GUINEIS Journal- 2016

GUINEIS Journal
ISSN 2347-2669
Vol. III, 2016

LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND

RESETTLEMENT IN ASSAM: SOME ISSUES AND
CONCERNS

Meenakshi Gogoi

Abstract
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereafter LAA) has enabled the state to acquire
land compulsorily even without theconsent of the land owner in the name of ‘public
purpose’. Of course, state is legally bound to pay the payment of compensation for
such acquisitions. However, to the individual land owners only. But the compensations
paid by the state are usuallynot fair, and at times, these are not enough as it was not
equivalent to the market rate. Moreover, rehabilitation and resettlement (hereafter R&R)
of the displaced or project affected people has never been the priority of the state. To
accomplish specified developmental goals have been its topmost priority and least
interest is paid to the livelihood crisis and other socio-economic issues brought about
by these developmental projects. However, a large quantum of land acquisition, since
India’s independence has compelled the displaced people and communities to resist
these compulsory land acquisitions by the state under the arbitrary LAA, 1894. This
Act has enhanced the power of sovereign by invoking the concept of ‘eminentdomain’
in matters of land acquisitions. The LAA, 1894 is an expression of the concept of
‘eminentdomain’ in Indian jurisprudence.Resistance movements to the arbitrary use of
this Act by the state have emerged in various parts of the country including the North-
East part of India. This paper is an attempt to examine the land acquisition processes
in the state of Assam, particularly in the context of dam projects. In order to explore
and revisit some of the issues and concerns related to land acquisitions and R&R
policies of the government, this paper deals with the following questions - why did the
previous R&R policies remained unsuccessful? Does R&R is the only alternative to
ensure lesser objections to the land acquisition process? What is the stand of the new
BJP alliance Assam government on dam projects in the state? What makes the new
land Act, 2013 satisfactory, if any, particularly in terms of R&R scheme?

Keywords: dams, land acquisition, ‘eminent domain’, Assam, rehabilitation, resettlement,

Ph. D. Scholar, Centre for Political Studies Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
Email: gogoi_meenakshi@yahoo.in

-83-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016

INTRODUCTION
Over the years, rehabilitations and resettlements of the development induced
displaced people and communities have remained a contentious issue in India. The
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (LAA) has enabled the state to acquire land compulsorily,
even without the consent of the land owner in the name of ‘public purpose’ by paying
compensation to them. The LAA, 1894 is an expression of the concept of
‘eminentdomain’ in Indian jurisprudence which has empowered the state to acquire
land as it may deem fit. The colonial LAA, 1894 has so far, remained the main
legislation for land acquisition in India and the many provincial states too have been
implementing the provisions of this Act. The LAA, 1894 was in operation until it got
repealed recently, by the new land Act, 2013 under the UPA II regime.
In the past years, under the LAA, 1894, the priority of the state lies in to
anyhow ensure land acquisition on payment of compensation to the land owners. But
the compensation paid was not fair enough as it was not equivalent to the market
rate of the acquired land. Moreover, the common property resources (CPR’s)
dependents like the labourers, tenants, artisans, barbers, etc were deprived of
compensation because under the LAA, 1894, only individual owners were given
compensation having ownership titles over land. In other words, provisions for
compensation were meant only for those having legal documents to prove their
ownership over the acquired land. The compensations were not paid equally to all
the land losers.
The LAA, 1894 did not make rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) as the
right of the displaced, project affected people and communities. As a result, the
displaced people and communities of developmental projects have to suffer
impoverishments like livelihood crisis after being displaced from their ancestral land,
change in means of livelihood, breaking away from community bonding etc. The
new resettlement sites provided by the state in most cases are not fertile lands and it
often lacks irrigation facilities. So it is difficult for the development induced displaced
people and communities to carry on with the farming. Displacement, further leads to
lack of employment opportunities and large scale dispossessions.It can be argued
here that the displacements compels these affected people to discontinue the earlier
means of livelihood and after resettlement, they have to go through various socio-
cultural and economic disadvantages. It becomes necessary, to make a proper
assessment of their poor conditions by the state to frame a comprehensive R&R
policy. Therefore, what is of utmost necessity, to resolve development induced
displacements is the implementation of a comprehensive and adequate policy for
R&R to provide proper livelihoods and a quality lifestyle for the sustenance of these
marginalised people and communities on the new resettlement sites. For them, land
acquisition is often seen as inevitable to boost development and economic progress
for the state which pays little or no attention to the threats to their livelihoods and
-84-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
culture.
What is striking about the new land Act, titled ‘The Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013’, is
that the Act claims to provide an adequate R&R plan as the title of the Act suggests.
Perhaps, it has focused on R&R to make the land acquisition process less difficult
and more transparent and to provide a livable space with basic facilities to the displaced
communities, so that they could begin their new life at the resettlement sites without
much difficulty. It will, thereby, weaken the resistance movements against the
developmental projects and land acquisitions by the state. Whether the new land Act,
2013 would fare well or not will be tested in coming years. But what is positive about
the Act, is its special focus on R&R along with the land acquisition process which did
not find a place under the previous LAA, 1894.
What is necessary today is to revisit the issues and concerns related to R&R
policies of the state so far and to analyse as to why do the previous draft policies on
R&R proves to be a failure? The North-East too, has witnessed numerous land
acquisitions since India’s independence which raised serious concerns over
development induced displacements. This paper attempts to analyse the land acquisition
process in the state of Assam, particularly in the context of dam projects. This paper
also deals with the following questions - why did the previous R&R policies were
unsuccessful? Does R&R is the only alternative to ensure lesser objections to the
land acquisition processes? What is the stand of the new BJP alliance Assam
government on dam projects in the state? What makes the new land Act, 2013
satisfactory, if any, particularly in terms of R&R scheme?

