Political outrage erupts as Punjab govt moves ahead with land acquisition project for urban development
CHANDIGARH: The Aam Aadmi Party-led Punjab Government's ambitious plan to acquire over 24,000 acres of land in Ludhiana for urban development meets strong opposition from Congress and Shiromani Akali Dal, despite Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann's assurances of voluntary participation and fair compensation.
The most ambitious land acquisition initiative of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)-led Punjab Government to acquire 24,311 acres across more than 30 villages in Ludhiana for the development of urban estates may face significant hurdles. A political confrontation has erupted over the project, with both the Congress and Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) declaring their opposition. They have pledged to prevent the acquisition of even an inch of land, threatening agitation if necessary. Meanwhile, Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann has emphasized that the government is not forcibly acquiring land but is instead seeking consent from landowners.
Shiromani Akali Dal president Sukhbir Singh Badal warned of a state-wide protest if the government does not withdraw the project. He stated that his party would resist any land acquisition, even if it required launching an agitation. He alleged that the project was designed to enable large-scale corruption by AAP leaders from Delhi, including party chief Arvind Kejriwal. Badal further demanded a ban on land sales to residents of other states and stated, 'If Punjabis cannot purchase land in Himachal Pradesh, why should Punjab allow outsiders to buy land here?'
Criticizing the AAP Government, Punjab Congress president and Ludhiana MP Amarinder Singh Raja Warring sent a letter to Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, stating, 'Punjab is an agricultural state. We cannot afford to sacrifice green fields to cement and concrete, especially when there is no urgent requirement. You are stripping tens of thousands of farmers of their livelihoods, pushing them from prosperity to poverty. The large-scale acquisition would not only cripple the rural economy but also threaten Punjab's agricultural identity. If executed, this will turn farmers into landless labourers in urban slums. The anger among affected communities is real and growing.' He questioned the necessity of acquiring new land when many existing colonies around Ludhiana remain underdeveloped. Warring urged Mann to reconsider the proposal, saying, 'Our ancestors belong to this land and so will our children. Let's not destroy what they built.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
16 minutes ago
- Mint
MAGA policies would make America mediocre
'MAGA" was always an insult to the United States. Make America great again? Wasn't this country great when Donald Trump rode down that escalator in 2015? Now, as Trump 2.0 unfolds, the president seems intent on turning this insult into a reality by damaging or destroying much of what has made America great over 2½ centuries—including the rule of law. The survival of our republic is at stake. But since I'm an economist, I'll stick to how MAGA policies are undermining America's economic greatness. Topping the list of what made our economy great is relatively free-market capitalism, supported by the rule of law. The U.S. has no monopoly on capitalism, but our version has traditionally been freer from regulation and taxed more lightly than, say, Europe's. Our sturdy rule of law has been a huge strength, attracting capital and brain power. The word 'relatively" does a lot of work, however. Every economy needs some regulation for health, safety, and other reasons. Every country needs to levy taxes to pay its bills. Democrats and Republicans have argued for decades over how much (and how) to regulate and tax, and those battles will continue long after MAGA is a bad memory. But when the White House begins telling companies like Walmart when it may raise prices, or Apple where it should make phones, that's not normal capitalism. America's economic greatness has also relied, among other things, on what might be called the federal-industrial-university complex in science and engineering. This engine of growth has been central to American economic exceptionalism. No other nation comes close. Yet each piece is now being undermined by MAGA. The U.S. government has been promoting scientific advances at least since Vannevar Bush, the engineer whose scientific leadership helped win World War II. He convinced President Harry S. Truman and Congress that such advances were crucial to national security and economic growth. Some of the research is done directly by the government in national laboratories such as Brookhaven and Los Alamos. Some is done at the National Institutes of Health. Some is done cooperatively between government and private companies, such as the life-saving mRNA vaccines for Covid-19. And a great deal is done at research universities, typically with federal grants. Importantly, the funding hasn't been politically based. Until now. Elon Musk's chainsaw approach has decimated or eliminated entire scientific units within the federal government. Green technology and anything that smacks of DEI are particular targets. But when you cut with a chainsaw rather than scissors, accidents happen. Remember those nuclear-safety employees? The national labs, the National Science Foundation and even the NIH are all looking at serious budget cuts nowadays. Will these make our nation greater? America's universities, the best in the world, merit special discussion because Mr. Trump has declared war on them, starting with Columbia and Harvard. First a small point: University education is an export industry for the U.S. In the president's distorted view of international trade, we are supposed to export more than we import. Well, the higher education industry does exactly that. Vastly more (paying) foreign students come here than American students go abroad. And it's not because our universities are cheaper. It's because they are better. But the main point is about science, and the extensive cooperation among research universities, government and private industry. America's universities employ many thousands of scientists, including some of the best. Will taking their grants away, sometimes in midproject, make our country greater? Our universities also teach many other subjects, some of which Mr. Trump doesn't like. Classroom discussions in these 'other" subjects may sometimes veer in anti-MAGA directions. That seems to upset the president. But should the federal government try to stop that by, for example, threatening to ruin the universities financially? The First Amendment has a clear answer: No. And so does any effort to keep America great. Universities are unusual 'businesses." While most aren't run for profit, they do need to pay their bills, including for research support. A few, like Harvard, are very wealthy. Most aren't. But even the richest universities are poorly positioned to withstand a major withdrawal of federal funds. Research and much else will suffer. Too few Americans, I fear, see the attack on universities as an attack on scientific and therefore economic progress. Maybe it's hard to generate sympathy for Harvard. But do we really want to make America mediocre again? Mr. Blinder is a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton. He served as vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, 1994-96.
