ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, I would like to express my gratitude towards Dr. Kahkashan Y. Danyal, Professor,
Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia, for her invaluable support, encouragement, supervision
throughout this research work. Her moral support and continuous guidance enabled me to
complete my work successfully. Her intellectual thrust and blessings motivated me to work
rigorously on this study.

Further I would like to express my thanks to my classmates and the library for their unflinching
support and assistance in the course of this study.

1|Page
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Statutes
Right of Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act, 2013 ............................................................................................................................................. 3
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ............................................................................................................. 3
The Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And
Resettlement (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 ................................................................................... 20

Cases
Abha Pramanick v. State of West Bengal................................................................................. 18
Coffee Board v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, .............................................................. 5
Radhey Shyam (D) through LRs and others v. State of U.P. and others ................................... 7
State of Bombay v. R.S. Nanji .................................................................................................... 4
Waman Rao v. Union of India ............................................................................................................ 2

2|Page
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 4

LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894 ......................................................................................................... 6

KEY PROBLEMS WITH THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1984 ..................................................... 8

THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION,

REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 ................................................................. 12

PURPOSE AND SCOPE .................................................................................................................. 14

SCHEME OF THE 2013 ACT.......................................................................................................... 15
OFFENCES AND PENALTIES ........................................................................................................... 16

RETURN OF UNUTILIZED LAND ................................................................................................... 20

THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION,

REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE, 2015 .................... 22

CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 25

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................. 26

3|Page
INTRODUCTION

Property guarantees freedom to individuals, when it is land, it embodies a bundle of rights.

Land is one of the scarce natural resource in the world. It is not possible either to increase or
to decrease the land. It is to be ensured that land is managed judiciously and in a suitable
manner to the common good of people that can be ensured in a long run.1 Property is special
because it allocates scarce resources and is fundamental for the exercise of other rights. In other
words, property rights determine access to the basic means of subsistence, they are the
prerequisite to the meaningful exercise of all other rights. In Waman Rao No table of
authorities entries found. Union of India2 a constitutional bench had observed that India being
a predominantly agricultural society, there is a “strong linkage between the land and the
personal status in the social system.” The tip of land on which they till and live, assumes them
equal justice and dignity of their person by providing to them a near decent means of livelihood.

Right to property is the natural and inherent right of individual. Hence, every individual has a
right to own and possess the property. This right of the individual conflicts with the right of the
State to acquire property under the doctrine of eminent domain.3 This conflicts of rights i.e.,
the right of the individual to protect his property and the right of the State to acquire property
of the subjects has become a matter of debate and contention. Eminent domain is the incidental
exercise of sovereign power of the State to acquire private property for public purpose by
providing just compensation. Eminent Domain means State sovereign power to take property
for public cause without owner’s consent, coupled with the obligation to make good to the loss
and it is the power of the State to appropriate any land from a private person for a public
purpose.4 When the government intends to carry out some developmental work like
construction of dams, flyovers, bridges, mines etc., it requires vast expanse of land. Since land
is a scarce resource, in order to carry out developmental work, the government has to acquire
land thereby depriving the existing occupants from its use. This leads to large-scale
displacement and forced transfer of people from their land.5

1
LAND ACQUISITION ACTS: ISSUES AND PERSPECTIVES, available at:
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/48090/13/13_chapter%206.pdf (last visited on: 18th
October,2017).
2
AIR 1981 SC 271.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid.
5
Kahkashan Y. Danyal, Land Acquisition in India-Past and Present. JLJ, 2016.

4|Page
Earlier, The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 formed the parent Act in India and it was the basis of
all control and State laws relating to compulsory acquisition and compensation.6 However,
when viewed from a Human Rights perspective, this colonial Act had many shortcomings. For
example under this Act no procedure was adopted for displacement of project affected families,
therefore, when property was acquired, they were forcible displaced and displacement may be
inhumane. There was no provision for Social Impact Assessment of any projects, there is no
any additional protection for marginalized people like SCs and STs land losers except monetary
compensation, moreover, it did not provide any kind of protection except monetary
compensation to the land losers. Consequently, on 1st January 2014 the Right of Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 (also referred as the LARR Act or RCFCTLAR Act) came into force and replaced the
earlier colonial Land Acquisition Act, 1894. This paper delves into the Offences and Penalties
prescribed under the LARR Act 2013 as well as the provision pertaining to Return of unutilised
Land.