LAND ACQUISITION FOR DEVELOPMENTAL PROJECTS IN ASSAM

The Land Acquisition Act (LAA), 1894 is the main legislation for land acquisitions
in India. Every state follows the main provisions of the LAA, 1894 on land acquisition
for developmental projects. In Assam, state legislations came into existence in the
post-colonial independent India like the Assam Land Acquisition and Requisition Act,
1948, the Assam Acquisition of Flood Control and Prevention of Erosion Act, 1955,
the Assam Acquisition of Flood Control and the Prevention of Erosion (Validation)
Act, 1959, were all enacted to speedily implement the process of land acquisition
without any delay (ALRAA 1964). Subsequently, The Assam Land (Requisition and
Acquisition) Act (ALRAA) 1964 is brought to validate all actions taken under the Act
of 1955 and also, to consolidate law for speedy acquisitions of land meant for public
purposes (ALRAA 1964). With the enactment of ALRAA 1964, all other previous
Acts of 1948, 1955 and 1959 were repealed.
In this Act of 1964, the definitions of ‘Collector’, ‘Land’ and ‘Person’
interested have the same meanings as stated in the LAA, 1894 (Act
I of 1894) (ALRAA 1964: 1) Land for the purpose of this Act includes
-85-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
trees, buildings and standing crops on it and assessment (ALRAA
1964: 1). Acquisition of land under this Act of 1964 follows certain
conditions as follows:
‘where any land has been requisitioned under Section 3, the state
government may use it or deal with it in such manner as may appear
to it to be expedient and may acquire such land by publishing in the
official gazette, a notice to the effect that the state government has
decided to acquire such land in pursuance of this section. Where a
notice as aforesaid is published in the official gazette, the requisitioned
land and premises shall on and from the beginning of the day on
which the notice is so published, vest absolutely in the state
government free from all encumbrances and period of requisition of
such land shall end, subject to the provisions of this Act on such
vesting, the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act I of
1894) with the rules framed there under shall, so far as may be apply
to such land’.(ALRAA 1964, pp.5-6)

The ALRAA, 1964 is amended only once in 1985. From the procedure of land
acquisition, it can be said that the rules of the main legislation of LAA, 1894 is followed
in the state as well. MonirulHussain, in his text, Interrogating Development: State,
Displacement and Popular Resistance in North East India, has highlighted the fact
that land acquisitions in the North-East has taken place under the LAA, 1894 (Hussain
2008: 46). The main objective of land acquisition is to acquire land for developmental
projects and to boost economic progress. As per the Assam government’s Gazette
notification during the period 1947 to 2000, it acquired 27,333.37 acres of land for
various water resource projects (Hussain 2008: 75). Apart from payment of
compensation, the state has least bothered about the consequences of land acquisitions
like the issues of rehabilitation and resettlement, emotions and psychological stresses
of the displaced persons and families attached to their ancestral lands. As a result, of
the forced displacement, loss of livelihood in resettlement sites, breaking away of
community bonding specially, in the context of tribals in the North-East and
dispossession of property has led to counter forces like resistance movements against
the various kinds of developmental projects initiated by the state in the region.
The ideology of development is different between the state and the people.
Since independence, the Indian state has delved into two important things. One is
development and the other is Nation-building. The initial years of independence has
witnessed the efforts and enthusiasm of the first Prime Minister, Pt. Nehru, who set
the developmental goals in the post-colonial independent India. He literally, focused
on the building of dams, both big and small to boost the economic prosperity of the
state and took initiatives to construct big dam projects in India. Dams were so, important
during mid 1950’s that Pt. Nehru, famously spoke about dams as the ‘temples’ of a
-86-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016

new progressive India (Klingensmith 2007: 6). Popular dam projects like the Bhakra,
Hirakud, Tungabhadra and Damodar valley were amongst the earlier dam projects
undertaken in the initial years of the post-colonial independent India. Subsequently,
several other projects were taken up like the Machkund, Pykara and Kundah hydro-
electric projects (Klingensmith 2007: 6). It is said that some 3,300 big dams have
been constructed in India in the last 50 years (Klingensmith 2007: 6). Therefore, it
can be argued here, the main focus of the Indian state was to carry out developmental
projects and least attention was paid on the huge number of displacements caused
with every project. Interestingly, there are no reliable official records on the number
of development related internally displaced persons in India.
In the North-East, a large tract of land is acquired which was earlier used by
the CPR dependents and rarely any official record is found to get the actual number
of displaced persons. However, on the basis of the number of the dam projects
constructed in India and its associated displacement, it is found that the number of
development related displacements may be as high as 21 to 33 million people (Banerjee
2004: 16). Hence, in India, it can be argued that dam building is one of the most
important causes for development related displacements (Banerjee 2004: 16). But
displacement issues cannot be ignored for so long and attention is drawn for the want
of a comprehensive R&R scheme to deal with the various ecological, socio-economic
and cultural issues of the already, displaced persons, families and communities of
dam projects.
In Assam, a little over 50 percent of population is considered as displaced
persons primarily, because no land records are available. A large proportion of displaced
persons and project affected persons are found in the minor irrigation projects in
Assam as compared to other states (Fernandes&Bharali 2011: 329). A very large
proportion of the displaced persons and project affected persons are tribal people.
Most of them are CPR dependents so more than 50 percent of their displaced persons
and project affected persons may be tribals. But the official files do not keep any
account of them (Fernandes&Bharali 2011:330). During 1947-2000, 66.5 percent of
the land acquired for developmental projects is CPRs which are the homelands of
tribal and other rural poor communities (Fernandes&Bharali 2011: 329). The North-
East region is receiving special attention of the centre to construct dam projects
because of its huge bounty of hydropower potential. These projects are aimed at
making the North-East as the power generator and supplier to the rest of India.
However, it appears, these projects have awfully ignored the ecological susceptibility
of Arunachal Pradesh and the rest of the North-East (Hussain 2008: 107). Whether
it is the Tehri dam in northern India or the Subansiri dam in the North-East, both are
an integral part of the fragile Himalayan ecology. Besides, the region is highly vulnerable
and has already, experienced several earthquakes of very high intensity. The 1950
earthquake is a testimony to that which has devastated the lower portion of the river
Subansiri, and severely, affected the then undivided Lakhimpur district and the famous
-87-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016

