By Jag Mohan Thaken
The Punjab government has introduced a new land pooling policy what it claimed aimed at curbing illegal and unplanned development by involving landowners, promoters, and companies as stakeholders. Under this policy, landowners contributing land will receive developed plots in return—1,000 sq yards residential and 200 sq yards commercial per acre, with larger returns for pooling more land. Farmers are promised annual compensation of ₹30,000 per acre for up to three years until they receive possession. The government emphasizes the voluntary nature of the policy, requiring farmers’ written consent through an NOC.
However, the policy has drawn criticism from opposition parties and farmer unions. BJP’s Sunil Jakhar termed it a “Ponzi scheme”, claiming farmers are being misled and denied the right to sell their land post-notification. Congress leader Amarinder Singh Raja Warring questioned the need to convert 24,000 acres of prime farmland for non-agricultural use, warning of economic collapse. SAD president Sukhbir Singh Badal accused the AAP government of using the 1995 Punjab Act instead of the more farmer-friendly 2013 central law to forcibly acquire 40,000 acres for party fundraising.
Farmer unions argue the policy threatens fertile, high-yield farmland without any proper survey or consultation. They fear the conversion of cultivable land into concrete structures and suspect the policy aims to benefit corporates and land mafias rather than meet genuine development needs. Protests are being planned across Punjab to resist the implementation of the policy, with fears of corporate exploitation and long-term harm to the agrarian economy.
Sharing the resentment voice of the farmers, Angrej Singh Bhadaur, Press Secretary, Bharatiya Kisan Union Ekta Dakonda, Punjab quotes the concerns raised by the union – Was there really any need to convert so much cultivable land into concrete jungles?
Bhadaur cites ‘The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013)’, which is abbreviated as the LARR Act. He adds that after decades of intense public pressure, the Central Government passed the above Act in 2013, repealing the Land Acquisition Act of 1894. As is clear from the text of this Act, several of its provisions are more sensitive to the rights of landowners and people affected by the acquisition process than the previous Act, such as providing compensation of two times the average market rate of the last three years in cities and four times in the case of villages, obtaining consent of 70 percent and 80 percent in the case of private institutions while acquiring land for public purposes, conducting an independent and It included provisions on getting a social impact survey conducted by an autonomous body and making provision for rehabilitation and resettlement, etc. Even after half a dozen amendments since 2013, the basic form of this act is still in place. The government has to declare compensation in advance for acquiring land under this act and it is likely to be increased through the intervention of the courts.
Farmers union also views that after the implementation of the LARR Act 2013, governments and corporates started finding it difficult to acquire land. They felt that it takes a long time of 1.5 to 2 years to acquire land under this Act; money has to be paid in advance; landowners go to courts to increase compensation; time and money are spent due to 70/80 percent consent of the people and social impact survey etc. Therefore, governments and other public institutions started looking for some other alternative and started eroding the basic spirit of this Act through loopholes in the land pool policy suggested under this Act. State governments can make necessary rules under state laws while implementing this land pool policy on the ground. Under this provision, many loopholes have been inserted in Punjab’s recent Land Pool Policy which are against the basic spirit of the LARR Act 2013.
Why the New Land Pool Policy? Bharatiya Kisan Union Ekta Dakonda itself answers- “The Punjab government could not even dream of acquiring such a large amount of land under the LARR Act 2013. To do so, it would have to pay two or four times the market rate of the land in advance, which is not possible given the financial condition of the Punjab government; it would have to obtain the consent of 70 percent of the affected people, which was not possible; it would have to get a social impact survey from an independent autonomous body, the report of which was very unlikely to be positive; it would have to make arrangements for the rehabilitation and resettlement of the affected people, which would have been a very expensive, difficult and long-term task. Therefore, this scheme was devised by making loopholes in the policy suggested under this Act by using the provisions of local state acts. They have devised an easy and cheap mantra to acquire land without any payment, consent, survey and rehabilitation – “Let us convert your acres into yards and enrich you”.
Stating the claims of voluntary nature of the scheme as false promise, the farmers’ union states – “To make its policy appear pro-landowner, the Punjab government has put all its efforts into propagating the fact that ‘not even an inch of land of any farmer will be taken without his “will”. This seems even absurd to hear. If the landowner with 5-7 acres lying in the middle of a colony for development in two to two and a half hundred acres does not have the “will” to give the land to the government, then how will the planned layout of that colony be implemented? Will this piece of land in the middle be covered with paddy and will there be a shopping complex built around it? Therefore, it is a complete lie that land will not be taken without “will”. In fact, there is a provision in the scheme itself that such pieces of land will be forcibly acquired under LARR 2013. There has been an attempt to hide this fact from being made public so that wherever there is any talk of land being acquired forcibly, everything appears to be voluntary. Anyway, governments have many ways to twist their arms like CLU (Change of Land Use) etc.”
The major point of concern is about the displacement of the settled people. The union doubts if this scheme is implemented indiscriminately, it will have many adverse effects on different sections of the society. Villages will be depopulated, the culture associated with them will end; the agricultural profession will be wiped out; auxiliary businesses related to agriculture like animal husbandry, dairying, vegetable/fruit cultivation etc. will be closed; public interest government schemes like MNREGA will be closed; people doing non-agricultural occupations in villages like tailors, barbers, motor mechanics, small shopkeepers, confectioners, cobblers etc. will be displaced; what is more, this unnecessary urbanization will swallow the villages and become a reason for the displacement of the settled people. (Concluded)
(The writer is a Senior Journalist, Columnist & Political Analyst from Chandigarh and can be reached MOB +918557033198; [email protected])
