why should govt. forcefully acquire futile land from formers thus depriving them of lively hood.if at all acquired same type and quantity of land must be given to them else where (near by ) and should not be given to private party let them buy from market by paying market rate . i buy site for house construction by paying market rate govt.does not acquire for me.it is minister kamlnath who started this whole sale land acquire for so called SEZ.compensation given was paltry.laws should be amended so that no land is acquired expect for military and road building and to construct lakes.land taken away should be evaluated very year and rise in cost of land difference should be paid every year. how does America (USA) handle this type of problems their formers are rich and travel by air but in india two square meals not available .we ashamed to indian (Rahul Gandhi)
Re: LAND ACQUSITION
by Deepak Pillai on May 12, 2011 08:31 PM
Why are u not thinking on Population Explosion Mister...IS THAT THE ONLY WAY TO PROVE YOU ARE MAN AND WOMEN...
If you take our land which you want than law of natural justice says you must give us land (same quantity)at the location specified by us,this should be done before you take our land.This is just a simple question of barter no nitty gritty involved.People (congis) who take refuge behind a law dated 1894 shows the era they are living in and the slave mentality.By the way AAM are selling for 120 per kg so mango man be ware.
The total amount of land acquired for SEZs in Gujarat is 20,800 acres, which makes up for around 40 per cent of the total land under SEZ in the country. But despite this, not even a single Nandigram or Singur like incident has taken place in the state. Interestingly, even in nearby Goa, the Centre has cancelled all the 18 SEZs owing to pressure from the masses, political parities and religious groups.
the credit for this goes to the state's land acquisition policy, in which unlike in other states, the government has no role in acquisition of land for private SEZs. As the SEZ developers are themselves permitted to engage in bargaining with the landowners or the farmers, it leaves little space for corruption or cheating.
As landowners directly bargain with the developers, they get better prices, adding that this policy leaves no room for any kind of complaint or anger against anybody.
Land Acquisition for any purpose by the Govt should always benefit the loser/farmer/land owner because he stands to lose it once for all while the govt gains once for all. When land is required for road purposes or industrial purposes, wherever possible, the Govt should not acquire land of only the roadside owners. THEY MUST EAR MARK 100 TIMES THE AREA ACTUALLY REQUIRED FOR THE PURPOSE. THEN, THEY SHOULD TAKE ONLY 1% FROM EACH OWNER & REALLOCATE THE REMAINING, WITH NEW BOUNDARIES DRAWN SO THAT NO ONE NEED BE EVACUATED FROM THE PARTICULAR VILLAGE/LOCATION. IF NOT EXACTLY THE SAME, SOMETHING ON SIMILAR LINES WILL NEVER HAVE ANY OPPOSITION FROM ANY OWNER. BUT IN SUCH A CASE, THE REVENUE DEPT HAS TO BE VERY HONEST & IN THE EVENT OF ANY ILLEGAL PRACTICES FROM ANYONE IN THE DEPT, THEY SHOULD BE TERMINATED, ON THE SPOT OR GIVEN DEATH SENTENCE. The most important thing is that whenever any land is acquired for any purpose in any State, the compensation paid is pittance & the Revenue Officials feel as if they are donating money from their own property. If liberal compensation is given there will be no complaint. Further, when roads are widened, now they are installing Toll Gates & the displaced persons must be given jobs (on par with SC,ST Reservation) in all such Toll Plazas OR Security guards in Industries etc. All our Netas are great Dramatists but can never think of an alternative when land is required & can not yield to
Forcefull land requisition for private industrial houses by the State (the act may term as sponsored dalal) is against the individual right to property. Secondly, why not the industrial houses having money in their hands try to grab the land of poor instead of paying due compensation and making them as partner (through shares)in the process of development. Therefore it would be better to be make both the owners of money and land as partner instaed of rival, so that win-win siatuation can be reached in the so called development process.
The total amount of land acquired for SEZs in Gujarat is 20,800 acres, which makes up for around 40 per cent of the total land under SEZ in the country. But despite this, not even a single Nandigram or Singur like incident has taken place in the state. Interestingly, even in nearby Goa, the Centre has cancelled all the 18 SEZs owing to pressure from the masses, political parities and religious groups.
the credit for this goes to the state's land acquisition policy, in which unlike in other states, the government has no role in acquisition of land for private SEZs. As the SEZ developers are themselves permitted to engage in bargaining with the landowners or the farmers, it leaves little space for corruption or cheating.
As landowners directly bargain with the developers, they get better prices, adding that this policy leaves no room for any kind of complaint or anger against anybody.
All the land under the Jamidari system belonged to Govt except the one that Jamindar has purchased.From the toime of Akbar and even before all agricultural land belonged to the state.Jamindari was only for collection of revenue. Slowly some of them purchased the land.The private ownership was very few even though zamindar claimed the land as theirown. Congress in order to create a vote bank after abolishing the Zamindari system surrendered the land ownership to the tillars. This was done to catch the votes. Nowhere except in totally capitalist country this is the case. Inafrica land ownership still rests withthe Govt and land is given on lease.So thetillars got the land free of cost without paying anything. Now we are shelling out huge sums of money for the land which in essence belongs to the state.This money is huge and now again Congress and other parties want to vacate the treasury for the land which is in essence state property. It was given for cultivation and not for cashing in.