river island Majuli (Hussain 2008: 107). Therefore, it can be said that state development
projects have time and again, ignored the region’s ecological vulnerabilities since,
India’s Independence. For the state, the priority lies in growth of economy and
development. State is not sensitive towards the emotional and psychological traumas
of the marginalised people evicted from their ancestral lands.
To fulfill the developmental goals, the centre has introduced a separate Ministry
called the Development of North East Region (DONER) at the centre to carry out
the region’s developmental needs. Besides, provisions have been made to ensure that
each Ministry keeps some specific funds reserved exclusively for the North-Eastern
states (Hussain 2008: 100) The centre has approved nearly, 145 dams to enhance and
ensure India’s energy security in future. Many mega dams are in the pipeline (Hussain
2008: 100). It is to be noted, that the quantum of land acquisition in Assam caused by
various state-sponsored development projects have led to huge number of internal
displacements and as a result of it, landholdings are becoming smaller in present
times (Hussain 2008: 86-107). Between 1947-2000, Assam has 19,00,000 displaced
and project affected persons and more than 50 percent of the 19 lakh displaced
persons and projected persons since then, are tribals who are only 12.4 percent of the
population (Fernandes 2007: 43-51). A significant number of them belong to the
scheduled castes and scheduled tribes category (Hussain 2008: 107). The South Asian
Solidarity for Rivers and People also claimed that out of 72 hydel projects proposed in
the North-East will only benefit the contractors and not the displaced people. It is
interesting, to witness that central allocation of funding for the North-East projects
have been increased specially, during 2005-06 (Hussain&Phanjoubam 2007: 15-16).

ISSUES OF DISPLACEMENT, COMPENSATION, REHABILITATION

AND RESETTLEMENT

Although, in the North-East, the state acquires vast tracts of land for building
dams, the local communities are yet not convinced of the idea of constructing dam
projects specially, the big dams due to several ecological, socio-economic and cultural
reasons. They are: fear of land submergence, cultural sites and religious places,
dispossession of property, livelihood crisis, breaking of community bonding etc. As a
result, of which both the tribal and non-tribal communities living near the project sites
do not want to get displaced. It is believed that land is also the basis of their community’s
identity. Moreover, the tribal communities are dependent for food, shelter, and livelihood
source from communal forests. It can be argued here, that people share an emotional
relationship with their land, livelihood, family, history and culture, and such deep
attachments may constitute one’s own or communal identity (Gupta 2012: 478).
Earlier, the LAA, 1894 has not prioritised on informed consent and
implementation of R&R. Though, acquisition of land is to be undertaken on payment
of compensation but in practice, no such fair compensation was paid as per the market
-88-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016

value of the acquired land. Due to the lack of attention to a comprehensive and
transparent scheme of R&R, displaced persons and families of different communities
have to undergo problems like livelihood and socio-economic crisis in the new
resettlement sites. Moreover, compensation is supposed to be paid to the individual
owners of the land and not to the common property resources (CPR’s) dependents
like tenants, labourers, artisans, forest tribals etc. Hence, the conditions of CPR
dependents are worrisome too, as they are deprived of both compensation and
rehabilitation because they do not possess legal documents or land pattas to claim
compensations. Moreover, in Assam, the compensation is paid very low. In the
Northeast, it is said that about 48 major dams will cause a million of both displaced
and project affected persons and other projects will cause half a million of them in a
decade. Thus, India alone may displace 20 millions and China similar numbers in ten
years (Sheikh 2005: 65-78). In India, for example, statistics shows, around 40 percent
of the 60 million displaced and project affected persons are tribals who are 8.08
percent of the population. At least 20 percent are Dalits and another 20 percent are
from other landless rural poor classes (Fernandes 2007: 45).
The result of displacements without a proper rehabilitation leads to further
impoverishments and marginalisation, specially, of the dalits and tribals, mostly are
CPR dependents, women and children. Women have to face problems in collecting
firewood, drinking water and getting job opportunities in the new resettlement sites.
Children are often dropped out of schools and are forced to do labour. As a result of
impoverishment, social evils like child labour, criminalisation and prostitution are
increasingly, taking place in the North-East. Moreover, the region has also, witnessed
a number of ethnic conflicts because tribal groups fight against each other to get the
advantages out of the limited resources left with them. For example, 60,000 Chakma
and Hajongtribals displaced by the Kaptai dam in the former East Pakistan are now
refugees in Arunachal Pradesh (Chakraborty 2002: 162-164, Hussain&Phanjoubam
2007: 16) and these tribal groups have faced ethnic conflicts for sharing resources.
Broadly, it can be argued that displacement is not merely understood as physical
dislocation from the original residing place but it also, means directly affecting the
livelihood of the displaced people. Michael Cernia says displacement emerges a set
of interrelated insecurities, impoverishment risks for the displaced people (Hussain
2008: 92). He has explained that these risks are landlessness, joblessness,
homelessness, marginalisation, food insecurity, loss of access to common property
and services and social disarticulation. Moreover, new resettlement sites are found in
most cases as unproductive land and it lacks irrigation facilities too and R&R is not
taking place in an adequate manner and also not in correct time. Thus, it took a long
time; almost years to rehabilitate displaced population in many dam projects and in
most of the projects, the rehabilitation is yet not properly completed. Displaced persons
have to experience these impoverishment risks (Hussain 2008: 92). Hence, it can be
said that Cernia’s explanation on risks of displacement is quite practical.
-89-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
In most dam projects, R&R was provided either to those projects funded by
the World Bank or to those projects against which an active resistance movement is
launched by the displaced population like the Farakka Super Thermal Plant,
Subarnarekha dam, Indravati and Rengali dams etc (Fernandes 2003: 8). But an
adequate scheme of R&R is still lacking in India because a huge number of displaced
and project affected population is still remained unsettled, so far. For example, the
SardarSarovar dam displaced farmers and adivasis are still struggling for an adequate
R&R and recently, a dharna (sit-ins), jalsatyagraha is organised by them as they are
demanding for their rehabilitation rights from the Gujarat and the Madhya Pradesh
governments (NAPM 2016 a, NAPM 2016 b)

