One of the social costs of development is that dams, roads, ports, railways,

mines and logging displace people. In all cases displacement raises important
ethical questions. What is owed to people who are displaced? Under what
conditions can development that includes displacement be justified? What kind
of ethical analysis can provide justification for displacement-inducing
development?1

 ABSTRACT

Displacement of human populations from the natural habitats results in a

host of socio-economic impacts. Through this study we will focus on dynamic and
counter-dynamic impact of globalisation with special reference to displacement for
development in India especially on farmers and tribal communities in India and
how the modernisation process has affected these communities especially since the
adoption of neo-liberal economic reforms. For the rural people the displacement is a
traumatic both in terms livelihoods and cultural point of view. We will analyse the
issues of displacement of the various displaced communities that have been
relatively isolated from the outside world. The development induced displacement
becomes important due to its impact on the rural and tribal communities through
land alienation in the form of protests by the affected communities.

 INTRODUCTION

Development refers to the situation where both material and quality living
standard of masses will increase. The most fundamental goal of economic
development seems to be to advance the welfare and wellbeing of the people. It is
quite understood that a country can be developed only if its economic sector is
developed but by affecting a vulnerable sector in the name of development is not
development at all.2

1
PETER PENZ, DISPLACE: FORCED MIGRATION REVIEW, Dilemmas of development-induced
displacement, Refugee Studies Centre, Jan 12, 2002 (Apr 28, 2015, 11:20 AM)
http://www.fmreview.org/FMRpdfs/- FMR12/fmr12full.pdf
2
K ASOORA & FAYARUS MUNIVAR, DEVELOPMENT INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS: SOCIAL
PROBLEMS AND HUMAN RIGHT VIOLATIONS, (Apr 29, 2015, 07:46 AM) http://indianresearch-
journals.com/pdf/IJMFSMR/2014/October/12.pdf.

1
 Economic liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation model of development
in India is virtually depriving the tribal people and other agriculture dependent poor
people from their traditional means of sustainable livelihood by promoting the
unregulated growth of mineral-based industries in the tribal regions of India. In the
name of modernisation and the country’s economic development, the elites in India are
taking over the life sustaining resources of the poor and pushing them into a further
marginalised state of living as a result of displacing them from their land and homes.
Displacement for development has created increasing conflict between these
ecosystem-dependent peoples and the elites. The former are fighting to defend their
traditional and sustainable forms of subsistence and the latter are intruding into the
territory of these people to exploit the land, forests and minerals in their ecosystems. In
the name of development and of civilizing, assimilating and mainstreaming the tribal
people, the affluent elites are evicting these poor people from their homes and land.3

 THE DISPLACEMENT SCENARIO4

Displacement is described as dislocation of people from their native place and

region. It often exacerbates rather than mitigates economic insecurity, helplessness and
alienation. This could mean loss of economic livelihoods and communities. After
independence the developmental projects were launched by the government, which
were formulated, designed and carried out by the engineers and bureaucrats, who had
no concern for environmental and rehabilitation issues.
There is a disagreement over exact number of displaced people. It seems likely
that no less than 40-50 million people have been displaced. Various studies on
displacement point out that in earlier phase until 1980 was marked by meager
compensation towards the affected people and lack of any attempt to understand the
issues of rehabilitation of the displaced people. Most of the affected people were from

3
RAJKISHOR MEHER, DISPLACEMENT AND THE LIVELIHOOD ISSUES OF TRIBAL AND AGRICULTURE
DEPENDENT POOR PEOPLE: THE CASE OF MINERAL-BASED INDUSTRIES IN INDIA, (Apr 28, 2015, 11:20
AM) http://www.abstract.xlibx.com/a-economy/63531-1-globalization-displacement-and-the-livelihood-
issues-tribal-and.php.
4
Kalim Siddiqui, Development and Displacement in India: Reforming the Economy towards
Sustainability, (Apr 28, 2015, 11:26 AM) http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/364/1/012108/pdf/1742-
6596_364_1_012108.pdf.

