Although many of my compatriots may hold different views, I largely agree with the Parliamentary Standing Committee panel's proposed norms — that land acquisitions by the Government should be done mainly for infrastructure and social projects.

I feel that in any project in which private players are involved, the government should stay away from land acquisition. The fact of the matter is that the few lakh private enterprises set up in India since Independence have, by and large, acquired land on their own for projects which they are running successfully. The private industrial sector in India has always fended for itself and has done a good job of setting up large enterprises and creating large scale employment without government support. Let this spirit of self-reliance prevail.

Industry can acquire the land for itself. The land giver needs to be adequately compensated and resettled, if need be by re-training or other means. The government can, of course, intervene as a facilitator in such acquisition only when there is a need to resolve disputes and remove bottlenecks.

It makes sense that the government should acquire land only for:

Rural or social sector development purposes like roads, schools, hospitals, sanitation, drinking water;

Projects of national interest and public service to create infrastructure like roads, power, irrigation

Forcreating land banks for supporting small /micro enterprises and land-linked employment generation activities.

Private players — including realtors and SEZ developers — have often, through the Government, received more land than they actually needed for their projects at a considered price, which they later dispose of for profit. The Standing Committee's proposal would curb such profiteering, made at the cost of the farmers and land owners.

Also, this would pave the way for optimal land usage in India and effectively address the issue of land shortage by indirectly making land available for industry.

(The author is a renowned industrialist.)

comment COMMENT NOW