Latest news with #LandAcquisitionAct
Hindustan Times
21 hours ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Parl panel flag violations in land acquisition
The Parliamentary standing committee on rural development flagged blatant violations of the Land Acquisition Act of 2013 in cases where land was acquired by undermining the authority of gram sabhas, people familiar with the May 28 proceedings in New Delhi said . Underhanded techniques, such as using forged signatures to manufacture consent, remained a key focus of the panel, which discussed land acquisitions for infrastructure development and industrial purposes, such as for mining bauxite and iron ore, without the mandatory clearances of gram sabhas. The committee discussed in depth at least nine cases from Odisha involving serious violations affecting the forest rights of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs) in the implementation of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (RFCTLARR) Act, Land Acquisition Act and the Forest Rights Act intersect in several cases involving land acquisition in forested areas. 'In the last two-three years, many arbitrary decisions were taken on giving leases for bauxite mining in Kalahandi, Koraput, Rayagada districts and iron ore mining in Sundargarh and Keonjhar districts in Odisha. In all cases, the Land Acquisition Act 2013 was violated, where the governments had forcefully and fraudulently acquired lands across Fifth Schedule areas in the Constitution without the knowledge and consent of gram sabhas,' said a person part of the meeting. The standing committee recorded oral evidence from representatives of the department of land resources under the ministry of rural development on May 28, as well as from experts and other stakeholders, on the implementation and effectiveness of the Land Acquisition Act. The Act mandates prior and informed consent of the affected families, a social impact assessment before any rehabilitation, and importantly, the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups: members of Scheduled Tribes (STs) and OTFDs. The committee discussed at least nine instances of such violations across five districts in the state, including in Rairangpur in Mayurbhanj district, where in March this year, 43 tribal families' houses were bulldozed for an airstrip expansion project. '43 tribal families are living their daily life without proper rehabilitation. The district administration had issued a notice giving one month's time to vacate homes, but within six days of serving the said notice, their houses were bulldozed. A notice was issued to conduct a gram sabha, but it wasn't held. The land in question is grazing land where the villagers have been staying for more than 35 years…PMAY houses were constructed [in that land]…the villagers could have been consulted, and rehabilitation and proper compensation could have been offered till they agreed to shift for the expansion of one Air strip,' said a person part of the meeting, wishing anonymity. The person added that various Members of Parliaments (MPs) also pointed out that gram sabhas' consent was not taken as a norm across the country. The committee also discussed the fake gram sabhas allegedly held on December 8, 2023, for the diversion of forest lands for non-forest purposes in Rayagada and Kalahandi districts for bauxite mining in 10 villages. Another person part of the meeting said: 'None of villages where gram sabhas were allegedly held had any prior information about the proposals for forest diversion for the bauxite mines. However, we were told that the resolutions were fake, and it was shocking that gram sabhas were allegedly held on the same date and time across all the 10 villages and that the sarpanch or other government officials who have signed in gram sabha documents were also present in ten different places on the same time and date.' Officials present at the meeting told HT that the Ministry of Tribal Affairs had also sent a letter on this issue in March this year to the state government for a thorough examination. People aware of the matter said that inadequate compensation and rehabilitation under the Land Acquisition Act were also discussed in the meeting. 'The need for an immediate action from the central government for the implementation of all the special provisions under RFCTLARR Act 2013 for the rights of STs and other forest-dependent communities were also discussed,' said another official.