2
poor households and with the displacement they were further marginalised due to loss
of their livelihoods.5
The involuntary displacement of people due to acquisition of their land for
developmental activities across India is a major issue. They have resulted in widespread
protests across the country. People began to protests, for example, major projects such
as Sardar Sarovar, Salient Valley, the Manglore Thermal Power, the Dabhol power,
Maha Mumbai Special Economic Zones, the Nandigram Special Economic Zones, the
Singur Tata Motors and so on.
In India people continue to be involuntary dislocated and the goal of
resettlement remains exceedingly difficult to achieve. Moreover, the aims of
sustainable development, where people are better than they were before resettlement
are far from being achieved. Seeing this issue merely a financial seems to be incorrect.
Compensation by itself cannot fully restore and improve levels of income of those who
have been involuntary displaced.
In the 1990s, development-induced displacement emerged as a major concern
and also a challenge among the Indian social researchers. The concern arose because of
dramatic rise developmental projects and urban expansion in the 1980s fuelled by
construction of dams and urban development coupled with disastrous outcomes in
resettlement experiences. This led to an increase in popular resentment and protest,
which brought the issue on forefront.
The Upper Krishna irrigation project (i.e. dams and reservoir) displaced about
300000 peoples. Loss of livelihoods and displacement has become a recurring feature
of Singrauli region of Madhya Pradesh state mainly due to construction of dams, power
and mining since 1960s. Displacement in the Singrauli region began first by the
construction of Rihand dam and Govind Sagar Reservoir in the 1960s. Later on in
1980 Thermal power projects were set up, which led to expansion of coal mining in the
region. All these activities have initiated a series of displacement and loss of
livelihoods of the people in the region (Sharma, and Singh, 2009).6
The Sardar Sarovar project has affected nearly 300 villages, with 163000 people
have been displaced and among them tribal population has been severely affected

5
Ibid at 5.
6
Ibid at 6.

3
(Parasuraman, 1999) In fact, it seems that the colonial land acquisition Act 1894
ignores that fact that in rural economy land is the sustenance not merely of land owners
but also to the landless service groups. To attract private investors and profits have
become the sole criteria. The force is being used to evict the people from their homes
and lands, where they may have lived for generations is unjust and inhumane and could
not be justified in truly democratic sense. On this issue government seems to be bent on
advocating and protecting the interest of tiny corporate sector. As Medha Pathkar, one
of the leading figures in the movement against Narmada project points out in World
Commission on Dams’ report, 2000: “Even with rights recognised, risks assessed and
stakeholders identified, existing iniquitous power relations would too easily allow
developers to dominate and distort such process… Understanding this takes us beyond
a faith in negotiations”. (pp 320-21)
The government of India admitted that several million people displaced by
dams, mines, industries, power plants etc. and still ‘awaiting rehabilitation’, a figure
regarded very conservative by most independent researchers. The developmental
projects are always put forward as development for national interest. The communities,
who lost their livelihoods for so-called ‘greater good’ and national interest, would be
making this sacrifice to benefit the entire nation. (India Today, 2007)
Involuntary displacement occurred due to the need to build dams,
transportation, power generation, urban development and so on. It is claimed that such
projects creates employment and improves services. However, it also displaces people
from their land, community and cultural heritage and raises major issues social justice
and equity. In India, for example, researchers found that the country’s developmental
projects since independence have displaced more than 20 million people. And most of
these people have not been rehabilitated. The rehabilitation programmes since
independence have performed miserably. Relocation of human population from the
protected areas, also known as wild life conservation, affects peoples’ socio-economic
conditions.
At least 50 million people have been displaced since independence under the
colonial Land Acquisition Act of 1894. Most of these people are difficult to trace, who
are living in urban shanty towns across the big cities in India. Despite the years of
protests and demonstrations on the issue of displacement and rehabilitation little