POLICIES ON REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT AND ITS

SHORTCOMINGS

Some draft policies have been introduced in India in order to deal with the
issues related to R&R. It took eight years for the Ministry of Rural Development to
formulate a policy draft in 1993. More than 1,500 activist groups have joined thousands
of displaced and project affected persons, while preparing for an alternative to it and
to the LAA, 1894 (Fernandes 2003: 12). Although, fifteen departments of the
government of India got together to revise the draft policy but it did not include the
good points as mentioned in the draft. It showed no remorse about the sufferings of
millions of past displaced persons who were not resettled till then. Instead, it stated
that with the 1991 economic policy, more land would have to be acquired to attract
both the Indian and foreign private capital. Land is to be acquired from the tribal
areas and it would require a rehabilitation policy also. (Fernandes 2003: 12). It appears,
the revised draft policy has mentioned to give away minimal benefits to the displaced
and the project affected persons so that they would not pose further troubles in the
land acquisition process. It further ignored the very need to minimise enormous
displacements. Therefore, it can be argued here that the revised draft 1994 was
found to be lacking in understanding the grievances of the displaced persons and
quite insensitive towards their pitiable conditions of displacement.
Again, in November 1997, the Committee of Secretaries, government of India
has approved a new draft. But it did not question the main thrust of the 1993 and 1994
drafts which stated that more land acquisition is required for liberalisation. Thus, even
the draft rehabilitation policies supported the idea of acquiring more land and turn
rehabilitation into a palliative (Fernandes 2003: 12).
The Ministry of Rural Area and Employment formulated the 1997 policy draft
and also prepared the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 1998, to make acquisition
for companies easier than in the past. The District Collector still upholds the authoritarian
role in deciding on the payment of compensation. The policy that includes displaced
and project affected persons inhabiting the area 3 years before the first notification
-90-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016

on land acquisition has come out. The Amendment, 1998, also included that
compensation to be given to those having ownership of legal documents or to the
patta owners only. Finally, the Union Cabinet has approved the Land Acquisition
(Amendment)in October 1998 but rejected the draft policy. However, under pressure
from both the displaced, project affected persons and civil society at a meeting
convened in January 1999, the then Minister for Rural Development gave the impression
that he was open to the idea of formulating a policy first and then drafting a law based
on it (Fernandes 2003: 12).
Subsequently, the NPRR, 2004 was introduced and it applies, to projects
displacing 500 or more families in the plains and 250 families in the hills or the scheduled
areas. Agricultural or cultivable wasteland is to be allotted to each project affected
family (PAF) to the extent of actual loss subject to a maximum of 1 hectare of irrigated
or 2 hectare of unirrigated land/cultivable wasteland on the basis of availability of
government land in the district (NPRR 2003). Each PAF whose house has been
acquired will be allotted a site free of cost but only the families below the poverty line
will be given a one-time grant of Rs 25,000 for house construction and land losers will
be given a one-time grant of Rs 10,000 per hectare for land development and Rs
5,000 per family for agricultural production (NPRR 2003). Each rural artisan, small
trader and self-employed PAF will get financial assistance of Rs 10,000 for construction
of shops or working sheds. Those who lost their customary grazing, fishing or other
rights will get one-time financial assistance. Tribal PAFs get other R&R benefits.
Their families resettled out of the district will get R&R benefits to the extent of 25
percent in monetary terms (NPRR 2003).
But the NPRR, 2003 has its shortcomings too. Like it did not take up rehabilitation
as a right but took it merely as a need. It did not make a proper scheme of rehabilitation
of the PAF and stated that rehabilitation is dependent on the rehabilitation agency, if
they want to rehabilitate the displaced ones. Hence, rehabilitation was not made
mandatory. Moreover, the policy did not prioritised the livelihood issues, need of a
social and economic infrastructure for the want of a quality life after resettlement;
land will be given to the individual land owners and not to the PAF. Thus, broadly
NPRR, 2003 did not provide a comprehensive R&R policy to remove impoverishments
and risks of displacements.
NPRR 2003, further indicated that many issued addressed by this policy needs
to be reviewed. A careful assessment of the costs and benefits to be accrued from
each project should be made along with an assessment made on the impact of
displacements and the socio-economic, cultural needs of the affected people (NRRP
2007). As a result of it, a new policy was introduced known as the National
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy (NRRP), 2007. It was introduced to provide
for the basic requirements and all projects leading to involuntary displacements of
people must address the R&R issues, comprehensively (NRRP 2007). The objectives
of the NRRP, 2007 are: to minimise displacements, to ensure adequate rehabilitation
-91-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016