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump-led White House formally asks Congress to rescind $9.4 billion in approved spending
The White House on Tuesday officially sent its request to the Congress to claw back $9.4 billion in approved spending, which would take away funding from programs targeted by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The $9.4 billion package, known as 'recissions' on Capitol Hill, requires President Trump to take approval from the Congress in order to return the money which had been previously appropriated. And the move to cancel the funding via Congress route would also insulate the Trump administration from legal blockades. Trump aides have said the spending cuts are targeting programs which have liberal ideologies. If the said request passes from the House and Senate, it would formalise several spending cuts and freezes suggested by DOGE. NEW: Today, we sent the first rescissions package to Capitol Hill. This package contains BILLIONS in wasteful foreign aid and federal funding for NPR and PBS. Here's just some of the waste, fraud, and abuse identified: 🧵 — Office of Management and Budget (@WHOMB) June 3, 2025 The development comes when Elon Musk has officially exited DOGE and White House but heavily criticized Trump's tax cut and spending plan, calling it on Tuesday a 'disgusting abomination' for increasing the federal deficit. $1.1 billion for the left-wing Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which uses your taxpayer dollars to fund PBS and NPR. — Office of Management and Budget (@WHOMB) June 3, 2025 The White House spending cuts would target the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (funding cuts for NPR, PBS), United States Agency for International Development (USAID) as well among others. Congress needs to clear the White House request in 45 days and it can through simple majority, meaning no Democratic support would be needed in both House and Senate. In a statement House Speaker Mike Johnson said, 'This rescissions package reflects many of DOGE's findings and is one of the many legislative tools Republicans are using to restore fiscal sanity. Congress will continue working closely with the White House to codify these recommendations,' CNN reported. Meanwhile, White House budget director Russ Vought said that more recissions package and spending cuts would follow the suit, if the current effort succeeds in the House. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called Vought 'a 'well-respected fiscal hawk,' and said that White House budget director has tools to produce more savings.
Hans India
44 minutes ago
- Hans India
A controversy that could well have been avoided
For reasons fair or foul, there have been many skirmishes and flashpoints between the two states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka over nearly seven decades since both were carved out as independent states. While justifications from both sides abound for each of the incidents that stirred passions, created riotous situations and severely created law and order problems in both the neighbouring zones, there seems to be no stopping fresh troubles that seem to be breaking out ad nauseam. Ever since Tamil top star Kamal Haasan, known for his typical intellectual surmises on all things under the sun said 'Kannada is born out of Tamil' at a function in Chennai, it set off a furore in Karnataka. Like a typical cinema narrative, the usual villains did the usual things and kept the political temperature up. The hero, however, much like the film 'Thug Life' in which he is seen endorsing in many parts of the world, refused to accept that he had overstepped in this case and could have well been discreet with such matters in public domain. Quite clearly, all the players in this drama know that Haasan is using the oldest trick in the book of any publicity being good publicity in the cinema circles. With Tamil cinema market being the biggest across south India, with almost all states running its films in many prominent cities of the peninsula, it is incomprehensible why the Chennai actor refused to see reason. The latest is that the film is not likely to get a release in Karnataka, the biggest market after Tamil Nadu. Haasan has informed the High Court that he would not release his film on the earlier announced date for his Kannada fans to watch him in action. Interestingly, what Judge Nagaprasanna said, while adjourning the case, deserves mention. As a news agency report wrote: 'The judge further questioned Haasan's authority to make such claims, asking, 'Are you a historian or a linguist to make such a statement? No language is born out of another.' He added, 'A single apology could have resolved the situation.' Justice Nagaprasanna stressed the importance of respecting cultural sensitivities and remarked, 'Water, land, and language — Jala, Nela, Bashe — are sacred to the people'. Adding further, the judge had pointed out that an illustrious person like C. Rajagopalachari had issued a similar statement in 1950 about the origins of the Kannada language and later apologised following protests, even though there was no commercial motive. 'If such a big person can apologise, and a similar statement has been issued after 75 years, and there is a commercial motive...' the court observed. Surely, the matter is not going to end here. If Haasan has won the battle for the moment, by the time the case comes up for hearing again a week from now, the public would know who has won the war. Not to be missed is the cool-headed handling of the controversy by the Congress government, which has flayed the hero for his observations, but in an even-tempered tone kept the socio- political pot from boiling over. After all, there is a hyperactive BJP waiting and watching.