4
progress has been done to ameliorate the sufferings of the affected people. However,
the government has announced its policy on National Resettlement and Rehabilitation
Policy (NRRP) in 2007 which states: “through a careful quantification of costs and
benefits that will accrue to society at large, of the desirability and justifiability of each
project. The adverse impact on affected families - economic environmental, social and
cultural - needs to be accessed in a participatory and transparent manner”. (Cited in
Sampat, 2008)
On the issue of displacement risks, Cernea (2000) has identified key vital
components such as: Landlessness; joblessness; homelessness; marginalisation; food
insecurity; community disarticulation; loss of access to common property resources.
According to him, preventing these factors would mean reversing the risks. He
emphasis that land is the basis of people’s productive system in agrarian society and if
it is not replaced by steady income generating employment would lead towards
impoverishment. Cernea notes: “Expropriation of land removes the main foundation
upon which people’s productive systems, commercial activities, and livelihoods are
constructed. This is the principal form of de-capitalisation and pauperisation of
displaced people, as they lose both natural and manmade capital”.

In recent years states like Gujarat, Haryana, Jarkhand, Madhya Pradesh and
West Bengal have displaced very large number of people in order to acquire land for
SEZs that was expected to attract millions of US dollars on nearly half-million acres of
land. It was also claimed that these investments would create more than half million
jobs, but due to high mechanised and automation the job creation was far less than
expected. The mechanisation appears to be the main reason for high job costs. For
example, the average size of coal mines increased from 150 acres in 1976 to 800 acres
1995, but it created fewer jobs.7Various studies have pointed out that nearly 50 million
people have been displaced since independence due to developmental projects among
them 40 % were tribal, 20 % dalits (untouchable castes) and 20 % were from backward
castes.

7
W. FERNANDES. AND M. ASIF. (1997) DEVELOPMENT INDUCED DISPLACEMENT IN ORISSA 1951-1995, pp.
74-75, New Delhi: Indian Social Institute.

5
 TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

The types of development projects which caused wide stir among the people can
be ranged from hydro power projects to tourism. The development projects in India can
be categorized under the following types:8
1. Hydro or water based big developmental projects like big dams, irrigation,
canals etc.
2. Power or thermal projects including mines, nuclear power reactor.
3. National security related projects like setting up of defence headquarters in
various zones, defence training school etc.
4. Natural resources including agriculture and its related industrial set up e.g. tea,
coffee, rubber, jute plantation etc, natural gas and petroleum, refineries, oil rigs
and its related set up.
5. Tourism projects which includes tourist spots, tourist lodges and hotels, theme
parks, beautification of cities, religious places, places of interests, reserve forest
areas which debarred human habitation except primitive tribes which are on the
verge of extinct etc.

 DEVELOPMENT PARADIGM

There are broad two types of discussions taking place on this issue namely: those who
argue for faster economic growth and others stress on the issues of environmental
protection. There is a need to understand the choices to be made especially large
projects that are considered crucial to economic growth but are detrimental ecological
and environment.
India’s economic liberalisation also known as New Economic Policy was launched in
1991. The major policy change was growth centred focus. It did not make any reference
to long standing problems of the Indian economy such as poverty, malnutrition,
unemployment, ill health, illiteracy and environmental degradation etc.
However, Indian economy is predominantly rural in character. This is evidenced from
the fact that in 2011, about 74 % of its population lived in some half million villages.

8
Rakhi Moni Gogoi & Thaneshwar Lahon, Paradigm Shift: The Situation of Development Induced
Displacement in India (Apr 29,2015, 03.31 PM) http://www.ajssh.leena-luna.co.jp/AJSSHPDFs/ Vol.3%
281%29/AJSSH2014%283.1-13%29.pdf.

