<p>A bench of justices R M Lodha and J S Khehar expected that the process for replacing the statute with a “fair, reasonable and rational enactment” would be completed soon.<br /><br />The Act was enacted in 1894 for the acquisition of land needed for public purposes and for companies and for determining the amount of compensation to be made on such acquisition. The Act has undergone some amendments in 1919, 1921, 1923, 1933, 1962, 1967 and 1984; the last major amendments being by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (Act 68 of 1984), the Bench noted.<br /><br />“The provisions contained in the Act, of late, 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 unutilised.”<br /><br />“To say the least, the Act has become outdated and needs to be replaced at the earliest by fair, reasonable and rational enactment in tune with the constitutional provisions, particularly, Article 300A of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 Bench said.<br /><br />Notably, the new Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill 2011 has already been introduced in Parliament. The country has witnessed a number of agitations against land acquisitions to set up industrial units as well as for other development projects.<br /><br />The proposed law provides for compensation to the owners of land at the rate of four times of the market price.<br /><br />While favouring the passage of the new law soon, the apex court dismissed a special leave petition filed by Ramji Veerji Patel and others against the Madras High Court order.<br />They challenged the acquisition of land under the Act by the state government on the requisition of Cholan Roadways Corporation Limited, Kumbakonam through a notification in 1989.<br /><br />The Bench noted that even though the acquisition proceedings have been completed in accordance with the law, the litigation had traversed up to the Supreme Court and taken about 22 years, thereby stalling the public purpose for more than two decades.<br /><br />Stay on Singur land return extended<br /><br />The Calcutta High Court on Thursday extended the stay on the state government’s move to return the land acquired by TATA Motors to the farmers in Singur, until the hearing on Tata Motors’ appeal in the case was completed, agencies report from Kolkata.<br /><br />“The division bench of Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghosh and Mrinal Kanti Chaudhuri extended the stay on the distribution of land till the disposal of the appeal. The petition will be heard on a daily basis from Monday onwards,” state government counsel Kalyan Banerjee said. The court also rejected the government’s plea to restrict the stay only to the land owned by the company.</p>
<p>A bench of justices R M Lodha and J S Khehar expected that the process for replacing the statute with a “fair, reasonable and rational enactment” would be completed soon.<br /><br />The Act was enacted in 1894 for the acquisition of land needed for public purposes and for companies and for determining the amount of compensation to be made on such acquisition. The Act has undergone some amendments in 1919, 1921, 1923, 1933, 1962, 1967 and 1984; the last major amendments being by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (Act 68 of 1984), the Bench noted.<br /><br />“The provisions contained in the Act, of late, 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 unutilised.”<br /><br />“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 Bench said.<br /><br />Notably, the new Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill 2011 has already been introduced in Parliament. The country has witnessed a number of agitations against land acquisitions to set up industrial units as well as for other development projects.<br /><br />The proposed law provides for compensation to the owners of land at the rate of four times of the market price.<br /><br />While favouring the passage of the new law soon, the apex court dismissed a special leave petition filed by Ramji Veerji Patel and others against the Madras High Court order.<br />They challenged the acquisition of land under the Act by the state government on the requisition of Cholan Roadways Corporation Limited, Kumbakonam through a notification in 1989.<br /><br />The Bench noted that even though the acquisition proceedings have been completed in accordance with the law, the litigation had traversed up to the Supreme Court and taken about 22 years, thereby stalling the public purpose for more than two decades.<br /><br />Stay on Singur land return extended<br /><br />The Calcutta High Court on Thursday extended the stay on the state government’s move to return the land acquired by TATA Motors to the farmers in Singur, until the hearing on Tata Motors’ appeal in the case was completed, agencies report from Kolkata.<br /><br />“The division bench of Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghosh and Mrinal Kanti Chaudhuri extended the stay on the distribution of land till the disposal of the appeal. The petition will be heard on a daily basis from Monday onwards,” state government counsel Kalyan Banerjee said. The court also rejected the government’s plea to restrict the stay only to the land owned by the company.</p>
