LAR&R Act 2013, and the physical
possession of land has not been taken or compensation has not been paid, the LAR&R Act 2013
provisions would apply (GoI 2013).15
The Ordinance also states that while calculating this time period, any period during which the
proceedings of acquisition were held up:
(i) due to a stay order of a court, or
(ii) a period specified in the award of a Tribunal for taking possession, or
(iii) any period where possession has been taken but the compensation is lying deposited in a court
or any account, will not be counted.

3. Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2015 (amendment in act of 2013)

The RFCT LAR&R Bill 2015 is still under the process of becoming a law and it seeks to make
some amendments to the earlier act of 2013. It has been passed by the Lok Sabha but yet discussion
of its controversies is going in Rajya Sabha to get passed. It has same lines as that of RFCT
LAR&R 2013 Act but with some major modifications. The modifications are as below (Chopra
2015).
The RFCT LAR&R Act 2013 exempted 13 laws (such as the National Highways Act, 1956 and the
Railways Act, 1989) from its purview. However, the RFCT LAR&R Act 2015 required that the
compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement provisions of these 13 laws be brought in consonance
with the RFCT LAR&R Act 2015, within a year of its enactment, through a notification. The
12 ibid
13 State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh 1952 1 SCR 889.
14 Ibid
15 Ibid
8|Page Anoop Bardiya
Ordinance also brings the compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement provisions of these 13 laws
in consonance with the RFCT LAR&R Act 2013.16
The RFCT LAR&R 2015 Ordinance creates five special categories of land use to be exempt from
the provision of public consent:
(i) defence,
(ii) rural infrastructure,
(iii) affordable housing,
(iv) industrial corridors, and
(v) infrastructure projects including Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects where the central
government owns the land.
The RFCT LAR&R Act 2013 requires that the consent of 80% of land owners is obtained for
private projects and that the consent of 70% of land owners be obtained for PPP projects. The new
Ordinance exempts all the five categories mentioned above from International Journal of Law &
Management Studies | Volume III Issue II` (Featured Article) Published by Agradoot Web
Technologies LLP this provision of the Act. In addition, the Ordinance permits the government to
exempt projects in these five categories from the following provisions, through a notification:17
The RFCT LAR&R Act 2013 excluded the acquisition of land for private hospitals and private
educational institutions from its purview. The new Ordinance removes this restriction. While the
RFCT LAR&R Act 2013 was applicable for the acquisition of land for private companies, the new
Ordinance changes this to acquisition for 'private entities'. A private entity is defined any entity
other than government entity, and could include a proprietorship, partnership, company,
corporation, non-profit organisation, or other entity under any other law. It therefore expanded the
scope of ‘purpose’ from strictly ‘public agency’ too lenient ‘public-like private body’. The
compulsion of the current government to make such change lies in its drive to propel economic
growth through large scale industrial and urban development. However, taking such legal short-cuts
may only harm the citizenry and may become detrimental in the long term.18

3. COMPARISON
Following area unit comparative study of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and therefore the Right to
truthful Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and resettlement Act
2013:
1. The LARR Act, 2013 has received the Presidential assent on Gregorian calendar month twenty-
seven, 2013 and came into result from Jan one, 2014. in keeping with the govt. of India Acts 1919
and 1935 the provinces had the facility to ordain with relation to required acquisition of land and by
workout such power several provinces amended in respect of sure provisions, the Act of 1894. once
the Indian Independence Act, 1947, by virtue of the Indian Independence (Adaptation of Central

