NITI
Aayog has set up an expert committee under the chairmanship of T Haque, former
chairman of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices, to prepare a model
agricultural land leasing act in consultation with states
The committee will consist of top representatives
from seven states and officials from rural development ministry as well as the
Aayog, and will have a term of three months to submit its proposals. The states
which are part of the committee include Andhra Pradesh, Uttarakhand,
Punjab, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Assam and
Meghalaya.
As per the terms of reference, the
committee
- will review the existing
agricultural tenancy laws of states,
- examine the distinctive
features of land system in erstwhile zamindari, ryotwari and mahalwari
areas
- suggest appropriate
amendments, keeping in view the need to legalise and liberalise land
leasing for agricultural efficiency, equity, occupational diversification
and rapid rural transformation.
Why this committee ?
- Having failed to bring about changes in the Land
Acquisition Act and the entire LAND ORDINANCE connundrum, such model is
being proposed which can facilitate States undergo industrialisation
*******************************************************************************
- Currently, conversion of agricultural land for
non-agricultural use requires permission from the appropriate authority,
which takes a long time. State governments can address this barrier by
either an amendment of the law to permit non-agricultural use or by the
introduction of time-bound clearances of applications for the conversion
of agricultural land use in the implementing regulations
- Some states have an excellent provision:
12% of acquired land is returned to the farmers after development. Given
the appreciation in land prices after development, this 12% may soon be
worth more than the original farmland acquired.This again will make the
farmer a partner, not a victim, of development. By aiming to give the
farmer a very high price for land.
 |
- Acquisition can be designed as a 33-year, 50-year or 99-year leases with substantial down payment plus annual rent (linked to the cost of living). The farmer should have an entitlement to buy a certain number of shares in the company at face value.When the lease ends after 33/50/99 years, his heirs should be able to repossess the land or negotiate a fresh lease. Leasing will transform the farmer from a victim to a landlord. A farmer without land has no social status. A landless person loses status, and this carries not just humiliation but other social costs, like the inability to attract desirable grooms for daughters.A farmer with Tata and Birla as tenants will have high social status.
- Every state should identify NOGO areas
unfit for industrialisation, and give automatic approval for all other
areas. This will end the confusion, facilitate industrialisation, and
expand jobs.
Yet compulsory land acquisition makes farmers view
industrialists as foes. To end this, farmers must have a stake in industry too.
Some industrialists have tried offering shares in their companies to farmers,
but share values are notoriously volatile and uncertain. Besides, industries
can go bankrupt, and not pay their rents.
- The safest solution is
for state governments, which cannot go bust because of their tax powers,
to lease the land and sub-lease it to industrialists where required. The
states must be responsible for all payments to farmers. Farmer preferring
to sell outright should have that option too. Part of the developed land
should be returned to farmers as part of the compensation package (as we
have seen the 12 percent example above)
Moral of the
story !!
With such an approach, no social impact
reports, rehab schemes or majority votes are needed, since farmers are not
actually losing land. This will speed up projects amicably, ensure rapid
economic growth, and create millions of new jobs. It will make farmers partners
in industrialization, not victims..
*********************************************************************************
Counter Argument ---
Now from the Industry's perspective.
- We should remember that the average landholding size in
India is 1.1 ha and is decreasing with every year. For a typical
industrial corridor, or say an airport, we would need to acquire tens of
kilometers of land. Imagine the kind of work bureaucrats would need to do,
and the kind of red tape the corporate would face in finalizing all the
lease agreements.
- After 100 years, will the government have to negotiate with
the 4th or 5th generation owners for small parcels of lands piecemeal at a
time to keep the highway or a atomic power plant intact?
And if the assumption with the 100 year time frame is that lease would be auto-renewed by that generation, why not permanently acquire the land in the first place?
- All throughout the developed world, the law of eminent domain is simple, make it easy for the private players to acquire the land while being mindful about the sensitivities of farmers through rightful compensation. When the entire world is actually spreading red carpet for manufacturers we shouldn't be giving them red-tape by inviting them to "Make in India".
Let's wait for the panel to study all this aspects, the report
will come some time ..and we will analyse even that :) that's what upsc
aspirants are supposed to do :)