package, to protect rights of the weaker sections of the people like SC and ST’s, to
provide better standard of living, to integrate rehabilitation concerns into the
development planning and implementing process (NRRP 2007).
However, from the above account of draft policies on R&R, it can be argued
here that the policies on R&R were not comprehensive in nature and have its
shortcomings too. In practice, the implementation of the R&R policies was not
adequate and transparent.The previous policies on R&R did not emphasise on reduction
of enormous land acquisitions and land transfers meant for the private companies or
the corporate. It limits the involvement of displaced persons in preparing the rehabilitation
package and excludes them from taking decisions regarding the land acquisition
process (Fernandes&Bharali 2011: 24). Moreover, over the years, R&R of the
displaced and project affected persons were not taken place adequately.Hence, in
such a situation, rehabilitation of the already displacedand potential oustees of the
future land acquisition cases remains a contentious issue. The irresponsibility and
lack of accountability on the part of the administration to carry out the land acquisition
process and to figure out accurately, the displaced population in each developmental
project remained neglected so far. The District Collectors are responsible for the
corrupt and non-transparent land acquisition and non-implementation of an adequate
R&R scheme. The entire North-East in general and Assam in particular, have to bear
the consequences of inadequate rehabilitation for a huge number of displaced
populations. There is a lack of an adequate rehabilitation in Assam. Less than 9
percent of its displaced persons have been resettled only (Fernandes&Bharali 2011:
339). Moreover, rehabilitation is not mentioned in government files or documents and
project budgets have made no provisions for it (Fernandes&Bharali 2011: 340).
In contemporary times too, the North-East region has been witnessing resistance
movements like in any other parts of India, against the forcible land acquisitions by
the state using the power of ‘eminent domain’. The displaced and project affected
people are demanding their rehabilitation rights from the state and are resisting against
the compulsory acquisition of their ancestral land. It can be argued that due to the
lack of a comprehensive R&R policy in India, the UPA II have introduced the new
land Act,’The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013' which hasprioritisedthe issue of R&R
before land acquisition is made. Perhaps, the focus on R&R is intentional to reduce
the number of resistance movements all over India due to lack of an adequate and
non-transparent R&R policy. Thus, it can be said that the new land Act, 2013 is made
to deal with the lacunae on R&R policies so far. The new land Act, 2013 has
deliberately, focused on to strengthen the administrative machinery, to preserve
transparency in matters of land acquisitions and to monitor the R&R of the displaced
people. What is of foremost requirement today is the responsibility of the state agents
to maintain transparency and accountability in implementation of such R&R policies.
So that no displaced and project affected families and communities will be left to
-92-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
suffer the consequences of development induced displacements. Therefore, the
monitoring of the R&R scheme as per the new Act, 2013, is indeed, a necessity to be
implemented by the state.

RESISTANCE MOVEMENTS AND CONCERNS OF REHABILITATION

IN THE NORTH-EAST AND ASSAM

Since, independence, the Indian state has been focusing on tapping the hydro-
power potential of the North-East region. A large quantum of land has been acquired
and developmental projects are set up to boost economy and development in the
region. For instance, enormous land acquisition is made for developmental purposes
like for the defence and security projects, transport and communication projects,
industry projects, oil refineries projects, water resources projects etc. But the issue of
land acquisitions made for developing power projects, hydroelectricity projects like
the dam projects specially, the big dams have remained a contentious issue so far, and
is severely criticised by the environmentalists, social activists, NGO’s, academicians,
various other voluntary organisations, displaced and project affected persons etc.
Some of the popular power sector projects in Assam like the Borapani project
undertaken by the Assam State Electricity Board in early 1960’s when Shillong was
the capital of Assam. It was criticised for the construction of a large artificial lake
which had submerged a vast tract of land of the Khasitribals and displaced a huge
Khasi population from their ancestral land (Hussain 2008: 29). The establishment of
the Chandrapur Thermal Power Station at Chandrapur, Namrup Thermal Power Station
at Bongaigaon aimed at generating megawatts of electricity had displaced a huge
number of tribal populations (Hussain 2008: 29). It can be argued here that due to
lack an adequate rehabilitation and resettlement scheme the displaced people have to
undergo the plight of displacement. Another instance of the Kopili Hydropower Project,
in Assam, a huge tract of ancestral land approximately, 7015.60 acres of land were
acquired by the state (Hussain, 2008: 30). In 2004, the flood generated out of the
project had destroyed the districts of Nagaon and Morigaon as stated by the local
inhabitants. Moreover, a large number of populations were displaced in Assam every
year due to flood and the situation is aggravated by the Kopili project. The havoc of
flood is also witnessed by the state due to the flood occurs from dams constructed in
bordering countries like the Kurichu dam of Bhutan and flows downstream areas of
Assam like the districts of lower Assam is severely affected (Hussain 2008: 30).
Over the years, it has been witnessed that due to the lack of a transparent
rehabilitation and resettlement National policy has led to many resistance movement
against the dam projects in India. There is a long history of anti-dam movements in
India. For instance, resistance movements against the Mulshi dam, Hirakud dam,
Silent Valley dam, Tehri dam, Koel-Karo dam, were quite popular during the post-
colonial independent India. In recent times, the anti -dam movement like the Narmada
-93-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
BachaoAndolan or to say, SardarSarovar dam project resistance is a testimony to the
lack of a comprehensive rehabilitation and resettlement schemes on the part of
administration (NAPM 2016 a)
The North-East in general and Assam in particular, is also not lagging behind
when it comes to launch resistance movements against construction of big dams on
the mighty Brahmaputra and also, against the non-fulfillment of adequate rehabilitation
and resettlement rights of the displaced and project affected persons and families in
general and Assam in particular. Some of the popular resistance movements in the
North-East are the Dumbur dam Project in Tripura, Tipaimukh dam project, Pagladiya
dam project in Assam, LoktakHydel Project in Manipur, Siang project and Lower
Subansiri dam project in border areas of Arunachal Pradesh and Assam, in recent
times. The main reasons of such resistance movements are the ecological, socio-
economic, cultural reasons like issues of livelihood crisis, lack of quality lifestyle due
to inadequate rehabilitation and resettlement, loss of ancestral land due to submergence,
dispossession of property, loss of flora and fauna, submergence of cultural sites like
prayer halls called ‘Namghars’ of Assamese people, other cultural sites and places of
worship of both tribal and non-tribal communities in Assam and the rest of the North-
East.
In recent times, voluntary organisations like the Krishak Mukti Sangram
Sammittee (KMSS), All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), other NGO’s, social
activists, environmentalist, academicians, Kalpavrikshaorganisation, South Asian
Network of Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP) are participating in the resistance
movements against the dam projects in Assam and the rest of the North-East too.
Demonstrations, public meetings, discussions at various levels are taking place under
these groups leadership and creating awareness about dam projects and its
consequences, building solidarity among the people belongs to various communities to
come together against the construction of big dams in Assam and The North-East.
A few years back, the role of Pagladiya Bandh Prokolpar Khati Grasta Alekar
Sangram Samittee (PBPKASS) and Bodo Territorial Council (BTC) was quite popular
and appreciable in the context of the anti-dam resistance movement against the
Pagladiya dam project in Baksa district under theBodoland Territorial Autonomous
Districts (BTAD) in Assam. The resisters were not supporting the rehabilitation and
resettlement programmes and compensation as guaranteed to them by the Assam
government. They lack faith in the state promises of proper rehabilitation as like any
other anti-dam supporters in the rest of India and so; they have resisted for many
years, against the government moves of forcible acquisition of their ancestral lands
and finally, succeeded to close down the dam project. Despite government was claiming
to initiate relief and rehabilitation and to allocate a plot of 12, 00 bighas of land,
besides compensation, the potential oustees and project affected people rejected the
rehabilitation offer, saying it would not compensate their losses (Majumdar 2011: 11).
They also stated that the resettlement sites were already occupied by refugees and
-94-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
suspected whether the Assam government could ever rehabilitate a huge number of
displaced people, if the Pagladiya dam project is completed (Majumdar 2011: 11).
Due to the consistent support of BTC,student bodies, regional voluntary organisations,
the active role of PBPKASS and the potential oustees belongs to both tribal and non-
tribal communities defeated the proposal of dam construction initiated by the state.
The Brahmaputra Board, the implementing agency of the dam project could not
convince the people about the compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement packages.
In 2007, many scholars, academicians, journalist, student bodies and other civil society
members have submitted memorandum to the then Prime Minister apprising him about
the negative effects of big dams in Assam (Ahmed 2012). It appears to the people
that under the previous congress government the then C.M TarunGogoi did not take
much interest about R&R provisions and ecological imbalance and the state government
was rather much interested to set up the lower Subansiri dam project at any cost
(Ahmed 2012). For the state government supplying electricity to the rest of India has
become the priority and to generate more avenues for revenue collection through it
rather than paying attention to the devastation caused by big dams like homelessness,
desolation of communities, destruction of agriculture etc (Gogoi 2011). Recently, KMSS,
AASU, several academicians and social activists have participated in an agitation
against the construction of lower Subansiri dam project in Arunachal Pradesh and
Assam. Resistance movements so far, have became a strong countering force against
the authoritarian role of state in terms of land acquisition and non-implementation of
proper R&R.

REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT SCHEME UNDER THE NEW

LAND ACT, 2013
The new Act namely, ‘The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013’ has claimed to repeal
the age old colonial Land acquisition Act, 1894 (LAA) and prioritised on informed
consent, facilitation of R&Rprogrammes, to provide rehabilitation as a right of the
displaced people and also, to maintain transparency and accountability in matters of
land acquisition by the state. As per the Section 31 of the new Act, 2013, it has
introduced some entitlements for the displaced families and individuals like rehabilitation
amount must be payable to the family and it should be transferred to the bank account
of the displaced person, particulars of the house site and land to be allotted, one-time
subsistence allowance and transportation allowance must be allotted, one time amount
to artisans and small traders to be paid, payment for cattle shed and petty shops also
to be paid, mandatory employments to be provided to the members of the project
affected families, special provisions for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
should be provided, along with annuity and other entitlements to be given to the affected
families (Ramesh & Khan 2015: 42). The district collector has to ensure the provision
of all infrastructural facilities and basic amenities for the potential displaces and he
-95-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
has to keep a summary of the entire proceedings of the land acquisition and amount
of compensation paid, along with details of the land finally, acquired to maintain
transparency and accountability in the public eye (Ramesh & Khan 2015: 43-44).
Moreover, the collector can take possession of land only after payment of compensation
and providing resettlement entitlements to the entitled persons. The Act also provides
additional safeguards for double displacements . Two Committees are proposed to be
set up namely- The National Monitoring Committee for Rehabilitation and Resettlement
and State Monitoring Committee for Rehabilitation and Resettlement, to monitor the
rehabilitation programmes in the states. These two bodies will be consisted of the
representatives of both the central and state governments along with some experts.
Both the states and the Union Territories have to provide all the necessary information
regarding land acquisition to these two bodies in a regular manner to ensure a fair
recording of all proceedings (Ramesh & Khan 2015: 47).
However, it should be noted that according to the new land Act, a fixed rate of
70% consent is required by the project affected families in case of public-private
partnership projects and 80% consent, is necessary to be acquired for a private
company (Ramesh & Khan 2015: 28). But consent is not required for projects where
the government is acquiring land for its own use, hold and control (meaning it does not
intend to sell the land or develop it to benefit specific private parties) (Ramesh &
Khan 2015: 28). Therefore, it can be argued here, that non fixation of informed consent
in the context of sole public sector projects may lead to forced land acquisitions by
the state using the power of ‘eminentdomain’ in near future. How does the state of
Assam will resolve disputes over land acquisition in such projects and build trust
among the displaced people to surrender their lands to the state? Does Assam be able
to convince people about R&R in such state sponsored public sector projects where
consent is not required as per the new Act, 2013?