6
3 V.G. Ramachandra’s, ‘The Law of land Acquisition & Compensation’, (Justice G.C. Mathur rev’d, Eastern
Book Company, Lucknow, 8th ed., 1995), p 1.

5|Page
LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894

The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 replaced all previous laws relating to land which was enacted
for acquiring privately owned land by the state for public purposes. The succession of events
which led to the enactment of this Act clearly showed that it was need of the time. Mining,
plantation, establishment of railway lines, manufacturing industries, beginning of major
irrigation works, roads and buildings all needed land which again was already under various
forms of state controlled and customary tenurial systems that existed from the pre-colonial
period. This enabling Act empowered the state to acquire any privately owned as well as
common land property for public purpose7

In India, the Land Acquisition Act (L.A.A) 1894 had served as the basis for all government
acquisition of land for public purposes. The Government of India adopted the L.A.A 1894. The
Constitution of India placed “Acquisition and Requisitioning of Property” as Entry 42 is the
concurrent list. This meant that both the Centre and State could make laws governing land
acquisition. However, in case of conflict between the Central and State Law the Central
Legislation would prevail. However, the law failed to address some important issues associated
with land acquisition particularly forcible acquisitions, the definition of “Public purpose,
widespread misuse of the “Urgency” clause, compensation, lack of transparency in the
acquisition process, participation of communities whose land was being acquired and lack of
R & R package. Under this Act no procedure was adopted for displacement of project affected
families, therefore, when property was acquired, they are forcible displaced and displacement
may be inhumane. There was no provision for Social Impact Assessment of any projects, there
is no any additional protection for marginalized people like SCs and STs land losers except
monetary compensation, moreover, it did not provide any kind of protection except monetary
compensation to the land losers.

The Supreme Court Judgments on various occasions spelt out divergent views in “Public
Purpose”. In the State of Bombay v. R.S. Nanji,8 1956, the Supreme Court of India observed “it
is impossible to precisely define the expression “Public Purpose”. In each case, all the facts
and circumstances will require to be closely examined in order to determine whether a public
purpose has been established. Prima facie, the government is the best judge as to whether public

7
Vikas Nandal, ‘Land Acquisition Law in India: A Historical Perspective’, International Journal of Innovative
Research & Studies, Vol. 3, Issue 5, p. 466.
8
1956 AIR 294 1956 SCR 18.

6|Page
purpose is served by using a requisition order, but is not the sole judge. The courts have the
jurisdiction and it is their duty to determine this matter whenever a question is raised whether
a requisition order is or is not for a public purpose.

In Coffee Board v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, 91988, The Supreme Court of India
again stated “Eminent domain is an essential attribute of sovereignty of every state and
authorities are universal in support of the definition of eminent domain as the power of the
sovereign to take property for public use without the owner’s consent upon making just
compensation.

9
1988 AIR 1487;1988 SCR Supl. (1) 348.

7|Page
KEY PROBLEMS WITH THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1984

Designed by the British to serve their only purpose of taking-over land to serve their colonial
interests, the law is too narrow and lacks humanitarian touch and sense of justice that any
modern law should have.

Method of fixing the monetary compensation: The land owner is entitled to the
compensation determined on the basis of the market value of the land on the date of preliminary
notification – no consideration of rising future values as a result of the development project. It
is determined by the Collector, and for any objections under Section-5 and Section-9 of the
Act, the Collector and Government act as the Quasi-Adjudicatory Body, and the suits to a civil
court are specifically barred. There is no provision for an independent judicial body to fix the
amount of compensation calculated and hear the objections.10

No consideration of rehabilitation – reconstructing the lives of displaced and affected people

– is clearly the most glaring short-coming of the 1894 Act, which instead emphasizes cash
compensation for loss of land and that too without specifying any time limit. This has allowed
considerable laxity to the officials further annoying the already affected people. Even with
some time limit, the larger issue of rehabilitation would remain.11

Misuse of the “urgency clause”- The blatant misuse of Section 1712 by the state governments
is a serious cause for concern. The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been referred to as a
draconian law, because the landowner whose land is proposed to be acquired cannot seek
injunction against it. He can only file objections under Section 5A13 against the proposed land
acquisition which is a basic right of the landowner under the principles of Natural justice –
audi alterem partem. But there have been a number of cases where various state governments