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Greater Noida to seize T-Series land to build road
Greater Noida The Greater Noida authority on Thursday said it has decided to invoke the urgency clause to acquirefour hectares land for a 1.5km road project pending for 15 years, which aims to connect LG Chowk on Kasna Road with Knowledge Park 3, after the landowner, music and film producer T-Series, refused to part with the land. The urgency clause of the Land Acquisition Act allows the government to take immediate possession of land needed for public purposes if an urgent situation exists, bypassing normal acquisition process. 'The road connecting LG Chowk with Knowledge Park needs to be urgently built and we cannot afford to wait any longer. Traffic in the area is set to increase because the Noida Airport will open soon. The road will decongest other city roads, benefiting commuters in Greater Noida, Noida and those travelling towards the Yamuna Expressway,' said Ravi Kumar NG, chief executive officer of the Greater Noida authority. The project was first mooted in 2010 but was delayed because of resistance from T-Series. The four hectares needed for the road is part of 80 hectares of land owned by T-Series. The authority wants all 80 hectares for developmental purposes but T-Series wants to keep 76 hectares, and only wants to give up the four hectares needed for the road. T-Series bought the land from farmers in 1987 before the Greater Noida authority came into existence. According to the rules, without the approval of the building map from the Greater Noida authority, no one can build any project or use the land for industrial, commercial or any other purpose. T-Series has been resisting the acquisition because it wants permission to use the land for its own purposes, which the Greater Noida authority has refused. 'We are ready to give four hectares land required for the road project. But we request that the remaining land must be given to us for industrial purposes because we had bought the land in 1987 before the Greater Noida authority came into existence in 1992,' said a T-Series spokesperson. On Thursday, the authority said it plans to complete the land acquisition process as soon as possible and deposit the land cost in the additional district magistrate's office. According to officials, the land cost is ₹3,100 per sqm. Once the authority gets the land, it will build the road within two to three months. The budget for the road project is ₹31 crore, said officials. The road is currently only half-finished, with three lanes built from Knowledge Park to LG Chowk. The other half of three lanes from LG Chowk to Knowledge Park have yet to be built.
Time of India
5 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Talks fail, Gr Noida set to acquire land from T-Series for road
Noida: Greater Noida Authority has decided to acquire 20 hectares owned by T-Series in Namoli to construct a crucial road linking LG Chowk with Knowledge Park 3. CEO Ravi Kumar NG said multiple negotiations with the music company have failed, prompting the Authority to proceed with the acquisition under provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, to build a critical infrastructure. "The Rs 31-crore project aims to decongest Pari Chowk, improve connectivity between key institutional hubs, and provide a direct link between Noida sectors 146-147 and Greater Noida via Knowledge Park 2 and 3," Ravi Kumar said. Social impact assessment (SIA) and expert committee review for the project have been completed, and the district administration will next issue a notification under Section 11 of the Act for initiating the process of land acquisition. The Section mandates a govt to publish a notification of land acquisition and a summary of the SIA in an official gazette to inform the public about the need for acquiring a plot. Currently, a single-lane carriageway, constructed in 2010, struggles to accommodate two-way traffic between the busy LG Chowk and Knowledge Park 3, leading to frequent traffic snarls. In April, Greater Noida Authority claimed it had secured in-principle approval to acquire land from the music company to upgrade the stretch into a six-lane road with service roads, a central verge, and a drainage system. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Qual deles é você? É isso que diz sobre a sua personalidade! Conselhos E Truques Undo Later, T-Series contested the claim, stating they did not agree to part with more land beyond what was essential for the road. According to the company, founder Gulshan Kumar purchased 300 acres in Namoli in 1987, even before GNIDA was set up in 1991, for industrial use. Although the land is non-agricultural and freehold, operations ceased when a dedicated freight corridor split the property. At its peak, T-Series ran about 15 manufacturing units here producing cassettes and incense sticks. The company has alleged that GNIDA used around 12 acres of its land for one side of the road without formal acquisition in 2009-10, with a promise to allocate alternative land. When the promise went unfulfilled, T-Series halted the second carriageway's construction through a High Court order. T-Series spokesperson Vinay Kumar Mittal told TOI the company is not against land acquisition per se, but was willing only to part with land required for the road, around 4 hectares, and nothing beyond. He warned that any further acquisition attempts would be met with legal resistance. "We raised our objections during an expert committee meeting, even as the panel agreed that only the absolute bare minimum of land should be acquired," he added. To break the standoff, the Authority in its March 29 board meeting proposed a conditional settlement. Under this, 40% of 196 acres of undeveloped land owned by T-Series would be returned, subject to payment of external development fees. The remaining 60% would be acquired as per the circle rates. GNIDA also proposed that land coverage, FAR, and setback norms, applicable in 1992 (before the area came under GNIDA's jurisdiction), would be honoured, though current FAR charges would apply during purchase.