Land Acquisition in India – A tool to displace the poor?

By Mrinalini

The Recent Adani Land Acquisition case opened a can of worms on how large businesses in
their run to make profits often coerce and acquire land by unscrupulous means for grabbing
land. Land Grabbing has state wise legislations prohibiting the same and the Andhra Pradesh
Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 defines land grabbing under . The Adani Land
acquisition case came into light when sixteen villagers from 4 villages in Jharkhand decided
to file a petition against the Adani group for practically land grabbing fertile farmlands for
their project in the name of Government Land Acquisition, despite checks and balances
provided in the highly debated Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The Adani group is a powerful
Conglomerate and acquired the fertile land to build a megawatt power plant fueled by
imported coal in Godda, and sell the power to Bangladesh. This move by one of the most
powerful conglomerates sought to displace Adivasis and Dalits from their land. The petition
filed by the villagers highlighted that the acquisition of the land was made in a manner that
undercut several necessary steps given in the Act like take consent of the landowners,
rehabilitate the landowners and compensate them for the land, and even failed to undertake
the essential Social Impact Assessment and highlight the particular “public purpose” of the
project.
This is not the first time Private Players with the help of governments often misused or
bypassed necessary legal safeguards given in the Act in the name of profits. The Adani group
is not the first conglomerate to unlawfully acquire lands from farmers, Dalits and Adivasis. In
2016, the Supreme Court finally held that the acquisition that was done by Tata Motors in
Singur was made unlawfully by the state government where objections were not heard as
mandated by the old Act and directed Tata Motors to return the land to the rightful owners. In
2018, the Supreme Court directed the Governments of five states to respond to the petition
filed by an activist against these states as the activists claimed that these states made
amendments to the central legislation of the 2013 land acquisition act, which affects the
livelihood of the farmers and landowners, and also go against the basic structure of law. The
states of Gujarat, Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Jharkhand exempted the
crucial consent clause, and governments have made amendments that go against the purpose
of the Act itself. In 2019, however, the Madras High Court held that all acquisitions done by
the state government under three state acts after the enactment of the 2013 LARR act is null
and void but exempted those lands where the purpose of the acquisition was achieved.
The 2013 LARR Act came into existence amidst a lot of controversies. Still, the reason for
this legislation to come into existence was make a land acquisition by the Government a more
transparent process and give the public more agency through the consent clause and included
compensation and rehabilitation of the persons displaced from the land acquired. The Act
also contains a social Impact Assessment to be done before the acquisition.

Displacements of Adivasis by Conglomerates

While the Adani case and the Singur cases point out a problem in our country, these,
unfortunately, are just the tip of the iceberg. For years, forceful displacements of Adivasi’s
from their land in the garb of “development” has rendered them homeless. Land Grabbing as
shown in the movies is quite similar in real life, at least for these villagers where a company
dealing with “renewable energy, green energy” hired goons to thrash up opposing villagers to
their project with the full support of the local police, who according to a report used tear gas
scaring the villagers, wounding them, and even detaining few of them up to three days. What
seems to be the problem in most of these cases is that the state often throws a blind eye to the
helplessness of the poor farmers, Adivasis and Dalits, while helping these conglomerates get
more prosperous by making it easier for them to acquire the land. Government servants –
Forest officials, local police officers are often known to treat the Adivasis with indifference
and even harass them constantly. The Supreme Court’s order to evict Adivasis if they fail to
provide documentation in 2019 caused widespread outrage, even more so as vulnerable and
minority groups must be protected. Steps should be taken for their empowerment, rather the
order of the court rendered them helpless, separating them from their land, communities that
live synonymous with nature, are being displaced under charges that they are encroaching
forest lands. Governments have often failed these forest dwellers, and even farmers, to the
point where farmers who were forcibly displaced, abused and coerced in giving their land up
for the construction of lignite plant by the Gujarat Power Corporation Limited, begged for the
right to die, as they had no means of livelihood apart from farming and often depended on
these lands as a means of survival for more than 20 years and demanded that they be paid fair
compensation based on current land prices or that the Government follow the latest bill of
2015, which renders that the land will belong to the farmers, something that the Government
is unwilling to do.
The most famous case of unlawful acquisition of land would be the Narmada Dam case
where the Government forcibly displaced about 200,000 people who lived on the banks of the
river with plans to improve the dam by raising the height of the same and by building
additional dams.
What is interesting is that, both in the Singur case and in the Narmada case, the
Government’s defence was that the industrial development would inevitably increase
employment in the area, by employing the villagers in these plants/projects. Still, in both
cases, it was not possible to provide jobs to every single person displaced; thus, only a few
were benefitted.
It has often so happened that the governments favour development through investments by
conglomerates often going the extra mile to provide support to them even if it means coercing
poor persons dependent on the piece of land or even going an extra mile by excluding
provisions that were brought in the central legislation to ensure a fair and transparent manner
of land acquisition.

The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And
Resettlement Act, 2013, while including specific welcome changes, has also received a fair
share of flak, leading for the 2015 amendment bill to be introduced, where the exceptions for
higher compensation of land for public projects with regards to roadways and railways were
removed. However, the bill did not pass.
A lot of problems with the LARR act 2013 are based on how the Act enforces rather
mechanical methods for compensation and fails to take into consideration of a practical
scenario where only a fraction of owners is given the right to provide consent. The
calculation for the land price and even the method of a social impact assessment – which is
essential for the acquisition process is muddled with corruption, red-tapism and delays. The
compensation amount for the land acquired is based on the historical value of the land price
and not on the fertility, or the scope the land might fetch and due to that landowners have the
short end of the stick in quoting the price for the land they want, often leaving them
unsatisfied at the meagre compensation amount.

Land Acquisition around the world –

Land Acquisition by Governments is often made for development and infrastructure provided
that the said Government can prove that the land so acquired is being used for public good or
purpose. In the United States of America, Land Acquisition or appropriation can be found in
the Fifth Amendment, which enables the state to acquire land from the individual. However,
just compensation must be provided by the Government. Most of the countries follow
acquisition as mentioned above – acquisition of land for fair compensation to the owner. Few
states also, apart from the market price of the land compensate the owner for any damage or
grievance suffered.
In Europe, The ECHR does play a more proactive role in protecting the citizens’ rights of
possession and against land acquisition – which is detailed in Article 1 and 8 of the
convention subject to exceptions where the governments can prove that the acquisition would
result in a public good and pay fair compensation to the owner.

While unlawful land acquisition often stems up from a capitalistic system, disadvantaged
sections of the society, especially in a country where they are constantly harassed, suffer the
most as they are further marginalized through forced displacement. Modern-day Land
acquisition mirrors the Zamindari system in a lot of ways as in both these parallels only the
rich get richer, while the poor get poorer. Problems in land acquisition stem from corruption
and bureaucracy in developing countries, as witnessed in India. While the LARR act of 2013
does take a step in making a somewhat chequered process like land acquisition more
transparent and fairer, it still leans towards favouring the industrial giants instead of
upliftment of the poor sections which must be remedied especially in India since the country
stands on the ides of socialism as imbibed in the 42nd Amendment and the preamble of the
Indian Constitution.