RESETTLEMENT FRAMEWORK IN ASSAM

A Resettlement Framework (RF) was prepared and disclosed in 2009 and it is

revised again for the Multi-Tranche Financing Facility (MFF) under the Asian
Development Bank (ADB), to provide funds to the Assam Power Sector Enhancement
Investment Program, on the basis of the new land Act, ‘The Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013’
and the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS), 2009. The RF has been formulated
to guide the resettlement plans and it outlines objectives, policy principles and
procedures for any land acquisition, compensation to be provided to the affected
persons. It will follow involuntary resettlement principles for each sub-project like-
land acquisition and involuntary resettlement impacts will be avoided, time bound
resettlement plans will be prepared, consultation with affected persons on compensation,
including compensation to be paid to non-titled affected persons prior to the contractor
-96-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
taking physical acquisition of land, disclosure of resettlement information to the affected
persons and their participation in planning and implementation of sub-projects,
vulnerable groups will be provided special assistance, establishment of grievance
redress mechanism etc (RF 2014: 10).
The RF will also follow ADB SPS like safeguarding requirements for
environment, to minimise involuntary resettlement of indigenous people, to enhance
livelihood of all displaced people, to improve the standard of living of the displaced
poor etc (RF 2014 : 6). To bring the RF in accord with ADB requirements, the RF
mandates that in land acquisition, the date of publication of preliminary notification for
acquisition under Section 4 (1) of the RFCT in LARR Act, 2013, will be treated as a
cutoff date for title holders and for non-titleholders such as squatters, the cut-off date
will be the start date of the project (RF 2014: 11).
However, the ruling of the new BJP alliance government in Assam and its
decisions on land acquisition processes and R&R plans will highlight as to what an
extent the RF would be implemented and how effective, it has been proved in
rehabilitating and resettling displaced persons in Assam under their regime, in the
coming years.

STAND OF ASSAM ON THE NEW LAND ACT, 2013

When the present NDA government in the centre passed ordinances to amend
some of the provisions of the new land Act, 2013, the previous congress government
of Assam stated that the then government would not implement the amended land
Act, 2013 as per the ordinances. Instead, the then congress government stated it
would introduce a new land acquisition Bill for the state of Assam (Kashyap 2015).
However, subsequently, the ordinances were repealed by the NDA government and
the new land Act, 2013 is in cold storage at present. The present Prime Minister has
also made an announcement during his monthly radio programme ‘Mann Ki Baat’
that the land bill would lapse and he is agreed to it (The Hindu 2015). The NDA
government will not re-promulgate the ordinance again but will include a 13 points
reform to the land acquisition law to benefit the farmers. He further said, the 13
points ‘meant to provide direct financial benefit to the farmers, are being brought
under the rules effective from today so that farmers do not face financial loss’ (The
Hindu 2015). Other states like Maharashtra, Assam and Karnataka are keen to make
changes in the new land Act, 2013 and to bring legislation specifically, for infrastructure
to get around the difficult provisions of social impact assessment. However, the centre
has advised the states to frame their own Act with the centre’s approval (The Indian
Express 2015).
Moreover, the present BJP alliance government in Assam has stated that the
government will focus in the implementation of smaller dam projects rather than big
dam projects and it will take suggestions from expert committees in case of big dam
-97-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
projects around Arunachal Pradesh (Borah 2016). The stand of the present BJP
government in Assam on land acquisition will further, say whether the new land Act,
2013 is implemented in a proper manner or not. It will be tested in the years to come.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The LAA, 1894 did not focus on the R&R and only prioritised the acquisition
of land compulsorily, even without the consent of the land owners, in order to provide
mechanism for development and economic prosperity. A large quantum of land has
been acquired since India’s independence in the North-East. The numerous cases of
water resource projects like the hydropower projects and dam projects are testimonies
to it. Assam has largely witnessed the acquisition of land for the completion of dam
projects which led to huge number of displacements primarily due to the inadequate
R&R schemes. Over the years, although the Indian state has implemented the draft
policies on R&R, it cannot be overlooked that such policies have been proved to be
inadequate. The impoverishments and risks of displacements are often reflected in
the socio-economic and cultural issues of displacements. Although, the new Land
Act, 2013 has positively focused on the R&R, yet the implementation of such an Act
depends on the stand and actions of the present BJP alliance government in Assam.
But, what is necessary to highlight is the fact that a comprehensive and transparent
R&R policy is needed to reduce the plights of displaced people and communities. In
contemporary times, with the state priority to pursue developmental goals and agendas,
land acquisitions are inevitable. So, if land is to be acquired, an informed consent
along with a comprehensive R&R policy is of utmost necessity. To make R&R policy
a suitable alternative to ensure lesser objections on land acquisitions, it is necessary to
acquire informed consent and participation of the potential oustees and displaced
people in the decision making process concerning their livelihood issues. The CPR
dependents need to be fairly compensated along with the individual owners of the
land. The R&R provisions in the new Land Act, 2013 rekindle the hope of an adequate
andfaircompensation. What is now required is the accountability on the part of the
state administration and they must maintain the accurate account of the displaced
people and communities of every developmental projects and to implement R&R
policy in letter and spirit in order to ensure lesser objections to the land acquisitions.

NOTES
The term ‘eminent domain’ comes from the Latin dominium eminens (translated
“supreme lordship”) and may be traced back to the seventeenth century Dutch jurist
Hugo Grotius. He wrote that theproperty of subjects is under the eminent domain of
the state or he who he who acts for it may use, and even alienate; destroy such
property for ends of public utility. (Downing 2013: 212)

-98-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
In 1894, the Land Acquisition Act (LAA) was passed which further amended and
unified all land acquisition laws under it during the British rule in India.The power of
‘eminent domain’ has existed, in statutory form, since the enactment of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (Downing 2013: 214)

The new land Act, 2013 has also made provision to pay double the compensation, as
a last resort to those families and individuals displaced twice, as a result of the same
land acquisition. ‘Double displacement’ refers to more than one time displacement
(Ramesh & Khan 2015: 44)