6
India’s two-thirds workforce engaged in agricultural sector, and this sector contributed
about 26 % of the GDP in 2009.
Since the adoption of neoliberal reforms, the foreign investors have increased their
presence in India. And various collaboration and joint ventures projects have been
launched. For example, in recent years as many as 341 SEZs have been approved and
set up across India.
On the name of efficiency in agriculture sector, the World Bank and mainstream
economists support increased capital intervention and commodification of land. For
instance, the World Bank (2010) argues in favour of large scale land acquisition as a
way to reduce poverty. The Bank suggests that large-scale land acquisition can be
vehicle for poverty reduction. The report further suggests that increased private capital
investment in agriculture will create more jobs and new opportunities for contract
farmers.9
The World Bank (2010) also claims that land acquisition could reduce poverty by
making better use of underutilised land. (pp 77) The study cites the examples of large
scale mechanised production of soya and grains in North America and Argentina. The
study notes, “near-industrial methods of quality control and production at low cost,
managed by high quality agronomists using land leased by corporations that pay high
rents for land, making it advantages for landholder to cease their own production. (pp
33) The report does not provide any concrete evidence of job creation due to increased
mechanisation in large farms. It would like to see reversal of land reforms in
developing countries. It seems that the only success criteria are efficiency and profits.
The study favours a laissez-faire approach in which private investors take command
from small and medium farmers into contract farmers arguing that, “productivity and
welfare enhancing transactions can occur without the need for active intervention by
the state”.
Contrary to the Bank’s claims, Li (2011) finds in Indonesia that the influx of capital in
agriculture did not result into job creation; it rather widened rural inequality and
increased involvement of private capital. No jobs were created to affected people, as
initially claimed. Li (2011) study in Indonesia that, “Where large scale plantation and

9
World Bank, (2010) RISING GLOBAL INTEREST IN FARMLAND: CAN IT YIELD SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE
BENEFITS?, pp 77, pp 33, Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

7
smallholders’ contract schemes have a long history…the predicament of people who
are displaced from their ‘inefficient’ farms in a context where generalized capitalist
system fails to provide them with an alternative livelihood or living wage” (pp281). Li
further argues that “large scale farming not only fails to reduce poverty, it actually
produces it”.10

 DYANAMIC AND CONTER-DYNAMIC

It is admiited that development and displacement denotes to two conflicting

interests of two different groups. But, despite of this fact, the necessity of infrastructure
development can’t be undetermined. On the same hand, it is duty of a welfare state to
make balance between these two interests. The positive aspects of the development at
the cost of displaced person are as under:

1. Creates more opportunities for firms to create and tap into more and larger
markets
2. Lead to more access to capital flows, technology, human capital, cheaper
imports and larger export markets
3. Allows businesses to become part of international production networks and
supply chains.
4. Attracts foreign investors and multinationals companies.

On the same hand, the adverse impacts of these big projects can’t be ignored. These are
as under:

1. Exacerbating income inequalities among different groups of socities.

2. Leads to illiteracy, poverty and social insecurity

 THREE ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES

1. Public interest,
2. Self-determination and
3. Egalitarianism

10
T.M.LI (2011) “CENTRING LABOUR IN THE LAND GRAB DEBATE”, JOURNAL OF PEASANT STUDIES, Vol.38,
No.2, March, pp.281-98, pp 285.

8
 1. Public interest: The public interest perspective is given concrete expression by
cost-benefit analysis. The criterion is that of net benefits to the population as a
whole. Negative side effects, including displacement, are treated as costs and
the question is whether the benefits of the project or policy exceed such costs.
Questions of compensation and distribution are treated as separate, political
matters. It is possible for those displaced to become worse off, for these costs to
be taken into account, and yet for the project or policy to generate positive net
benefits. Such a line of reasoning lay behind the statement of Jawaharlal Nehru,
India’s first Prime Minister that people displaced by dams had to make such
sacrifices for the good of the country.11

2. Self-determination: Self-determination, on the other hand, is more an issue of

freedom and control. In its libertarian form, which focuses on the self-
determination of individuals, displacement at least of property owners – is
necessarily immoral. There is also a communitarian interpretation of self-
determination, which is violated by the coercive removal or forced migration of
whole communities. This can be a promising antidote to heavy-handed and
business privileging development from the top. However, it is also too crude on
its own. It ignores broader public-interest considerations, such as improved
living conditions resulting from the electricity and irrigation provided by
dams.12

3. Egalitarianism: Third perspective, egalitarianism. Development-induced

displacement can conceivably reduce inequalities if it primarily benefits the
poor and puts the burdens on those who are better off. However, horizontal
equity among the poor will be violated when some disadvantaged groups
benefit while others are harmed by being displaced. This can be partly resolved
by adequate compensation but equal sharing requires also that those displaced

11
Supra note 1 at 4-5. See also Shilpi Jain, Development Induced Displacement, (Apr 29, 2015, 07:40
AM) http://www.manupatrafast.com/articles/PopOpenArticle.aspx?ID=d03848b7-dff9-4b57-b7c8-c7e7a
4df797f&txtsearch=Subject:%20Property.
12
Ibid.