10
Land Acquisition Law in India, available at: https://socialissuesindia.wordpress.com/tag/problems-with-the-
land-acquisition-act-1894/( Last visited on: 19th October 2017).
11
Ibid.
12
Section 17 reads Special powers in cases of urgency. Clause (1) In cases of urgency, whenever
the[appropriate Government] so directs, the Collector, though no such award has been made, may, on the
expiration of fifteen days from the publication of the notice mentioned in section 9, sub-section (1), [take
possession of any land needed for a public purpose]. Such land shall thereupon[vest absolutely in the
[Government]],free from all encumbrances.
13
Section 5A reads Hearing of objections. Clause (1) Any person interested in any land which has been notified
under section 4 ,sub-section (1), as being needed or likely to be needed for a public purpose or for a company
may, [within thirty days from the date of the publication of the notification], object to the acquisition of the
land or of any land in the locality, as the case maybe.

8|Page
have acquired land by misusing the provision of Section 17(4)14 of the ‘urgency clause’. Under
this provision, the state government may direct that the provisions of Section 5A shall not apply
and take away the basic rights of the landowners to file his objections. Hence state power is
used to misuse the provisions of urgency. The acquisition of land under Section 4 (1) read with
Section 17(1) and 17(4) has generated substantial litigation in the last 50 years. The Supreme
Court in Radhey Shyam (D) through LRs and others v. State of U.P. and others15 held as under:
“In cases where the acquisition is made by invoking Section 4 read with Section 17(1) and
17(4)…excluding the application of Section 5A is likely to make the land owner a landless
poor and force him to migrate to the nearby city only to live in
aslum.Adeparturefromthisruleshouldbemadeonlywhenthelandisrequired to meet really
emergent situations like those enumerated in Section 17(2). If the acquisition is intended to
benefit private person(s) and the provisions contained in Section 17(1) and/or 17(4) are
invoked, then the scrutiny of the justification put forward by the State should be more rigorous
in cases involving the challenge to the acquisition of land.”16

Thus, according to the Supreme Court, Section 5A represents the statutory embodiment of the
rule of audi alteram partem and the urgency provision under section 17(1) should not be
invoked unless there is real and substantive urgency. Apart from the misuse of the urgency
clause, there are certain other drawbacks of the 1894 Act

No provision for dialogue with the affected people: The government does everything
arbitrarily, the only thing the dissatisfied land owner can do is to file objection regarding
compensation (and wait for decision). This is nothing but a mockery of democracy – one is
losing not just property but age-honoured lifestyle and the law offers no platform to express
one’s opinion.

The only way an affected person can say something is by way of filing an objection within
thirty days from the date of notification in the gazette. The objections will be valid on one or
more of the following grounds:

14
Section 17(4) reads- In the case of any land to which, in the opinion of the appropriate Government, the
provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) are applicable, the provisions of section 5A shall not apply
where the appropriate Government so directs to where possession of the land has been taken with the
consent of the person interested.
15
Civil Appeal No. 3261 decided on April 15,2011.
16
Ibid.

9|Page
  That the purpose for which the land is proposed for acquisition is not a public purpose.

 That the land is not or less suitable than another piece of land for the said purpose.

 That the area under acquisition is excessive.

 That the acquisition will destroy or impair historical or artistic monuments or will
desecrate religious buildings, graveyards and the like.

The collector after hearing the objections will submit his report to the government who will
finally declare the land for acquisition under the Section 6 of the Act. After notification the
collector proceeds with the claim. Needless to say, this undemocratic situation is loaded against
the poor tribals.17

Total silence about project affected landless people: They often survive working for land
owners and collecting natural produce from the CPR land. In fact, a self-sufficient
infrastructure of small workers doing various useful things automatically develops in any
settlement. By allowing acquisition of common property like wells, grazing fields, etc it renders
them without means of sustenance and survival. In tribal areas such facilities fall under
traditional community rights – the 1894 Act is blind towards such rights; thus the government
does not have to pay any compensation for CPR land.

Forced Acquisition – Once the government develops an intention that a particular piece of
land may be acquired, nothing can stop the government from acquiring that land without
sparing any thought for the person whose land is being acquired. The individual so deprived
cannot go to the Court and seek injunction against the proposed acquisition. What he can do is
file objections in the written form under Section 5Aandto appear before the Collector under
Section 5A(2). The Collector shall prepare a report on the basis of his objections which shall
be submitted to the appropriate government, the decision of the appropriate government shall
be final. The government can overrule the objections on the ground that land is required for a
public purpose under Section 6. Thereafter, the acquisition cannot be challenged. The
landowner can only challenge the amount of compensation decided by the government. Under
the Act, the collector’s award of compensation is final, unless altered by a decree of a Civil
Court in a regular suit.