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Chhattisgarh HC quashes charges against deputy collector in NTPC land fraud case
The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed charges against Tirthraj Agrawal, a Deputy Collector, in a land acquisition case linked to an NTPC project. Allegations included fraud and conspiracy concerning compensation disbursement in Jhilgitar village. RAIPUR: The Chhattisgarh High Court has quashed the framing of charges against a Deputy Collector-cum-Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raigarh, in a case involving alleged fraud and conspiracy related to land acquisition for an NTPC project. The charges, framed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), pertained to alleged offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506(B), 120(B), and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Tirthraj Agrawal, currently serving as an Additional Collector, was posted as Deputy Collector in Raigarh on March 6, 2013, and was functioning as Land Acquisition Officer and Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue). A significant portion of land in Jhilgitar village, Pussore tehsil, Raigarh district, was under acquisition for an NTPC project. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the gazette, and after approval of the award by the Secretary and Revenue Commissioner, the compensation amount was transferred to the state treasury for disbursement by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue). On April 17, 2014, one Girdhari Agrawal submitted an application expressing concern over a family land dispute and his intent to return Rs 7 lakh of the compensation. He submitted a copy of a demand draft in this regard. Subsequently, an anonymous complaint was lodged with the Collector, Raigarh, alleging the fraudulent opening of 5–6 new bank accounts in connection with Khasra numbers 16/190 to 16/197 in Jhilgitar village. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo A committee constituted to probe the complaint found discrepancies in the bank account holders' photographs, indicating impersonation. The investigation revealed collusion between the then Patwari, Tehsildar, and Sarpanch. It also found that seven individuals who received cheques from the Land Acquisition Officer withdrew funds through fraudulent accounts opened at UCO Bank, concealing their caste. The then Patwari allegedly prepared fake partition deeds in connivance with others, based on which the Gram Panchayat issued panchnamas and loan books, later certified by the Tehsildar. Based on the findings, an FIR was registered at Pussore police station on the Collector's directions in 2014. The only allegation against Deputy Collector Tirithraj Agrawal was that, in his capacity as Land Acquisition Officer, he issued cheques without verifying co-sharer certificates related to Rakesh Goyal's land. It was alleged that co-sharers then opened bogus accounts and misappropriated the compensation. Additionally, he was accused of failing to verify the certificate of the cheque recipient and the depositor while processing the returned amount. The charge sheet claimed that, between 2011 and 2013, based on a proposal from the Chief General Manager of the District Trade and Consumer Centre, private land in Khasra No. 16/6 (area 0.024 hectares) of Jhilgitar village was illegally subdivided into small plots in the names of Jaishree, Sonia, Akash, Sonam, Chandni, Girdhari, and Chanchal with the intent to fraudulently claim compensation. These individuals were falsely presented as legal successors to defraud the state government, constituting offences punishable under the aforementioned IPC sections. Challenging the charge sheet, Agrawal filed a petition in the High Court. The case was heard by Justice Arvind Kumar Verma. Senior counsel Rajiv Srivastava and counsel Mateen Siddiqui argued that Agrawal's actions, taken in his official capacity while passing the award, were protected under Sections 2 and 3 of the Judges Protection Act, 1985. They further asserted that the charge sheet lacked any substantive evidence or specific allegations against him. His name did not appear in the FIR, and no witness had made any statement under Section 161 of the CrPC implicating him. Moreover, an order dated November 20, 2024, from the Secretary of the General Administration Department, Chhattisgarh, stated that after considering Agrawal's representation, the departmental inquiry against him was closed. The High Court, noting the absence of prima facie evidence, quashed the charges against Tirthraj Agrawal, thereby discharging him from the criminal case.
