Indian Holocaust My Father`s Life and Time - SIX HUNDRED NINETY SEVEN
The Ruling Zionist and Brahaminical Hegemony and its India Incs Government have launched UNPRECEDENTED Monopolistic Aggression against the Aborigin Indigenous India. The target remains to EXPLOIT all Natural Resources without any Mercy. Tribal Scheduled Areas are under sieze. Unique Identity Project and Citizenship Amendment Act together create an AGENCY to ROB Citizeship of the owners of the Natural resources! Environment Hype is Killed with shifting Jai Ram Ramesh. Now Mining Amendment Bill is followed by Land Acquisition Bill 2011, which has to redefine PUBLIC Interest as CORPORATE Interest! The decks for the New Act is clear as Mamata Banerjee is apparently happy and TRINAMOOL CONGRESS to back the Bill!
"I will support the National Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011 if what we have suggested is incorporated.
"We want among other things that 10 per cent developed land should be returned, rate of compensation should be more than market rate, besides a rehabilitation package and employment," Banerjee, whose party has 19 members in the Lok Sabha said.
She was asked by reporters whether she would give back the new bill, the draft of which has been put on public domain.
"It is our government's policy that we will not acquire even an inch of land forcibly," Banerjee, who steered the Singur and Nandigram movements, told Bengali TV news channel 'Star Ananda'.
She said that industrialists would have to purchase land directly for setting up units in the state. "They will feel more comfortable, if they go for direct purchase."
Banerjee, however, said land might be acquired for defence, national security, construction of embankments or railway lines which involved public interest.
"I am against acquisition of land for private purposes," she said, adding, "Even for public purpose we should not go for acquisition unless it involves essential services."
On NTPC's proposed power project at Katwa in Burdwan district for which the company has sought 1000 acre, the chief minister said that the PSU was told to construct the plant on 500 acre which was earlier acquired for the purpose.
"They have to build the project on land which is there. We cannot acquire more land for it. If they require more land, let them purchase it."
Without naming Tata Motors challenging the taking back of land at Singur by the state government, Banerjee said, "Someone has challenged it in the court. They can do it. I will wait for the court verdict, but the land is with the state government.
"I am committed to the people (to return land). I can't bluff the people of Singur. Even if I have to go to jail, I will be happy."
Union rural development ministerJairam Ramesh, who met West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Saturday night, said she was apparently happy with the approach to the new land acquisition bill.
Talking to reporters after meeting the chief minister, Ramesh said "broadly she appears to be happy with the approach to the bill, particularly with R and R (relief and rehabilitation) package contained in it."
The state government would take a position on the bill after a thorough study and will give its detailed comments, he said.
Banerjee, on her part, said she had no problem with the R and R policy contained in the new bill.
She said Ramesh knew that Trinamool Congress had opposed the land bill presented earlier to the union Cabinet as the party was against forcible acquisition of land.
"I have said except for building embankments or for national security, we will not allow any forcible land acquisition, Banerjee said.
"I am also against SEZs (Special Economic Zones)," she said.
On the new bill containing a provision for acquisition of land for the private sector for public purpose, she replied "I have not gone into the details. But I feel this bill has positive features over the earlier one."
- File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
- 3 days ago – THE DRAFT NATIONAL LAND ACQUISITIONAND. REHABILITATION & RESETTLEMENT BILL, 2011. Ministry of Rural Development. Government of India ...
- www.pravasitoday.com/read-draft-of-land-acquisition-bill-2011 - Cached
- July 29th, 2011 | Category: Must Read | Tags: 2011 land acquisition bill draft, complete text of 2011 land acquisition bill draft, complete text of draft ...
- www.thehindubusinessline.com/resources/article2305510.ece- Cached
- July 29, 2011: Draft Land Acquisition Bill 2011. Related. NEWS. Govt puts draft Land Acquisition Bill in public domain ...