17
Supra note 10.

10 | P a g e
Vague and wide Definition of “Public Purpose”: Under Section-4 of the Act, the
Government is required to make a public notification of the intention to take over the land for
a “public purpose.” Its definition under Section-3(f) is quite vague and is often interpreted very
liberally to include a variety of uses such as housing schemes, roads, play grounds, offices and
factories, benefiting only a portion of the society by the Collector and State Government taking
advantage of the wide definition. In fact, the Supreme Court in various cases has laid down that
the “Public Purpose” is hard to define and the Government is the best judge to decide whether
a purpose falls under this definition. Under the existing legislation, even private corporations
are granted the right to acquire land under certain sections.

Bone of Contention: - Thus all the acquisitions were challenged in the Courts of law on various
courts as have discussed earlier leaving the parties and the government in jitters. Many
claimants stalled the proceedings by getting stay or injunction orders leading to abrupt halt of
several important and needy infrastructural projects. The Supreme Court of India had to view
seriously at the lapses of government and even went to the extent of passing strictures against
the erring officials on erroneous and unjustified action in acquiring lands at their whims and
fancies much to the detriment and loss to the genuine and lawful land owners.18

18
Mr. Karra Kameswara Rao, LAND ACQUISITION ACT – 2013 AND LAND ORDINANCES – 2014: A MOCKERY OF
DEMOCRACY, Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2016 at p.93.

11 | P a g e
THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND
ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013

India’s new Land Acquisition Act, praised in some quarters and reviled in others, is a complex
piece of legislation. The government has issued a document explaining the tenets of the Act
that offers a comprehensive explanation of a law that will change how land is acquired and
owners are compensated in India. However, the principle objective of the new Bill is fair
compensation, thorough resettlement and rehabilitation of those affected, adequate safeguards
for their well-being and complete transparency in the process of land acquisition. The title has
been amended to reflect this19There was need for bringing new legislation which can deal with
land acquisition because of unanimity of opinion across the social and political spectrum that
the Law (The Land Acquisition Act 1894) suffers from various shortcomings. Some of these
include Forced acquisitions, No safeguards, silence on resettlement and rehabilitation of those
displaced, Urgency clause, Low rates of compensation, etc.

Although the 1894 Act was enacted by a colonial government, it was adopted unchanged by
the government of independent India in 1947. It did not meet the evolving requirements and
gradually, the injustices caused by it began to generate resistance in the society, causing
abandonment of several projects, including the Tata Motors’ small car project at Singur.
Therefore, new land acquisition law was drafted, circulated, discussed, tweaked and finally
became an act of Parliament in 2013.20

The 2013 Act marked a paradigm shift in the land acquisition process and contains many
provisions to protect the interests of not only the land owners but also landless project affected
persons such as farm labour and slum dwellers. Under the new law, in cases where PPP projects
are involved or acquisition is taking place for private companies, consent of 70% and 80%
respectively of the landowners is required. This ensures that no forcible acquisition can take
place. Given the inaccurate nature of circle rates, the law provides for payment of compensation
up to four times the market value in rural areas and up to twice the market value in urban areas.
This ensures fairer payment to the landowners. The new law links land acquisition with the
accompanying obligation for Resettlement and Rehabilitation (“R&R”) of all project affected

19
All you wanted to know about new land acquisition bill, (November 12, 2015, 7:02 AM),
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/FXZ9CrJApxRowyzLd8mb2O/All-you-wanted-to-know-about-new-
landacquisition-Bill.html.
20
Mahendra Singh, India Controversial Land Acquisition Laws, (October 17,2017),
http://www.psalegal.com/upload/publication/assocFile/ENewslineMarch2015.pdf?utm_source=Mondaq&utm
_ medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-Original

