Harish and BRS watered down 2013 Act: say farmers bodies
(My work which remained unpublished)
DC Correspondent
Hyderabad, Sept. 29: The BRS leader T. Harish Rao’s assertion that the State government should implement the Land Acquisition Act 2013 passed by their own UPA government while holding HYDRAA operations has raised hackles of all given its track record on the issue. They recall that by issuing GO MS No. 123, which was struck down by the High Court, the BRS had worked against the letter and spirit of the 2013 law.
Activists aver the centre took a cue from the Telangana government which passed the GO and AP which used the land pooling process for land acquisition of its capital and then allowed the states to bypass the 2013 Act. Thus came the BRS governments ‘The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Telangana Amendment) Act, 2017’.
The BRS leader made the comments recently while addressing the residents of Maruthi Nagar in Hyderabad who feared demolition of their residences by HYDRAA, created for removing encroachment. However, activists recall that this is sheer hypocrisy as the 2013 act was not implemented in any of the projects undertaken by the BRS.
Explaining the importance of the 2013 Act Sarampally Malla Reddy, AIKS state vice president said, “It mandated payment of thrice the rates of lands to the owners and barred taking over of two cropped land. Consent of 80 percent of land owners for private projects and 70 percent of them for PPP projects was mandatory along with a situation impact assessment (SIA). The 2013 act which was passed owing to pressure from farmer’s organizations was sought to be bypassed by the BJP but its bid to pass a law diluting it failed in the Rajya Sabha. The BJP wanted to facilitate acquisition of one kilometer of land on both sides of the highways which practically meant 1/3rd of the country’s land would be up for grabs. It is then that the states were asked to enact their own laws.”
In this milieu, the BRS government brought in GO MS No. 123 on 30 July, 2015 and began its efforts to circumvent the 2013 Act. Many states like Karnataka and Tamil Nadu also followed suit.
Dr Usha Seethalakshmi, an independent researcher on land issues said, “The GO doesn’t talk of relief and rehabilitation and talks about voluntary land procurement through a consultation process. It basically meant setting aside the 2013 act which for the first time recognized the need for compensating not just the land owners but tenant farmers and farm labourers by holding the social impact assessment (SIA). The Congress government should repeal the 2017 act and bring in the 2013 Act as promised in their manifesto. The HYDRAA operations are being taken up under the 2017 act.”
The GO issued on 30 July, 2015 fixed the rate of land to be acquired at Rs 5,85,000 per acre. It barred the land owners from approaching the court for higher compensation once agreed upon. The government had by then acquired nearly 40,000 acres as per its counter affidavit in the court. When some aggrieved landless labourers approached the High Court a single judge bench struck down the GO which was then upheld by a two-member bench for violating the 2013 Act. The 2017 act was enacted after that.
The single judge of the High Court in his order had said, the GO is unconstitutional and the government cannot act as a private property broker. Activists remind that the BRS government amended the land rates when they wanted to sell them and not before acquiring lands as per Sec. 36 of the 2013 Act.
The British era Land Acquisition Act of 1894 and the 2017 Act are the same in spirit and Harish Rao who presided over the latter should ask for its repeal if he is sincere by holding an assembly session, said Donthi Narasimha Reddy, a policy analyst.
“The government has a valid argument that for houses within the FTL of tanks or within the Musi riverbed, the Land Acquisition Act doesn't apply. But in the context of the proposed Musi River Development project, the government should conduct Social Impact Assessment, seek consent of the affected people and involve them in the planning process, because the 2013 Act goes much beyond just the compensation requirements," said Kiran Vissa, Rythu Swarajya Vedika.
The BRS Government’s failure to implement the 2013 Act in letter and spirit, led to a large bunch of litigations in the HC by various sections of people including the landless farmers, single women etc affected by land acquisition. (G Ram Mohan)
