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(My work which remained unpublished)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 1/3^rd 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)

 

 

 No chance of GST violations in TGBCL

(My article which remained unpublished)

DC Correspondent

 Hyderabad, Sept. 26: The interesting and intriguing part of the Rs 1,400 crore alleged GST evasion scam that was unearthed by the commercial tax department is of this Rs 400 crores has been evaded by the public sector entity that is the Telangana Beverages Corporation Limited (TGBCL). The inclusion of publicly owned entities has raised eyebrows.

As public entities cannot pay bribes officially, how and why these entities were allowed to evade paying GST is a point for investigation. How these allegations would unfold and who must have pocketed the amount if any is the moot question. The other public entities that have been found to be charged in the same FIR for evading GST are GHMC, TRANSCO, LIC, L&T metro rail, TGTS (Telangana Technological services) and Telangana Fibre Net Corporation.       

However sources in the TGBCL aver the modus operandi of its operations does not leave any scope for any manipulation by the corporation. Payments are all made to the treasury account in the SBI.  The end customer for the corporation is the retailer who pays money in the form of challan to the treasury in the finance department and collects an indent. The challan is matched by the software and then stock is given.

Payment to the supplier for the corporation that is breweries or distilleries are also paid by the finance department treasury. The payment is made by the corporation every week apportioning the income under VAT and excise duty heads. All through the money remains under different heads of the finance department and not in the corporation accounts.

There is no liquid cash involved anywhere. The salaries, pensions and office expenses of the corporation employees are paid through a grant-in aid by the finance department, an official informed.

The corporation does not have either assets or liabilities as they have been taken over by the government. Another fall out of this entire episode has been the reported proposal by the excise department to show the VAT income generated by them on sale of liquor under their own head in the finance department as it is generated by the work of their staff all through.  

The corporation has so far not received any notice from the government in the Rs 400 crores alleged GST evasion issue. Three probes are now underway namely by the CID, ED and a high-powered committee headed by the former commissioner of the commercial tax department.

 Another outcome of this has been the central GST officials addressing a letter to the state GST officials demanding details on evasion of Rs 1,400 crores GST scam seeking their share of Rs 700 crores. They have also sought names of the businesses facing allegations. (G Ram Mohan)