9
 share in the benefits of development, not simply receive compensation. At the
same time, equality requires that displaced communities are not the only ones to
benefit from development.13

 PROBLEMS FACED BY THE DISPLACED PEOPLE

The problems faced by the displaced people offers a valuable tool for the assessment of
the many risks inherent in development-induced displacement. These problems are
interlinked and lead to the onset of impoverishment of the displaced people. These
problems are:14

1. Landlessness. Expropriation of land removes the main foundation upon which

people’s productive systems, commercial activities, and livelihoods are
constructed. This is the principal form of de-capitalization and pauperization of
displaced people, as they lose both natural and human-made capital.

2. Joblessness. The risk of losing wage employment is very high both in urban and
rural displacements for those employed in enterprises, services, or agriculture.
Yet, creating new jobs is difficult and requires substantial investment.
Unemployment or underemployment among resettlers often endures long after
physical relocation has been completed.

3. Homelessness. Loss of shelter tends to be only temporary for many resettlers;

but, for some, homelessness or a worsening in their housing standards remains a
lingering condition. In a broader cultural sense, loss of a family’s individual
home and the loss of a group’s cultural space tend to result in alienation and
status deprivation.

4. Marginalization. Marginalization occurs when families lose economic power

and spiral on a “downward mobility” path. Many individuals cannot use their
earlier acquired skills at the new location; human capital is lost or rendered
inactive or obsolete. Economic marginalization is often accompanied by social

13
Ibid.
14
Brookings Institution, The Brookings Institution-SAIS Project on Internal Displacement (Brookings
Institution, Washington, May 2003).

10
 and psychological marginalization, expressed in a drop in social status, in
resettlers loss of confidence in society and in themselves, a feeling of injustice,
and deepened vulnerability.

5. Food Insecurity. Forced uprooting increases the risk that people will fall into
temporary or chronic undernourishment, defined as calorie-protein intake levels
below the minimum necessary for normal growth and work.

6. Increased Morbidity and Mortality. Massive population displacement threatens

to cause serious decline in health levels. Displacement-induced social stress and
psychological trauma are sometimes accompanied by the outbreak of relocation
related illnesses, particularly parasitic and vector-borne diseases such as
malaria. Unsafe water supply and improvised sewage systems increase
vulnerability to epidemics and chronic diarrhea, dysentery, and so on. The
weakest segments of the demographic spectrum—infants, children, and the
elderly—are affected most strongly.

7. Loss of Access to Common Property. For poor people, loss of access to the
common property assets that belonged to relocated communities (pastures,
forest lands, water bodies, burial grounds, quarries, and so on) result in
significant deterioration in income and livelihood levels.

8. Social Disintegration. The fundamental feature of forced displacement is that it

causes a profound unraveling of existing patterns of social organization. This
unraveling occurs at many levels. When people are forcibly moved, production
systems are dismantled. Long-established residential communities and
settlements are disorganized, while kinship groups and family systems are often
scattered. Life-sustaining informal social networks that provide mutual help are
rendered non-functional. Trade linkages between producers and their customer
base are interrupted, and local labor markets are disrupted. Formal and informal
associations, and self-organized services, are wiped out by the sudden scattering
of their membership. Traditional management systems tend to lose their leaders.
The coerced abandonment of symbolic markers (such as ancestral shrines and
graves) or of spatial contexts (such as mountains and rivers considered holy, or
sacred trails) cuts off some of the physical and psychological linkages with the

11
 past and saps at the roots of the peoples’ cultural identity. The cumulative effect
is that the social fabric is torn apart. Others have suggested the addition of other
risks such as the loss of access to public services, loss of access to schooling for
school-age children, and the loss of civil rights or abuse of human rights.