References

Ahmed, Syed Mirza (2012): “Gogoi& # 39; s Dam in a Quagmire? Retrieved from:
www.assamtimes.org (Accessed on September 10, 2016)
ALRAA (1964): The Assam Land Requisition and Acquisition Act, 1964(Assam Act
XV, 1964). Directorate of Land Requisition, Acquisition and Reforms:
Government of Assam. Retrievedfrom: revenueassam.nic.in/pdf/acts/
THEASSAMLAND(REQUISITIONANDACQUISITION)ACT,1964.pdf
(Accessed on June 1, 2016)
Banerjee, Paula (2004): “The Internally Displaced Women”. In Das, Samir Kumar,
Paula Banerjee &Madhuresh Kumar (eds) People on The Move: How
Governments Manage Moving Populations. Kolkata: Mahanirban Calcutta
Research Group. Retrieved from: www.mcrg.ac.in (Accessed on September
22, 2016)
Banerjee, Paula (2005): “Resisting Erasure: Women IDP’S in South Asia”. In Paula
Banerjee, SabyasachiBasu Ray Chaudhury and Samir Kumar Das (eds) Internal
Displacement in South Asia, pp.280-315. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Borah, Amarjyoti (2016): “New Assam government Vows to Oppose Big Dams”.
Retrieved from : www.thewire.in (Accessed on September 10, 2016)
“Centre’s bill on hold, States move on Land Acquisition” (2015): The Indian Express.
Retrieved from: indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/centres-bill-
on-hold-states-move-on-land-acquisition (Accessed on April 5, 2016)
Chakraborty, Sanat (2002): “Chakma&Hajong refugees of Arunachal Pradesh: Still a
No where People”. In C. Joshua Thomas (ed) Dimensions of Displaced People
in Northeast India, pp. 159-178. New Delhi: Regency Publications.
Downing Casey ((2013): “Eminent Domain In 21ST Century India: What New Delhi
Can Learn From New London”, International Law And Politics, 46:207-251.
(http://nyujilp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/46.1-Downing.pdf. Accessed on
July 30, 2016)
Fernandes, Walter (2003): “Development Displaced and the Right to Life: Implications
for the North-East”. In TanmoyBhattacharjee (ed) Problems of Internally
-99-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
Displaced Persons in Assam with special reference to Barak Valley.Silchar:
Assam University.
Fernandes, Walter (2007): “Internally Displaced Persons: Challenges to Human
Dignity”, Vidyajyoti Journal of Theological Reflection, 71(1):43-51. Retrieved
from: onlineministries.creighton.edu (Accessed on September 15, 2016)
Fernandes, Walter and Gita Bharali (2011): Uprooted For Whose Benefit?
Development-Induced Displacement in Assam1947-2000. Guwahati: North
Eastern Social Research Centre.
Gogoi, Debabrata (2011): “Damn dams! The Mega issue of a helpless Assam”.
Retrieved from: www.timesofassam.com (Accessed on September 10, 2016)
Goswami, Amlanjyoti (2016): “Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement: Law,
Politics and the Elusive Search for Balance”, Journal of Land and Rural Studies,
4(1):3-22. doi: 10.1177/2321024915616669. http://lrs.sagepub.com. (Accessed
on May 4, 2016)
Gupta, Priya. S. (2012): “The Peculiar Circumstances of Eminent Domain in
India”,OsgoodeHall Law Journal, 49(3), 445-489. Retrieved from: http://
digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol49/iss3/2(Accessed on September 23,
2016)
Hussain, Monirul&PradipPhanjoubam (2007): A Status Report on Displacement in
Assam and Manipur. Kolkata: Mahanirban Calcutta Research Group. Retrieved
from: www.mcrg.ac.in (Accessed on September 22, 2016)
Hussain, Monirul (2008): Interrogating Development: State, Displacement and Popular
Resistance in North East India. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Kashyap, Samudra Gupta (2015): “Assam Government preparing Separate Land
Acquisition Bill: TarunGogoi”. Retrieved from: www.indianexpress.com
(Accessed on September 10, 2016)
Klingensmith, Daniel(2007): ‘One Valley and A Thousand’: Dams, Nationalism and
Development. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
“Land Ordinance gets a Burial” (2015): T he Hindu. Retr ieved from:
www.thehindu.com/news/national/land-acquisition-ordinance-bill-gets a burial/
article7597517.ece. ( Accessed on April 5, 2016)
Majumdar, Sanjay (2011): “Whether Pagladiya Dam Conflicts? Resistance Continues”.
The Sentinel, p.11
NPRR (2003): National Policy on Resettlement and Rehabilitation for Project Affected
Families. Department of Land Resources. New Delhi: Ministry of Rural
Development, Government of India. Retrieved from: https://www.brookings.edu
(Accessed on September 15, 2016)
NRRP (2007): The National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy. Department of
Land Resources, Land Reforms Division, Resolution. New Delhi: Ministry of
Rural Development, Governmment of India. Retrieved from: www.dolr.nic.in
(Accessed on September 7, 2016)
-100-
 GUINEIS Journal- 2016
National Alliance of People’s Movement (NAPM) (2016 a): “Thousand SardarSarovar
Project Affected Being re-evicted by Gujarat government: Agitation by Project
Affected Families entered Sixth Day”. Retrieved from:
www.countercurrents.org/2016 (Accessed on July 23, 2016)
National Alliance of People’s Movement (NAPM) (2016 b): “Narmada: 45,000 Families
Facing Risk of Submergence, Satyagraha from Today”. Retrieved from:
www.countercurrents.org/2016 (Accessed on July 31, 2016)
PTI (Press Trust of India) (2015): “Assam Government preparing new Land
Acquisition Bill: TarunGogoi”. The Economic Times. Retrieved from:
articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com (Accessed on September 10, 2016)
Ramesh Jairam and Muhammad Ali Khan (2015): Legislating for Justice: The Making
of the 2013 Land Acquisition Law. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Ramanathan, Usha. (2009): “A Word on Eminent Domain” in Lyla Mehta (Ed)
Displaced by Development: Confronting Marginalisation and Gender Injustice.
New Delhi: Sage Publications.
RF (2014): Resettlement Framework (Revised & Updated) Project No: 41614: Assam
Power Sector Enhancement Investment Program. ASEB (Assam State
Electricity Board): Government of Assam. Retrieved from: www.aegcl.co.in
(Accessed on September 10, 2016)
Sheikh, AttaturRehman (2005): “Pakistan: Development and Disaster”. In Paula
Banerjee, Sabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury and Samir Kumar Das (eds) Internal
Displacement in South Asia, pp.62-112. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

-101-