The Star
24-05-2025
- Business
- The Star
Revitalisation must be for all
MALAYSIA'S proposed Urban Renewal Act has been introduced with a familiar promise: to revitalise ageing cities, improve infrastructure, and 'modernise' neighbourhoods that are said to be falling into decline. On the surface, it sounds like a well-meaning effort to address real urban challenges. But beneath the language of progress lies a deeper concern – that this Act, if passed without serious safeguards, could become a tool for displacing low-income and marginalised communities in the name of development. This concern isn't theoretical. In Malaysia, urban development has long prioritised capital over community. As a friend once put it plainly, that Malaysia is neither a developing nor a developed country – it is a 'developer country.' Residents, especially those who rent, hold no formal title, or live in informal settlements, are consistently sidelined. They are rarely consulted in any real sense, and often find themselves displaced with little notice, little recourse, and little or no compensation. Even when compensation is offered, no matter how generous they may seem on paper, is not a substitute for stability, security, or belonging. In practice, com-pensation rarely translates into improved livelihoods. More often, it severs people from the very networks – jobs, schools, extended family, community support – that made their lives viable in the first place. The money runs out. The rent goes up. The cost of commuting rises. And what's left is not a better life but a more precarious one. Moreover, the promise of returning to improved housing post-redevelopment is fraught with challenges. While new units may be 'better', they often come with increased property taxes and maintenance costs. As property values rise due to redevelopment, so do the asso-ciated costs of living in these areas. For low-income residents, this financial burden can be unsustainable, effectively forcing them to sell their homes and relocate, despite initial assuran-ces of the right to return. The Urban Renewal Act, as it's currently being discussed, risks reinforcing this pattern. By centralising the power to initiate and approve renewal projects, and by opening the door for the Land Acquisition Act to be used more broadly for redevelopment, the government could make it easier to displace entire com-munities under the banner of 'revitalisation'. This is especially troubling given the way redevelopment is typically framed in Malaysia. Older buildings are labelled 'obsolete' or 'unproductive'. Working-class neighbourhoods are described as 'underutilised'. In these narratives, the existing residents are rarely seen as stakeholders with rights. More often, they're treated as obstacles to be removed or relocated to make way for something newer, shinier, and more profitable. But who actually benefits from this kind of renewal? When we strip away the language of 'modernisation' and 'revitalisation', what remains is a pattern of transformation that often prioritises land value over community wellbeing. If the goal is truly to make our cities more liveable and equitable, then we need to reconsider the values driving redevelopment. What is being renewed, and for whom? At the heart of this question is the issue of housing. Urban renewal cannot be reduced to infrastructure upgrades or the repackaging of neighbourhoods for higher returns. It must begin with the recognition that housing is not merely a commodity to be traded or optimised – it is a basic human right. And that right includes more than a roof overhead; it includes the ability to live with dignity, stability, and security in one's own community. The right to housing, as out-lined in international human rights frameworks, includes more than access to a physical unit. It includes legal security of tenure, affordability, habitability, acces-sibility, cultural adequacy, and proximity to work, schools, and healthcare. A policy that does not safeguard these basic elements is not renewal, it's displacement dressed up as progress. To avoid repeating past mistakes, several key safeguards must be built into the Urban Renewal Act. First, residents must be guaranteed the right to remain in or return to their neighbourhoods after redevelopment. This includes legally binding commitments to in-situ upgrades or the construction of affordable replacement housing in the same location, not vague promises or 'temporary' relocation plans that leave families in limbo for years. Second, if we are to treat housing as a fundamental right, then that right must extend beyond formal homeownership to include the many other ways people live and hold land. In Malaysia, entire communities have made homes on land without titles, not out of neglect, but because the legal system has long lagged behind the lived realities of urban growth, migration, and informal settlement. Recognising housing as a right means recognising the legitimacy of diverse forms of tenure – rented flats, ancestral lands for Orang Asli, long-term squatter communities. It means creating legal protections for these residents, and supporting alternative ownership models such as cooperative housing or community land trusts that allow for long-term stability, afford-ability, and collective stewardship. Third, residents must have a real say in how renewal happens. Too often, 'consultations' are performative, held after decisions have already been made. True democratic governance means giving residents decision-making power, not just a seat at the table, but a vote that counts. This could be done through local planning councils, participatory budgeting, or other mechanisms that give communities control over their own futures. Finally, the Act must include strong measures to counter property speculation. Without this, redevelopment will simply drive up land prices, attract speculative investors, and push long-term residents out. Anti-speculation taxes, limits on flipping, and caps on developer profits can help ensure that renewal serves public, not just private, interests. Cities do need to evolve. Infrastructure does need to be maintained. But change must be equitable. It must be rooted in justice. If we allow the same dynamics that have shaped Malaysia's urban landscape for decades to continue unchecked, this new Act will not renew our cities, but instead it will remake them in a way that further concentrates wealth and deepens inequality. Malaysia has a chance to get this right by putting people before profit and making urban renewal a tool for inclusion, not displacement. But without real political will, we risk repeating the same story: development that benefits the few while pushing out the many. Badrul Hisham Ismail is the director of programmes at Iman Research and a member of the Atlantic Fellows for Social and Economic Equity at the London School of Economics and Political Science. The views expressed here are solely the writer's own.
