The draft national land acquisition and rehabilitation and resettlement

bill 2011.

Mode of Calculating Compensation for Land Acquisition Re-explained

by Supreme Court 2012 Sc

We might remember that around six years back a massive agitation

erupted in Singur area of West Bengal where the TATA

s had planned to construct a mega car manufacturing factory. The Singur

agitation which was spearheaded by Mamata Banerjee (present CM of
West Bengal) gained lot of media attention when the Tata Motor
company started constructing the factory in the area to manufacture the
TATA Nano car. The then West Bengal

s leftist Government facilitated the land acquisition under Land

Acquisition Act of 1894 to undertake the acquisition of around 997 acres
of farm land (more than 9000 kanals approximately) This move was
opposed tooth and nail by the thousands of local villagers , activists and
opposition political parties as well. Due to immense public pressure the
TATA Motors finally decided to move out of Singur in October 2008 .
Similar agitations have been taking place in various parts of India like
Narmadha Bachaaw Andholan spearheaded by Medha Patkar and many
more anti land acquisition agitations in Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Orrisa etc.
Under the Land Acquisition Act 0f 1894 the farmers used to get very less
compensation for their land and property and this was the main reason
for such agitations. In order to overcome such agitations , protests and to
woo the farmers the Congress lead UPA II decided to enact a new Land
acquisition act which would be known as the


Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act

(LAAR Act). The discussions on LARR Bill is going on since 2011

when this bill was made public for an open debate. The passage of this
historic bill by the Lok Sabha recently is seen as a political stunt by the
Congress party to woo the rural vote bank. But some critics also believe
that this move will destabilize the economic growth of India as the
investment by the Multi National Companies (MNC

s ) will decrease in view of the sudden increase of land / property

rates .History of Land Acquisition Act:The land acquisition act was
enacted during the British Raj in the year 1894 . This law was enacted
by the Britishers with the purpose of facilitating the land acquisition by
the government of privately held land for public purposes. The word
"public purpose", as defined in the act, refers to the acquisition of land
for construction of housing schemes , health institutions , educational
institutions etc. The word "government" refers to the Central
Government if the purpose for acquisition is for the union of India and
for all other purposes in reference to the state Governments . The local
authorities , societies registered under the societies act , 1860 and
cooperative societies established under the cooperative societies act
could also acquire the land for developmental activities through the
government.Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill 2011
The bill was introduced first time in Lok Sabha on September 7th 2011
and was passed on August 29, 2013 by the it. As per the bill the muchawaited land acquisition and rehabilitation aims to provide better
compensation to the people whose land is taken away, brings
transparency to the process of acquisition of land to set up companies ,
factories or buildings and assures rehabilitation of the affected people .
Out

Justice G.S. Singhvi, and Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly in Dev Sharan v. State
of U.P., (2011) The Courts must examine these questions very carefully when
little Indians lose their small property in the name of mindless acquisition at
the instance of the State. If public purpose can be satisfied by not rendering
common man homeless and by exploring other avenues of acquisition, the
Courts, before sanctioning an acquisition, must in exercise of its power of
judicial review, focus its attention on the concept of social and economic
justice. While examining these questions of public importance, the Courts,
especially the Higher Courts, cannot afford to act as mere umpires. In this
context we reiterate the principle laid down by this Court in Authorised
Officer, Thanjavur and another vs. S. Naganatha Ayyar and others reported in
(1979) 3 SCC 466, wherein this Court held: ......It is true that Judges are
constitutional invigilators and statutory interpreters; but they are also
responsive and responsible to Part IV of the Constitution being one of the
trinity of the nation's appointed instrumentalities in the transformation of the
socio- economic order. The judiciary, in its sphere, shares the revolutionary
purpose of the constitutional order, and when called upon to decode social
legislation must be animated by a goal-oriented approach. This is part of the
dynamics of statutory interpretation in the developing countries so that courts
are not converted into rescue shelters for those who seek to defeat agrarian
justice by cute transactions of many manifestations now so familiar in the
country and illustrated by the several cases under appeal. This caveat has
become necessary because the judiciary is not a mere umpire, as some assume,
but an activist catalyst in the constitutional scheme
- IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2011
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.8939/10 , and CIVIL
APPEAL NO. OF 2011
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.10993/10

Shakuntala B. Moda vs Union Of India And Ors. on 28 May, 1991

Kalia Hati And Others vs State Of Odisha And Others on 13 July,

2015
K.E.Yesudas vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 15 November,
2007

Shri Basudeb Acharia Called The Attention Of The Minister Of

Home ... on 14 March, 2006

Nandini Sundar & Ors vs State Of Chattisgarh on 5 July, 2011

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCIVIL APPEAL NO.6293

OF 2011(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 15151 of 2011

REPORTABLEIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCIVIL

APPEAL NOS. 2650-2652 OF 1998