Not so easy

Land, a finite resource, is essential not just for agriculture, but also for industry. The acquisition of land by governments for setting up industries has given rise to protests and unrest in many parts of the country. To meet this situation and to temper social discontent, the government introduced in the Lok Sabha the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill and the Resettlement and Rehabilitation Bill, 2007. The purpose of the former bill is simple. It seeks to limit the role of the state and the government in the acquisition of land. It proposes that the government can acquire land for government projects, but not for private sector ventures. Whether such a proposal will lead to a reduction in the scale of social discontent is debatable. Those who protest against the loss of land do so because they are losing land; they are not so concerned about the end user. What is beyond dispute, however, is that the proposal will slow down the process of industrialization in most states, and in states like West Bengal the process might, in fact, grind to a halt. In West Bengal, ownership of land is highly fragmented and is also trammelled by various kinds of usufructuary rights. It will be impossible for a single private investor to negotiate with innumerable owners and right-holders to secure a large plot of land necessary for an industrial unit. Such negotiations will also open up the process to land sharks and thus artificially hike price. This is why the role of the state or the government is critical for acquiring land, even for private enterprises under certain circumstances. By suggesting one law for all provinces, the government may have been a trifle hasty, if not thoughtless.

In the proposed Resettlement and Rehabilitation Bill an effort has been made to set up a land acquisition compensation disputes settlement authority and to offer better compensation packages. But here, too, the heart of the problem has been bypassed. It is clear from past experience that where land is acquired and even good compensation packages offered, there is always a residual grievance. This is based on the fact that those who are deprived of their land are never integrated into the development process in the area. They remain at the margins of the new industries, if that. There is scope in both the proposed bills for greater reflection, and for dialogue with the relevant sections of society.

http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:PjeQ7Ze_bHkJ:www.telegraphindia.com/1071211/jsp/opinion/
story_8654420.jsp+not+so+easy+the+telegraph&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=in