16 RFCT LAR&R Act 2013

17 Ibid
18 Ibid
9|Page Anoop Bardiya
Acts and Ordinances) Order, 1948 the Act was created applicable to any or all the provinces of
India. However currently this Act has been repealed19.
2. Regime not needs following any provisions of latest LARR Act, 2013.
3. In keeping with section eleven of the LARR Act, 2013, the objection shall be filed among the
sixty days from the date of publication of the notification beneath section nine of this Act. In
keeping with section four of the recent Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the objection shall be filed
among the thirty days from the date of publication of the notification beneath section four20.
3. Beneath section eleven of the LARR Act, 2013 publication of preliminary notification and
powers of officers. However, this sort of provision is not obtainable within the recent Land
Acquisition Act, 1894.
4. Beneath section thirteen of the LARR Act, 2013 the licensed officer UN agency enters the land
for the needs of survey shall purchase all the damages and if the quantity paid is controversial, the
Distinct Collector is that the competent Authority to terminate the quantity.
5. Beneath section five of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the authorize officer UN agency enters
the land for the needs of survey shall pay or tender payment for all necessary damages and just in
case of dispute the choice of the collector or different chief revenue officer of the district shall be
final.
6. In keeping with section fourteen of the LARR Act, 2013 shows the importance of social impact
assessment i.e. if the appraisal of the social impact assessment report isn't finalized among the
twelve months and preliminary notification beneath section eleven isn't issued, it shall be deemed
that this report has irreligious and contemporary inquiry during this regard shall be undertaken or
recurrent transferral the advantages up to-date where necessary. However, this sort of provisions
isn't obtainable within the recent Land Acquisition Act, 189421
7. Beneath the LARR Act award shall be created among one year from the date of publication
however in recent Act award shall be created among 2 years from the date of publication.22

8. During this LARR Act, 2013 additional another new purpose is that if families already displaced
just one occasion and all over again displaced so that they area unit entitled to further
compensation23.
9. LARR Act, 2013 if somebody contravenes any of the provisions about payment of compensation
or rehabilitation and resettlement, each such person shall be susceptible to a penalization of six
months which can reach 3 years or with fine or with each, offences by corporations, offences by
department, cognizance of offences by court, offences to be noncognizable, offences to be
cognoscible solely on criticism field by sure person. This provisions not as well as beneath recent
Act24.

19 Paul Van Der Molen, Eugene. H Silayo, Arbind M. Tuladhar on “A Comparative study of Land Policy in 9 countries
in Africa & Asia”
20 Omitted by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act,1978, S.6 (w.e.f. 20-6-1979).
21 State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh 1952 1 SCR 889.
22 Ambika Mishra v State of UP, 1980 AIR 1762
23 Waman Rao v.UOI,1980 SCC (3) 587.
24 Bengal Resolution I of 1824.
10 | P a g e A n o o p B a r d i y a
10. Within the LARR Act, 2013 four schedules additional. within the 1st schedule some elements
obtainable that area unit unbroken in mind whereas deciding compensation for land owner, second
schedule parts of rehabilitation and resettlement claim for all affected families, third schedule
provisions of infrastructure amenities and within the fourth schedule list of 13 enactments control
land acquisition and rehabilitation and resettlement obtainable during which exemption given by the
central government that this act isn't apply. These provisions are conjointly not obtainable within
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

11. Wherever somebody is granted land or stabile property had a region of compensation of
encompasses a part of edges, identical is also recorded within the name of lady, woman, adult
female, spouse, partner, married person mate, better half or oldest woman member within the
family. but it's going to be noted that infrastructural comes as is also notified area unit exempt from
providing Rehabilitation and resettlement strategies.