9. Loss of Access to Community Services. This could include anything from

health clinics to educational facilities, but especially costly both in the short and
long term are lost or delayed opportunities for the education of children.

10. Violation of Human Rights. Displacement from one’s habitual residence and the
loss of property without fair compensation can, in itself, constitute a violation of
human rights. In addition to violating economic and social rights, listed above,
arbitrary displacement can also lead to violations of civil and political rights,
including: arbitrary arrest, degrading treatment or punishment, temporary or
permanent disenfranchisement and the loss of one’s political voice. Finally,
displacement carries not only the risk of human rights violations at the hands of
state authorities and security forces but also the risk of communal violence
when new settlers move in amongst existing populations.15

 CHALLENGES THAT ARISE IN RELATION TO THE

DISPLACEMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT

Human rights challenges that arise in relation to displacement for development:

1. Right to Development and Self-Determination: In 1986, the UN General

Assembly adopted a Declaration on the Right to Development, which states that
every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to
and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all
human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized. The Declaration,
moreover, asserts the right of peoples to self-determination and their inalienable
right to full sovereignty over all their natural wealth and resources. Such
language makes it clear that local communities and individuals, not states, have
the right to development.

15
Ibid at 19.

12
2. Right to Participation: If self-determination is the right to say whether
development is needed or not, participation rights begin to be relevant when
development begins. The right to participation is based on various articles of the
International Bill of Human Rights, which consists of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR). More specifically, the 1991 International Labor
Organization Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in
Independent Countries (ILO Convention) stipulates (Article 7) that indigenous
and tribal peoples shall participate in the formulation, implementation and
evaluation of national and regional development plans that affect them.

3. Right to Life and Livelihood: When security forces take action to move people
forcibly or to quell civil dissent against development projects, this may
constitute a direct threat to the right to life, which is protected in the UDHR
(Article 3) and the ICCPR (Article 6). The right to livelihood is threatened by
the loss of home and the means to make a living—whether farming, fishing,
hunting, and trading or the like—when people are displaced from habitual
residences and traditional homelands. The rights to own property and not to be
arbitrarily deprived of this property as well as the right to work are spelled out
in the UDHR (Articles 17 and 23, respectively) as well as in Article 6 of the
ICESCR. Article 11 of the ICESCR, moreover, affirms that States Parties to the
present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of
living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and
housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. Included in
the right to life is the right to environment, which makes life worth living,
materially and culturally. This concept has also been phrased as
intergenerational equity or the right of future generations to inherit a planet, or a
particular piece of it, that is capable of sustaining life. The 1992 Convention on
Biological Diversity, for example, asserts that state signatories are determined
to conserve and sustainably use biological diversity for the benefit of present
and future generations.

13
4. Rights of Vulnerable Groups: Growing evidence shows that, while development
projects may create vulnerability through impoverishment, they
disproportionately affect groups that are vulnerable to begin with, particularly
indigenous groups and women. Human rights of vulnerable groups are protected
generically in the International Bill of Human Rights. The ILO Convention 169
spells out protections for indigenous groups. Some governments still recognize
only male heads of household as legitimate, denying women compensation for
submerged lands and exacerbating pre-existing gender inequalities. In tribal
communities where women enjoy user rights over land but not ownership rights,
governments do not provide these women with any compensation. In addition to
suffering greater negative effects due to dams, women also generally do not
enjoy the same benefits men do, such as enhanced employment opportunities.

5. The principle of non-discrimination is not only codified in the UDHR (Article

2), the ICCPR (Article 2) and the ICESCR (Article 2) but also in the 1979
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW).

6. Right to Remedy: A right without a remedy is no right at all. The right to

remedy is asserted in the UDHR (Article 8) and in the ICCPR (Article 2). Often,
due to the nature of the development process, the project affected peoples come
to know about actions that have been taken without their knowledge or consent.
Therefore, they need a quick and efficacious remedy that can halt on-going
violations and prevent future ones. The right to remedy is therefore crucial to all
development projects.

7. Constitution of India: The Constitution of India and Directive Principles of

State Policy and Article 21 states that, “No person shall be deprived of his life
or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”. But
despite of these constitutional securities poor people, over the years, were
displaced.