12 | P a g e
persons, including the landless people. The law contains elaborate processes and entitlements
for R&R. It outlines the benefits (such as land for land, housing, employment and annuities)
that shall accrue in addition to the one-time cash payments. The new law even has retrospective
application in certain cases. It applies retrospectively to land acquisitions under the 1894 Act,
where no land acquisition award has been made. Also in cases where the land was acquired
over five years ago but no compensation has been paid or no possession has been taken, the
land acquisition process must be started afresh in accordance with the provisions of the 2013
Act. In case land remains unutilized after acquisition, the 2013 Act empowers states to return
the land either to the owner or to the state land bank. The law provides that no income tax shall
be levied and no stamp duty shall be charged on any amount that accrues to an individual as a
result of the provisions of the new law. In cases where the acquired land is sold to a third party
for a higher price, 40% of the appreciated land value (or profit) is required to be shared with
the original owners. In cases where the land is acquired for urbanization, 20% of the developed
land has to be reserved and offered to the landowners, in proportion to the area of their land
acquired and at a price equal to the cost of acquisition, plus the cost of development. All
affected families are entitled to a house, provided they have been residing in the area for five
years or more and have been displaced. If they choose not to accept the house, they are offered
a one-time financial grant in lieu of the same. Finally, under the new law, R&R provisions are
applicable even to acquisitions by private parties, subject to size thresholds to be determined
by state governments. If a private investor buys land directly from farmers and if the size of
acquisition exceeds the set threshold, the private purchaser must also bear the R&R costs.21

Predictably, the industry did not welcome the new law. According to CII’s estimates, the new
law was likely to increase land acquisition costs by up to 3.5 times, severely affecting the
viability of industrial projects across the board and eroding the competitiveness of the Indian
manufacturing sector22

21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.

13 | P a g e
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The Act aims to establish the law on land acquisition, as well as the rehabilitation and
resettlement of those directly affected by the land acquisition in India. The scope of the Act
includes all land acquisition whether it is done by the Central Government of India, or any
State Government of India, except the state of Jammu & Kashmir.The Act is applicable when:

Government acquires land for its own use, hold and control, including land for Public sector
undertakings; Government acquires land with the ultimate purpose to transfer it for the use of
private companies for stated public purpose. The purpose of LARR 2011 includes public-
private-partnership projects, but excludes land acquired for state or national highway projects;
Government acquires land for immediate and declared use by private companies for public
purpose.

The provisions of the Act does not apply to acquisitions under 16 existing legislations including
the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005, the Atomic Energy Act, 1962, the Railways Act, 1989,
etc

The primary objective of the Act was to fair compensation, through R & R (Rehabilitation and
Resettlement) of those affected, adequate safeguards for their well-being and completes
transparency in the process of land acquisition.

The most important features of the Act were:

1. The Consent of 80% land owners concerned was needed for acquiring land for private
projects and 70% land owners for public private projects (P.P.P).

2. The term “Public Purpose” which was left vague in the Land Acquisition Act (L.A.A) 1894
was restricted to land for strategic purposes, infrastructural projects, P.A.F’s planned
development or improvement of village or urban sites or residential purpose for weaker section
and persons residing in areas affected by natural calamities or displaced.

3. The compensation was increased to four times the market value in rural areas and twice the
market value in urban areas.

4. R & R package for the affected families with additional benefits to the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes families.23

23
Ibid.

14 | P a g e
SCHEME OF THE 2013 ACT

The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 consists of a total of 114 sections which are incorporated in 13
Chapters, and Four Schedules.

Chapter I deals preliminary i.e. short title extent and commencement, application of the Act
and definitions part (sections 1 to 3),

Chapter II deals the provisions regarding to determination of Social Impact and Public purpose
(sections 4 to 9),

Chapter III deals the special provisions to safeguard food security (section 10), Chapter IV
deals the provisions for notifications and acquisition (section 11 to 30), Chapter V deals VII
deals the provisions for National Monitoring Committee for Rehabilitation and Resettlement
(section 48 to 50),

Chapter VIII deals the provisions for establishment of land acquisition, rehabilitation and
resettlement authority (Sections 51 to 74),

Chapter IX deals the provisions for apportionment of compensation (sections 75 and 76),
Chapter X deals the provisions for payment (sections 77 to 80),

Chapter XI deals the provisions for temporary occupation of land (sections 81 to 83), Chapter
XII deals the provisions for offences and penalties (section 84 to 90),

Chapter XIII deals the miscellaneous provisions (section 91 to 114).

Further the Act consists of 4 Schedules:

First Schedule deals the compensation for land owners,

Second Schedule deals the elements of rehabilitation and resettlement entitlements for all the
affected families (both land owners and the families whose livelihood is primarily dependent
on land acquisition) in addition to those provided in the First Schedule.