4. CASE LAWS

In this section, a comparative analysis of land acquisition and R&R under the three legislations is
carried out with the help of three cases:
 The first being Tata Nano Project in Singur ; This case is based on Divya Gupta (2014). In
the second half of 2006, the West Bengal government acquired 997 acres of prime
agricultural land in Singur are of West Bengal state (Refer figure 1) in order to enable M/s
Tata Motors, a leading industry house in India, to build a factory for manufacturing Nano
car, its new model touted as small and cheap car. In order to do so, the State government
used its power of eminent domain under the aegis of the 1894 Land Acquisition Act. The
West Bengal government subsequently decided to acquire the area required for the car
factory and offer compensation to the farmers and other land owners whose lands were
being acquired as required by the 1894 Act. The local community of Singur was incensed by
this action, and put up resistance led by farmer households against forced acquisition and
displacement25.
This resistance soon snowballed into a protest movement, which the main opposition party,
the Trinamool Congress (TMC) subsequently galvanised. The state government
subsequently offered to improve the terms of compensation, including 25% compensation
for tenant farmers engaged in cultivation of acquired plots. No plans were offered to
compensate agricultural workers claiming to have lost employment on acquired lands. Local
outbreaks of violence occurred, and the protests acquired national and international media
attention. Eventually, two years later, after being frustrated with the protests and non-
acquisition, M/s Tata Motors decided to withdraw from West Bengal, and took the Nano car
manufacturing factory to Sanand,26
 The second being Noida Development Gujarat This case is based on the publication of
Patil (2012). Over the past ten years, the National Capital Region has been rapidly
developing; New Delhi and its vicinities in the NCR particularly witnessed high growth.
New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, which is located on the eastern side of
Yamuna River, has also been experiencing rapid development as a commuter town of the
capital, as can be seen by many industrial complexes being built one after another. 27
25 Ibid
26 Supra 3
27 Ibid
11 | P a g e A n o o p B a r d i y a
 The Supreme Court set aside land acquisition (156.3 hectares) carried out in 2009 at
Shahberi Village Uttar Pradesh State, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar the UP
government and Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, which is an UP-
government body. Based on this judgment, land was returned to the original owners (most of
them are farmers). This situation occurred because the land acquisitions were originally
carried out by the UP-State government headed as a part of the Greater Noida’s Industrial
Development Plan, pursuant to the emergency clause (Article 17) stipulated in the LAA
1894, whereby procedures for residents’ objections (Article 5A) were dispensed with. 28
The grounds for the judgment of the Supreme Court were: (1) such urgency was not likely to
be present, and (2) changed the purpose of land use from industrial use to residential use
without the prior approval of the State government. Table 4 shows comparison of land
acquisition acts with reference to land acquisition in Noida.
 Third being Koyambedu Market, Chennai. This case is based on the documentation
retrieved from the CMDA (2009). The Koyambedu Wholesale Market Complex has been
established by Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority with an objective of
decongesting the central business district. The market is located out of the congested areas
of Chennai. But at the same time, it is easily accessible to the city’s residents. As highlighted
the market complex is located adjacent to Chennai Mofussil Bus Terminus and it is
connected to both the Central and Egmore railway stations and Chennai International
Airport through highways. 29
The general guidelines for land acquisition within the LAA 1894 were followed and CMDA
went beyond them, and the process was completed in 28 months. Cash compensation was
provided to land losers on the basis of the market value of the land, standing crops, a
solatium of 30% and interest charges of 12% for the period between notification and
acquisition. Furthermore, the affected families were rehabilitated and resettled in new
location. About 424 sale deeds were considered and all but two were rejected on the grounds
of being artificially priced.30 Even out of these deeds, the lowest was picked to form the
basis of compensation, leading to some dissatisfaction amongst the affected parties.
However, since project authorities had built houses in nearby locations, allowed encroachers
to resettle and provided employment opportunities in the project, protests and resistance
were minimal31

While first two cases are examples of failures of land acquisition and the third case is an example of
success. These cases can also help us to understand further reforms in Land Acquisition Acts. We
introduce these three projects first and later we compare Land Acquisition Acts considering these
projects.

28Ibid
29Laxman, “Emergence of Articles 31A,31B & 31C”
30 Ibid
31 Ibid
12 | P a g e A n o o p B a r d i y a
13 | P a g e A n o o p B a r d i y a
 5. CONCLUSION

