The Hindu Business Line : Picking up the resettlement gauntlet

By planning to bring before Parliament a Bill on the resettlement of people displaced by land acquisitions for various projects, Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh is taking on a big challenge that could bring about a revolution in rural development.

The Union Minister for Rural Development, Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, emulates his Rashtriya Janata Dal leader in many ways. He is as effective a speaker as the Railways Minister, Mr Lalu Prasad — minus the latter's inimitable humour — enjoys his rustic image and the company of people. This is common knowledge.

Daunting task

What is not appreciated is that Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh is bringing about a revolution in rural development on the lines of Mr Lalu Prasad's in the Railways.

On June 9, speaking at a convention at Vigyan Bhavan, Mr Raghuvansh Prasad announced his intention of undertaking a task so daunting which no predecessor in the Ministry had dared even mention — to bring before Parliament a Bill on the of resettlement of people displaced by land acquisitions for various projects.

One can understand what provoked him to do this: The recent demand by Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) activists that work on the dam be stopped till the resettlement process is complete.

Right to property

What is the claim of the project-affected people to resettlement? Some time back, the Judiciary struck down the idea of the government promising project-affected people priority in governmental jobs.

"If those who had property at some stage can claim privileges because they lose that, what about those who never had any property?" questioned the court.

The claim of the project-displaced people cannot be based on the tenuous humanitarian argument. It must have a sound legal basis. Unfortunately, none exists.

Those who drafted the Constitution had provided for a right to property. It was specifically laid down that no property could be taken over by the state except through legal processes and, that too, on payment of adequate compensation.

This provision by itself was a rider to the Principle of Eminent Domain that India borrowed from the British.

Vesting of all property in the state is a part of political sovereignty.

The state allows its citizens enjoyment of land, subject to such conditions as it may impose, including payment of rent. Under Eminent Domain, the government merely takes away what it had given.

Under such a situation, there is no justification for the demand for compensation by the people whose land is acquired for what the state considers is a public purpose.

If the citizens had a right to property, one can imagine a system where they would have recourse to the Judiciary to question the justification as also the compensation for the deprivation of the rights.

The fact is that successive pseudo-socialist governments have had a whack at the Article that confers right to property, and Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh will have to undo the effect of a slew of constitutional amendments to restore the property right as was enshrined in the Constitution (in its unamended form).

Unless there is a right to property, there is no question of its claim, either for compensation or for resettlement.

The NBA leaders simply failed to grasp the legal situation in the Narmada issue and organised a campaign for the restoration of the property rights. This was not an innocent omission.

The leaders were obviously put off by the idea that the demand for restoration of property right would invite the charge of being pro-capitalism.

There was yet another complication in the Narmada issue. The land, threatened by inundation, belonged to the tribals, on paper. However, richer tenants, mostly from Gujarat, cultivate them. Any scheme of compensation or settlement would benefit only the tribal owners and not the moneyed tenants. It is this class that is trying to safeguard the land by opposing the construction of the dam itself and pushing the NBA leaders to an environmental agenda vis-à-vis the less glorious peasant agenda of resettlement/compensation.

When the government offered cash compensation, the leaders asked for compensation in kind.

The demand came from the urban elitist leadership that was ignorant of the fact that agriculture is a losing proposition and that anyone who had the opportunity to quit agriculture would benefit. The bureaucracy readily accepted this.

Then, the government offered for each acre of affected land, an acre of irrigated land; a minimum of five acres of irrigated land to those who had less than five acres; cash endowment for construction of houses; assistance for bringing the land under cultivation; and resettlement of integral communities in colonies with water, power and schooling facilities. This was, obviously, the most munificent compensation ever given in the world to project-affected people.

So much so, in many cases, the people in the resettlement colonies became the subject of jealousy for those in the neighbouring villagers, leading to frequent clashes.

The NBA, by opting for the environmental agenda, appears to have forsaken the resettlement question, although, on the face of it, the activists continue to argue for resettlement.

Draft Resettlement Bill

Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh was moved by the Narmada case that represents the cause of the project-affected people. But he will need to be wary in drafting the Bill on the issue of resettlement of project-affected people.

The Bill would probably propose a resettlement authority, with a chairman and a high-power panel that will be entrusted with all powers on compensation and resettlement. That will only be an addition to the slew of recent legislation.

One supposes Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh would restore the Constitution to its original form by reinstating the right to property and scrapping all the amendments made by the pseudo-socialist governments to defeat judicial pronouncements. Further, the compensation for the acquisition should be equal to the market price of the property.

The State governments carry out this exercise of normative market prices by fixing stamp values, depending on the circumstances. As a consequence, in general, the compensation received by the aggrieved party is only a fraction of the market price.

To provide transparency, the government will have to develop a ready land market that will facilitate `the exit and the entry' in agriculture. This kind of a solution will not be limited only to the problem of the resettlement of the project-affected people but will be a major step in the direction of agricultural take-off and `Bharat Nirman'.

It is hoped Mr Raghuvansh Prasad Singh will do a `Railways' in the Ministry of Rural Development.

(The author is founder, Shetkari Sanghatana and Member of Parliament — Rajya Sabha. He can be reached at sharad.mah@nic.in.)

More Stories on : Infrastructure | Rural Development | Social Welfare | Down to Earth

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Inflationary discomfort

One dollar is one dollar

Picking up the resettlement gauntlet

Politics of the oil protest

Textile exports to US — Weaving success, post-quotas

Hats off, IMF!

The FII `shock' to stock market

Making IPOs retail-friendly

Soft drinks

Promoting bio-diesel