Third Schedule deals the provisions of infrastructural amenities, and

Fourth Schedule deals list of enactments regulating land acquisition and rehabilitation and
resettlement.

15 | P a g e
OFFENCES AND PENALTIES

Sections 84 to 90 deal with offences and penalties.

The only offence for which a person can be tried and punished is the offence of false and
misleading evidence before the Authorities. Such misleading and false evidence can be in
relation to any matter under consideration by the Government, or the Authority or by the
Collector or the person making the award or before any other person or any other person who
is entitled to decide any issue under this Act. If the person accused is a Government servant,
he can be proceeded under disciplinary proceedings, provided the Officer concerned is proved
to have acted mala fide. If the person concerned is a department, the proceedings for
prosecution can be initiated against the Head of the Department. The other circumstance in
which a person can be prosecuted and punished is an omnibus section which is not specific. It
says that if any person contravenes any of the provisions of the Act, he shall be punishable.
Such a wide and independent provision is not maintainable under criminal jurisprudence.
Therefore this provision can be treated as ultra vires. The offences under this Act are not
cognizable. It means that the Police Officers cannot initiate any proceedings of investigation
or inquiry. Only the Magistrate of First Class is competent to entertain a complaint and
proceed-with the trial. In this context it may be mentioned that the Magistrate can proceed with
the trial only if prior sanction is granted, wherever it is provided in the Act that a prior sanction
is necessary. It means that the concerned Magistrate after taking cognizance of the offence can
proceed with the investigation and inquiry without the permission of the Government in cases
where such prior permission is required for trial. Where the prosecution is to be initiated against
the requiring body, it can be initiated only on the complaint filed by the Collector. It means
that no other person can file a complaint against the requiring body.24

Provisions:

Section 84. Punishment for false information, mala fide action, etc.

1. If a person, in connection with a requirement or direction under this Act, provides any
information that is false or misleading, or produces any false document, he shall be liable to be

24
A.K. Srivastava, COMPARISON BETWEEN LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 AND THE RIGHT TO FAIR
COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT 2013,
available at: http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/76497/14/14_chapter%206.pdf ( Last visited
on 19 October 2017).

16 | P a g e
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months,
or with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.

2. Any rehabilitation and resettlement benefit availed of by making a false claim or through
fraudulent means shall be liable to be recovered by the appropriate Government in the manner
as may be prescribed.

3. Disciplinary proceedings may be drawn up by the disciplinary authority against a

Government servant, who if proved to be guilty of a mala fide action in respect of any provision
of this Act, shall be liable to such punishment including a fine as the disciplinary authority may
decide.

Section 85. Penalty for contravention of provisions of Act.

If any person contravenes any of the provisions relating to payment of compensation or

rehabilitation and resettlement, every such person shall be liable to a punishment of six months
which may extend to three years or with fine or with both.

Section 86. Offences by companies.

1. Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company, every person who at
the time the offence was committed was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for
the conduct of the business of the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and
shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly:

Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such person liable to any
punishment if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he had
exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.

2. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where an offence under this Act
has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with
the consent or connivance of, or that the commission of the offence is attributable to any neglect
on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director,
manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall
be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.

17 | P a g e
Explanation.— For the purposes of this section,—

a. “company” means any body corporate and includes a firm or other association of
individuals and a Requiring Body; and

b. “director”, in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm.

Section 87. Offences by Government departments.

1. Where an offence under this Act has been committed by any department of the
Government, the head of the department, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall
be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly:

Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render any person liable to any punishment
if such person proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that such person
exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.

2. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where any offence under this Act
has been committed by a Department of the Government and it is proved that the offence has
been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part
of any officer, other than the head of the department, such officer shall also be deemed to be
guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.

Comments: The LARR Act, 2013 stated that if an offence is committed by the government, the
head of the department would be deemed guilty unless he could show that the offence was
committed without his knowledge, or that he had exercised due diligence to prevent the
commission of the offence. The 2015 Bill replaces this provision and states that if an offence
is committed by a government official, he cannot be prosecuted without the prior sanction of
the government.25

25
The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill,
2015 information collect from: http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Land%20and%20R%20and%20R/Bill
%20Summary%20%20LARR%20Bill%202015.pdf

18 | P a g e
Section 88. Cognizance of offences by court.