14
 DEFECTS IN COMPENSATION, REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT POLICY

For the Government and its agents of development, cash compensation

seems to be the only panacea for the problems induced by displacement and only
policy for rehabilitation. It's hard to believe that how land, natural resources, means
of livelihood, social and cultural loss resulting from displacement can be quantified
and compensated in monetary terms? Moreover, the manner in which the law is
framed and interpreted ensures that the displaced landowner or house owner is
always the loser. The limited provisions in the Land Acquisition Act to challenge
the rate of compensation are, in practice, inaccessible to the indigent and illiterate
oustees. Even, only those landowners who were familiar with the legal details of the
Land Acquisition took their cases to court. The value of the land is calculated as on
the date of the gazette notification and interest is liable to be paid only from the date
of taking possession up to the date of payment of full compensation. The LAA thus
does not take into consideration the escalation of the market value between the time
of notification and the date of actual possession.
The ill effects of the displacement induced by development ought to be
taken care off by the state and necessary arrangement thereof made, i.e. the
displaced persons be resettled in a safe habitat wherein they can start their life
afresh. However, this would require more than mere allocation of certain piece of
land for resettlement or mere construction of make shift camps for temporary
settlement. What is needed is the "rehabilitation" of the persons affected by the
projects; rehabilitation means to "restore to the former condition", and thus, all that
was lost by displacement, the emotional, cultural, social, political and economic
losses must be restored at a priority basis than to the Project itself, which is the
cause of the impoverishment.

 GOVERNMENT’S ENDEAVOUR TOWARDS REHABILITATION AND

RESETTLEMENT OF DISPLACED PERSONS

In India, the problem of land acquisition and payment of compensation is

handled by the colonial Land Acquisition Act 1894. The land acquisition procedure has
become a complex one, prohibiting the payment of fair compensation to project ousters.

15
The operation of the said Act has given the state the authority to abuse power and fix
the rate of compensation in a most arbitrary manner.

To address various issues related to land acquisition and rehabilitation and

resettlement comprehensively the Department of Land Resources has formulated a
National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2007. The new policy has been
notified in the Official Gazette and has become operative with effect from the 31
October 2007, based on which many State Governments have their own Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Policies.

1. The National Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy (NRRP) 2007 is

applicable to all development projects leading to involuntary resettlement of
people.
2. The policy aims to minimize displacement and promote, as far as possible,
non-displacing or least displacing alternatives.
3. The policy also aims to ensure adequate rehabilitation package and
expeditious implementation of the rehabilitation process with the active
participation of those affected.
4. The policy also recognizes the need for protecting the weaker sections of the
society especially members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.16

To give legal backing to the policy, the Cabinet also decided to bring legislation on the
lines of Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy and to suitably amend the Land
Acquisition Act 1894. In this direction, Government has introduced two bills on similar
lines in Lok Sabha in 2009 named as the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill 2007 and
the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007. Both of the Bills lapsed with the
dissolution of the 14th Lok Sabha.17

16
PARKASH CHANDRA DEOGHARIA, DEVELOPMENT, DISPLACEMENT AND DEPRIVATION, New Delhi
2012,p.13.
17
Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3305 dated 13.12.2012

16
 THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN
LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT,
201318

In May 2011, the National Advisory Council recommended combining the

provisions of Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) within a
single Bill. In this direction, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2012 (formerly known as the Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011) was introduced in Lok Sabha
on 7 September 2011. The Bill was passed on 29 August 2013 in Lok Sabha and on 5
September 2013 in Rajya Sabha. The bill received the assent of the President of India,
Pranab Mukherjee on 27 September 2013. The Act came into force from 1 January 201.

