ORDINANCE TO AMEND

LAND ACQUISITION ACT

WHAT ARE THE
CHANGES?
December 30, 2014

2 Votes
Government approved an ordinance to make amendments to the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013. Let us have a look at the changes that have been proposed
via the ordinance vis-a-vis the original Act.
Amendments Brought in via Ordinance

1.

Amended Section 10(A) of the

Act to expand the list of projects
that would not require Social
Impact Assessment and prior

What was the provision in the 2013 Act ?

The 2013 law required written consent from

70% of the affected land owners in case of
their lands being acquired for PPP project. If

consent of affected families.

the acquisition was meant for private

These include projects

pertaining to national security,
defence production, rural
infrastructure including rural
electrification, affordable
housing and housing for the
poor, industrial corridors as well
as infrastructure and social
infrastructure projectsincluding

companies, consent from 80% of the affected

owners was required. Social Impact
Assessment survey was to be held along
with the process of getting the families
consent.

PPP projects wherein the

ownership continues to vest

with the government.
2.
Land-acquisition proceedings
will lapse in case compensation
is not paid or physical
possession is not taken within a
mandatory time-frame of ten
years.

3.

The time frame in the law was 5 years.

Section 105 of the Act has

been amended to include 13

statutes previously exempted
from payment of compensation.

The 13 statutes are Ancient

Monuments and Archaeological
Sites and Remains Act 1958,
Atomic Energy Act 1962,
Damodar Valley Corporation Act
1948, Indian Tramways Act
1886, Land Acquisition Act
1885, Metro Railways
(Construction of Works) Act
1978, National Highways Act
1956, Petroleum and Minerals
Pipelines Act 1962,
Requisitioning and Acquisition of
Immovable Property Act, 1948,
Coal Bearing Areas Acquisition
and Development Act 1957,
Electricity Act 2003 and
Railways Act 1989.

These Acts were listed in the Fourth

Schedule of the existing Act. The Act
mandated that a notification including these
13 exempt laws be laid before Parliament
within an year.

4.

No change has been made in

the clause relating to

compensation for the land
acquired.

Compensations were hiked up to four times

and twice the market value in rural areas and
urban areas, respectively.

WHY THE AMENDMENTS ?

To ease the process of acquiring land to meet the strategic developmental needs of
the country. The ordinance will help to avoid the hassles and procedural difficulties in
obtaining permissions for acquiring land. Industres were demanding the need of a
simple and transparent acquisition framework. All this will be done without
compromising on the compensation to be given to the farmers.
To bring a large percentage of farmers and affected families under the purview of the
earlier exempted 13 acts. They were denied higher compensation and resettlement and
rehabilitation measures as per the 2013 Act.

FOR INDUSTRIES

FOR FARMERS

Ordinance envisages projects in defence,

rural housing and industrial corridors as

Farmers compensation will remain the

exempt from seeking 80% approval from

same four times the market rate for

affected persons.

urban areas, and twice for rural areas.

Private hospitals, educational institutions and

13 statutes that were previously exempted

hotels will be included under definition of

from the rigours of compensation have

public purpose, and exempt from SIA.

now been included.

Multi-crop land can be acquired for five

The Ordinance aims to make land acquisition

purposes without consent of affected

easier for industries, as delays in approvals

families: national security, defence, rural

have restricted growth in industry and

infrastructure, industrial corridors and

infrastructure, according to stakeholders.

social infrastructure

The Land Act, 2013 required that within a year from the commencement of the Act the
government may allow provisions of rehabilitation to apply even in acquisition under the
13 laws that were exempt, subject to Parliaments approval. Since it was not possible in
this session, the government found it necessary to resort to the ordinance route.
The ordinance reflects the governments intentness to push reforms.The litmus test
will be in the budget session, when the ordinance has to be passed by both houses of
parliament. Right now, it has only emblematic value.

WHAT IS THE CRITICISM ?

Through the ordinance, the government has tried to dilute the original mandate of the
act which was to transform the process of land acquisition into a humane, participative,
informed and transparent process. Farmers and land owners interests have not been
considered and the government has succumbed to the pressure of the corporates. By
taking recourse to amendment, government is being criticized for undermining values of
parliamentary democracy. According to Article 123, an ordinance is promulgated when
the President is satisfied that circumstances exist which render it necessary for him to
take immediate action, which does not appear to be the case here.

 The process of Social Impact Assessment was introduced with a purpose. It was
meant to empower the landowners and gram sabha . Discretion had been replaced by
verifiable systems and processes to check capricious decision-making. Now,with the
amendments, it all rests on the profound wisdom of the Collector, what constitutes
public purpose, and how soon the land can be acquired.
Acquisition has been for the most part ,forceful by the state. It has always led to
protests and riots. By seeking consent, the law empowered those who were directly
affected by the acquisition. By waiving the clause for consent, this safeguard has been
eroded.
There was a demand to increase compensation value. The reason why farmers have
not benefited is because of change in land use after acquisition. When the land is used
for agriculture, it has a low value. The value of the land will be rather high if it will be
used for infrastructure or industrial project. Farmers can get a fair deal by pricing the
land after its end-use has been determined. Alternatively, compensation can be given
fairly by giving the original land owners a significant equity stake in the developed
property or a regular profit based on future values.