No court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first class
shall be competent to try any offence punishable under this Act.

Section 89. Offences to be non-cognizable.

Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 every offence
under this Act shall be deemed to be non-cognizable.

Section 90.Offences to be cognizable only on complaint filed by certain persons.

No court shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act which is alleged to have been
committed by a Requiring Body except on a complaint in writing made by the Collector or any
other officer authorised by the appropriate Government or any member of the affected family.

19 | P a g e
RETURN OF UNUTILIZED LAND

Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the land acquired for public purpose was to be used for the
same. No provision in the Act placed an obligation upon the State to return the land to the
original land owner or to the land bank of the appropriate government, if it is not put to use for
what purpose the land is acquired

In Abha Pramanick v. State of West Bengal26Court held that, there is no provision under the
1984 Act which empowered the government to return any portion of unused land to original
owners.

The LARR Act, 2013 requires that land acquired under it which remained unutilised for five
years, to be returned to the original owners or the land bank. Under section 101 of the present
Act if the land acquired remains unutilized for a period of five years from the date of taking
over the possession, it may return it to the original land owner or their legal heirs, as the case
may be, or to the land bank of the appropriate government

Section 101 reads as follows:

“Return of unutilised land: When any land, acquired under this Act remains unutilised for a
period of five years from the date of taking over the possession, the same shall be returned to
the original owner or owners or their legal heirs, as the case may be, or to the Land Bank of
the appropriate Government by reversion in the manner as may be prescribed by the
appropriate Government.

Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, "Land Bank" means a governmental entity that
focuses on the conversion of Government owned vacant, abandoned, unutilized acquired lands
and tax-deliquent properties into productive use.”

The NDA government’s 2015 ordinance to amend the land acquisition Act does not merely
expand the list of projects that would be exempted from requirements of consent and Social
Impact Assessment but also quietly makes other provisions in the law less stringent. It dilutes
the requirement that unused acquired land be returned to the original owners, makes it tougher

26
1979 Kar. L.J.374 pp-377 & 37.

20 | P a g e
to prosecute defaulting civil servants, reduces the scope of the retrospective clause and expands
the definition of permissible infrastructure.27

The ordinance relaxes the period of time after which a piece of unutilised acquired land must
be returned to its original owner, by amending Section 101. While the original law said if
acquired land is not utilised after five years, it should be returned, the ordinance has amended
the provision from a “period of five years” to a “period specified for setting up of any project
or for five years, whichever is later”. Thus, an entity with unutilised acquired land can keep it
for the period it specifies for setting up the project, even if it is much more than five years.

27
Mr. Karra Kameswara Rao, LAND ACQUISITION ACT – 2013 AND LAND ORDINANCES – 2014: A MOCKERY OF
DEMOCRACY, Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2016 at p.93.

21 | P a g e
RETROSPECTIVE CLAUSE

Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act provides that the Act will not be applicable in cases where an
award has been made under section 11 of the old Act. Further, section 24(2) of the 2013 Act
starts with a non-obstante clause and provides-
"Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition
proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where an award under the said
section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the
physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the
said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so
chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the
provisions of this Act:
Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of
land holding has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries
specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act,
shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act."

Hence, the benefit under the provisions of the 2013 Act as per the above-stated statutory
provision is being given in the cases wherein the award has been made under the provisions
of the old Act five years (5) or more prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act (i.e. on or
before 01.01.2009) but the compensation has not been paid or the physical possession of the
property has not been taken.
There have been some cases where the Court ordered return of the land under this
retrospective clause:
In the case of Bimla Devi v. State of Haryana28 award had been passed in 1995 and the
parties had still not accepted compensation or parted with possession. The Court relying on
the ‘retrospective clause’ ordered the return of the land to the original owners.
Shiv Raj v. Union of India29
Here the Court ordered the return of the land to its original owners who were fighting the
case for the last two decades and held that the acquisition had lapsed.

28
30 (2014) 6 SCC 583.
29
31 (2014) 6 SCC 564.