The landmark Act on the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement 2013 brings an end to the era of forced
land acquisition. Integrating land acquisition with rehabilitation and resettlement and
bringing transparency in the process of acquisition, compensation, and rehabilitation as
a matter of right is a historic step. It was important to have a law to prevent forcible
land acquisitions which have increased during the last few decades due to big industrial
and development projects. Providing fair compensation and Rehabilitation and
Resettlement to the farmers, land-owners and livelihood losers in all acquisitions
becomes critical in the context of increasing alienation, displacement, deprivation, and
disentitlement to the resources of livelihood. Some salient features of the Bill are as
under:

1. Consent of 80 percent of landowners required in case of land acquired by

private companies and 70 percent for land acquired under Public Private
Partnership (PPP) model for public purpose;

2. Compensation up to four times the market value in rural areas and twice in
urban areas;

18
Ibid at 9-11.

17
 3. Mandatory Social Impact Analysis (SIA) to assess nature of public interest and
estimation of socio-economic impact prior to acquisition;

4. Land cannot be vacated until the entire compensation is awarded to the affected
parties;

5. Companies can lease the land instead of purchasing it;

6. Private companies to provide for rehabilitation and resettlement if land acquired

through private negotiations is more than 50 acres in urban areas and 100 acres
in rural areas;

7. Affected families include farm labour, tenants, sharecroppers and workers on

the piece of land for three years prior to the acquisition.

 CONCLUSION

In recent years rehabilitation and resettlement of project affected families has

turned out to be the most vital and sensitive issue for the development projects.
Different development projects are being opposed by the inhabitants of these areas and
being delayed because of the opposition from the PAFs (Project Affected Families).
This has been primarily due to the bitter R&R (Resettlement and Rehabilitation)
experience of PAFs.

In the post independence period, the development projects deemed to be

temples of progress, ultimately turned out to be “graveyards” for millions of these
PAFs. Although these projects did bring development but the cost has been enormous.
There is no denial of the fact that if the quality of life of people is to be improved,
development projects are a must but there is general consensus now that development
should not be at the cost of people and their environment, while the social activists and
the academicians have put the issue of R&R on the national agenda19.

19
Displacement and Rehabilitation of People Due to Developmental Projects, PARLIAMENT
LIBRARY AND REFERENCE, RESEARCH, DOCUMENTATION AND INFORMATION SERVICE
(LARRDIS)

18
 Therefore, the industrial and infrastructural development is the key word to the
success of any country. However, when this lead to the internal displacement of
millions of people the same become a boomerang for the country with the rise of
problems like insurgency, poverty, illiteracy etc. So, it is necessary to make a balance
between these two conflicting interests and to take some effective measures to mitigate
adverse impacts of displacement in the name of development and to enhance the
probabilities of Rehabilitation and Resettlement of the displaced persons and
communities. Some of these may be:

1. A regular government authority consisting of specialised persons including

NGO’s to deal with various aspects of displacement and development.

2. A comprehensive and effective policy for Rehabilitation and Resettlement of

the displaced persons.

3. States should ensure that eviction impact assessments are carried out prior to
the initiation of any project which could result in development-based
displacement, with a view to fully securing the human rights of all potentially
affected persons, groups and communities.

4. States should fully explore all possible alternatives to any act involving forced
eviction.

5. Sufficient information shall be provided to affected persons, groups and

communities concerning all State projects as well as to the planning and
implementation processes relating to the resettlement concerned, including
information concerning the purpose to which the eviction dwelling or site is to
be put and the persons, groups or communities who will benefit from the
evicted site.

6. The State must provide or ensure fair and just compensation for any losses of
personal, real or other property or goods, including rights or interests
in property.

19
 7. Resettlement must occur in a just and equitable manner and in full accordance
with international human rights law.

8. States should ensure that adequate and effective legal or other appropriate
remedies are available to any persons claiming that his/her right of protection
against forced evictions has been violated or is under threat of violation.

9. To make new Law on rehabilitation and change the Land Acquisition laws
since it goes against the rights of the poor. Rehabilitation should not be
separated from land acquisition and that the Land Acquisition laws should be
changed in such a manner as to minimize displacement and turn rehabilitation
into an integral part of such acquisition.

10. The very basis of the Land acquisition policies in its legal premises is required
to be compatible with constitutional frame of Fundamental Rights, Directive
Principles of State Policy and Special Provisions for the Scheduled Castes /
Tribes and weaker sections.20

20
Supra note 11.

20