The above cases can be now summarised for comparison of the application of various Land
acquisition acts and show some broad directions. Tata Nano project’s land acquisition case clearly
indicates the reason of its failure. This failure was due to improper market rate consideration of
lands which led to less compensation paid to farmers. The other reason being, no consent was
obtained from the farmers whose land was acquired, they got angry due to this and protested against
the government. As this case falls under LAA, 1894 there was no R&R for the affected people.
Moreover, the food security issue was not given any consideration during the acquisitions which
lead to reduced supply of various food grains. A lot of lessons were learned by the government from
this case, which helped them to formulate LAR&R, 2013. If this case would have fallen under
LAR&R, 2013 or LAR&R, 2015 it would have cost more to Tata group, but would have certainly
led to its success. Also, it was a lost opportunity as the employment in West Bengal would have
increased to a great extent considering various ancillary industries associated to Tata Nano Project.
NOIDA development case clearly shows that how the State government and its agencies misuse the
LAA 1894, which led to resistance from farmers. Flat purchasers, developers and the financial
institutions that have financed the residential projects also suffered in the process as greedy
investors. The main cause of failure of this project is “public purpose” clause was violated and
urgency clause was wrongly used for acquiring land. If this case would have fallen under LA&RR,
2013 and LA&RR, 2015 it would have the same effect as that of LAA 1894. But in the case of 2013
and 2015 acts, as the public consent and SIA are made necessary, the authority appointed for the
same would certainly have helped for the success of the project in its original design of industrial
development. It was one of the lessons for various State governments, which look upon short-term
gains from misusing the law and statutory procedures.
It is very clear from the Koyambedu Market case that even though there were no provisions for
R&R as it falls under Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the authorities provided R&R which increased
the cost of acquisition but reduced the hurdles during the acquisition stage. One more peculiar thing
that can be noticed from this case is though this case falls under LAA, 1894 but it replicated that as
if it has come under LAR&R Act, 2013 in some aspects. This is one of the case from which various
lesson can be learned. It also proves that if any project which falls under LAR&R, 2013 or LAR&R,
2015, its probability of success in terms of Land Acquisition is high. The authorities played a witty
role in acquisition which helped them get through acquisition successfully. However, the new Acts
would have increased the costs of project to some extent under new provisions.

14 | P a g e A n o o p B a r d i y a
The important conclusion about the Land Acquisition Acts in India and its transformation is that the
Government was on learning curve by including stakeholders, increasing compensation and making
R&R mandatory. But this learning is getting reduced with very painful escape routes sought in new
bill of 2015. The transformation from 1894 to 2013 to 2015 is turning out to improve the success of
large development projects. It is already understood that land acquisition becomes an impediment if
it is not handled carefully and properly thereby affecting project success (Nallathiga 2009).
Although changes to eminent domain act are needed as per the need of the hour, they need to strike
a balance between ‘gainers’ and ‘losers’; also, what is more important is that the implementation of
the Acts at ground level from the spirit with which they have been prepared. More and more
amendments will make the bill to land nowhere due to political oppositions and this political
conflict may also affect the project success.

15 | P a g e A n o o p B a r d i y a
Bibliography
1. Laxman, “Emergence of Articles 31A,31B & 31C”.
2. Ambika Mishra v State of UP
3. Waman Rao v. UOI.
4. State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh
5. Paul Van Der Molen, Eugene. H Silayo, Arbind M. Tuladhar on “A Comparative study of
Land Policy in 9 countries in Africa & Asia”.
6. Omitted by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act,1978, S.6
7. Nandal Vikas, “Land Acquisition Law in India: A Historical Perspective”; Vol.3 Issue 5,
2014 International Journal of Innovative Research and Studies.
8. Maitreesh Ghatak, Parikshit Ghosh “The Land Acquisition Bill: A critique and a Proposal”
Vol XLVI No 41
9. Dr Chetan Upadhyay “Research Paper on Land Acquisition in India” Vol 5 No 6,2015
10. Dr. Lakshmi T and Rajeshkumar S, “In Vitro Evaluation of Anticariogenic Activity of Acacia
Catechu against Selected Microbes”, International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Science &
Technology, Volume No. 3, Issue No. 3, P. No 20-25, March 2018.
11. Trishala A, Lakshmi T and Rajeshkumar S, “Physicochemical profile of Acacia catechu bark
extract –An In vitro study”, International Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Science &
Technology, Volume No. 3, Issue No. 4, P. No 26-30, April 2018

16 | P a g e A n o o p B a r d i y a