22 | P a g e
THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND
ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT (AMENDMENT)
ORDINANCE, 2015

Article 123 of the Constitution of India enabled the President of India to promulgate an
ordinance of both the Houses of Parliament were not in session and ‘Circumstances existed,
which rendered it necessary for him to take immediate action”. Every ordinance had to be laid
before Parliament, and ceased to exist six weeks from the end of the next sitting of Parliament.30

On 29th December 2014, the Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister of India approved
the amendments and recommended the President of India to promulgate the R.F.C.T.L.A.R.R
Ordinance 2014. The R.F.C.T.L.A.R.R. Ordinance in seven months of N.D.A (National
Democratic Alliance) Government and the ninth for the calendar year. 31

The ordinance brought in the following amendments:32 -

(a) Compensation and R & R specified in the Act was extended to the acquisition under thirteen
Acts mentioned in the Fourth Schedule.

(b) Projects in the areas of (i) Defence production (ii) rural infrastructure (iii) affordable
housing (iv)industrial corridors (v)social infrastructure projects including PPP’s in which
ownership lies with the government, were exempted from conducting Social Impact
Assessment and taking the consent of affected families.

(c) Definition of “Public Purpose” was widened to include private hospitals and private
educational institutions.

(d) The term “Private Company” was changed to “Private Entity” to encompass other forms of
companies like proprietorship, partnership, corporation, non-profit organisations and other
non-governmental entities.

(e) “Companies Act 1956” which was the reference for the definition of “Company” was
replaced by “Companies Act 2013”.

30
Supra note 27.
31
Ibid.
32
Ibid.

23 | P a g e
(f) The period after which unutilised land had to be returned was extended to any period
specified at the time of setting up the project. R.F.C.T.L.A.R.R 2013 required land, which
remained unutilised for five years, to be returned to the original owners or the land bank.

24 | P a g e
CONCLUSION

Land acquisition refers to the process where a government acquires land from land owners for
any purpose. Generally, the purpose is related to development projects conducted either by
PSUs (Public Sector units) or the private sector. The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 which was
imposed in India since the time of British rule. Under this Act, the government could acquire
any land as it wishes to, in the name of "public purpose". The British had never defined the
words "public purpose" in a straightforward manner, which meant that in theory as well as in
practice, a government could acquire land for any purpose they wanted, and term their purpose
"public purpose". After independence, this practice continued whereby Indian governments,
both at the central and at the state level, acquired large amounts of land for various kinds of
development and infrastructure projects, such as roads, highways, ports (air and sea), power
projects (thermal, hydro and nuclear) etc. During 1947 till 1991, most of these acquisitions had
been done by agencies or units in the public sector. After 1991, when liberalization had taken
place, most of the land acquisition was done by the government to provide land for the private
sector, either for private sector projects (infrastructure projects like power, roads etc.) but also
for housing projects.

Many bills came for amending Land Acquisition Act of 1894. In 2013, the Land Acquisition
Act got amended and changed to Right to fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The new Act has provisions to provide
fair compensation to those whose land is taken away, brings transparency to the process of
acquisition of land set up factories or buildings, infrastructural projects and assure
rehabilitation to those affected. As, this Act was brought in force at the time of UPA Govt., the
NDA Govt. in present time bringing ordinances to amend the Act.

The Narendra Modi government introduced the controversial Land Acquisition Amendment
Bill in the Lok Sabha amid vociferous protest by almost all opposition parties, in the 2015 pre-
Budget session of the Parliament on February 24. While the opposition is branding changes in
the current ordinance as ‘anti-farmer’, the government claims that the new amendments will
benefit farmers. The Land Acquisition Act was passed by the Manmohan Singh-led UPA
government in 2013, and now the Modi government has introduced Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Bill,
2015 to make changes in the current Act.

25 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Websites:

 www.livemint.com
 www.yourarticle.library.com
 www.psalegal.com
 www.indianexpress.com
 www.prsindia.org
 www.shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in
 www.socialissuesindia.wordpress.com

ARTICLES

 Mr. Karra Kameswara Rao, LAND ACQUISITION ACT – 2013 AND LAND
ORDINANCES – 2014: A MOCKERY OF DEMOCRACY, Bharati Law Review,
April – June, 2016
 Vikas Nandal, ‘Land Acquisition Law in India: A Historical Perspective’,
International Journal of Innovative Research & Studies, Vol. 3, Issue 5.
 Kahkashan Y. Danyal, Land Acquisition in India-Past and Present. JLJ,2016.
 Namita Wahi ,Land acquisition, development and the constitution.
 G. Raghuram, Simi Sunny, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Ordinance 2014: A Process
Perspective,IIMA, July 2015.

26 | P a g e