Joginder Singh Toor

“LAWS and institutions, no matter how efficient and well arranged must be reformed or abolished if they are unjust.” Says John Rawls in his ‘Theory of Justice’. Long back the Supreme Court of India declared the Urban Tenancy Laws as unjust although the same were just and necessary when these were enacted. “A fast changing society cannot operate with unchanging laws and preconceived judicial attitude,” said the Supreme Court of India in Parbhakaran Nair etc. Vs State of Tamil Nadu and others AIR 1987-SC-2117. Further elaborating “the laws of landlords and tenants must be made rational, human, certain and capable of being quickly implemented.” “The country very vitally and very urgently requires a National Housing Policy if we want to prevent a major breakdown of law and order.” In another case Malpe Vishvanath Acharya Vs State of Maharashtra AIR 1998-SC-602 the Supreme Court observed “The law must strike a balance between rival interests and it should try to be just to all – the law ought not to be unjust to one and give disproportionate benefit or protection to another section of society.” – “A statute which when enacted was justified may, with passage of time, become arbitrary and unreasonable.”

The Land Acquisition Act enacted in 1984 is another Act which has become archaic and is unjust in content and consequence. In a recent judgment Ramji Veerji Patel and other Vs Revenue Divisional Officer and others, Civil Appeal No.137 of 2003 decided on November 7,2011, it has been observed “The provisions contained in the Act, have been felt by all concerned, do not adequately protect the interest of the land owners/persons interested in the land. The Act does not provide for rehabilitation of persons displaced from their land although by such compulsory acquisition, their livelihood gets affected. For years, the acquired land remains unused and unutilized. To say the least, the Act has become outdated and needs to be replaced at the earliest by fair, reasonable and rational enactment in tune with the constitutional provisions, particularly, Article 300A of the Constitution. We expect the law making process for a comprehensive enactment with regard to acquisition of land being completed without any unnecessary delay.”

The Central Government pushed to the corner by unrelenting cries of the farmers who have been displaced by acquiring their land without paying them adequate compensation and without providing any resettlement, thought of bringing a new Act in place of the 1894 Land Acquisition Act. The Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India itself admitted and made a public statement in the foreword of the proposed Bill that “Under our Constitution, land is a State subject but land acquisition is a concurrent subject. So far, the basic law governing the land acquisition process has been the Land Acquisition Act,1894. Although it has been amended from time to time, it is painfully evident that the basic law has become archaic.”

As if it were not enough the Supreme Court has pulled up the State Governments for their callous attitude in issuing one after the other notifications for acquisition of land termed as mindless acquisitions by Justice G.S.Singhvi and Justice S.J.Mukhopadhaya in Raghbir Singh Sehrawat’s case observing “Resort to massive acquisition and that too without complying with the mandate of the statute in the name of planned development or industrial growth would seriously affect the availability of the food in future.” The Supreme Court in its judgment reminded the words of Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru “Everything else can wait, but not agriculture” and also referred to the report of the NCF headed by M.S.Swaminathan saying “Unfortunately, these words of wisdom appear to have become irrelevant to the state apparatus, which has used the Land Acquisition Act in the last two decades for massive acquisition of agricultural land in different parts of the country.” This “has not only adversely impacted farmers but also generated huge litigation.” The Supreme Court observed “It is wholly unjust, arbitrary and unreasonable to deprive such persons of their houses by way of land acquisition in the name of development of infrastructure or industrialization. Therefore, before acquiring private land, the state and/or its agencies/instrumentalities should, as far as possible, use land belonging to the State for the specified public purpose.”

The Government of India proposed Bill claimed that it would be a just and rational legislation but when put before the Committees constituted by the government itself, it suffered more lapses and shortcomings. It is far from meeting the demand of the farmers and landowners. It contains all the vices the 1984 Act contained. It cannot be said to be a just and rational legislation. It needs to be relooked and reappraised, else it would robe the farmers further.

[The writer is a senior advocate based in Chandigarh 91-9815133530. jogindersingh_toor@yahoo.com]

BACK