2011 LAND BILL MILITATES AGAINST 'PUBLIC PURPOSE'
Favours Companies, Legitimises Private Acquisitions
and Ignores Community Concerns
Movements Demand Democratic, Development Planning Act
New Delhi, July 30: The much awaited comprehensive draft of the land acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation Bill promised by Union Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh was put in public domain for comments yesterday. It is commendable that the Ministry has now agreed to reopen the whole process and focus on the pre-legislative consultations and not introduce such an important legislation in hurry in this Monsoon session of the Parliament. However, the proposed draft is NOT a comprehensive draft but mere combination of the earlier proposed Two Bills and fails to take in account the concerns raised by the millions of project affected people. The Bill focuses on only one concern which is to facilitate land acquisition and serve the land needs of private and public corporations and facilitate urbanization as 'inevitable'. There is no concerted attempt to fulfill the task of land reforms and protect the land and livelihood rights of the communities across the country. Nor does the Bill realize the gravity of urban displacement and its linkages with the enormous corruption of the land sharks builder mafia.
NAPM and many grassroots movements across the country have been struggling to protect the land rights of the farmers, forest dwellers and other nature-based communities and ensure their control over natural resources through the Gram Sabha and Basti / Area Sabhas, deciding the development plans for public purpose in their area. Proposed provision of consent of the 80% project affected people is only required wherever the private entities are involved in the process of acquisition whereas all the acquisitions for the government requires no such consent, keeping intact the 'eminent domain' principle of the state. This will mean that the proposed projects like Jaitapur, Fatehabad or dams, thermal power plants, airports etc. to be built by the government will not require any consent of the people. The Bill provides the much needed legitimacy for the acquisitions for the private companies since today only by violating the existing LAA 1894 state governments could acquire land in POSCO, Noida or many other places for the private entities.
This Bill is regressive that way, since the definition of public purpose covers almost everything from building educational institutions to airports to mining, where a large number of private companies are involved. These companies are not there for the public purpose but for making profit and it is in their private interest. Housing for any income group and by private entities will mean legitimising the real estate activities in all its forms. The broad definition of public purpose reduces the process of deciding the public purpose by a committee full of bureaucrats to a farce; it will be reduced to a mere rubber-stamp authority. The Bill also does not satisfactorily take into account the decades' long experience and progressive inputs by the displaced communities on land and livelihood based rehabilitation. The provision that R&R shall be provided only when more than 100 families are displaced is unreasonable.
The proposed Bill goes back on the significant debates around the concept of public purpose in last two decades and fails to take in account the provisions mentioned in the Draft Development Policy of NAC – I, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Rural Development recommendations in 2008 and submissions made by many social movements. The land struggles in Orissa, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, AP, Narmada Valley or even in urban centres like Mumbai and Chennai are not just for fair rehabilitation and appropriate compensation, but more fundamentally for communities' control over the resources – land, water, forest, minerals – and their right to decide the kind and process of development they need or what constitutes public purpose. Unless and until the Bill tries to address these concerns and take in account the Constitutional status of gram sabhas, basti sabhas / municipalities under the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments which mandate the formulation of district and metropolitan level development plans for public purpose by them, the Bill itself will serve no real 'public purpose'.
The Bill is high on rhetoric but low on content and is many steps backward in the overall debate over the land conflicts in the country today. It will in no way quell the ongoing conflicts across the country, armed or otherwise; but will surely facilitate acquisitions in the areas like Haryana, UP and other plain areas, promote real estate and make corporations rich, happy and unruly. However, the communities will have to continue their struggle to save their resources from being taken over by the public and private corporations in the name of public corporations. Although the Bill contains some necessary provisions such as "under no circumstances should multi-cropped, irrigated land be acquired", it does not address the challenge of large scale diversion of agricultural land across the country for non-agricultural purposes and the consequent impact on the nation's food security and pauperization of communities.
INDIA is not NOIDA, the architects of the Bill doesn't seem to recognize the diverse realities of the country and are only concerned about the nine percent growth, creation of infrastructure and urbanization; extremely unfortunate for a Bill drafted by the Ministry of RURAL DEVLOPMENT which is obsessed with the ambitions of the URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
To oppose these draconian provisions being pushed by the government in the name of 'protecting farmers' interest' and legitimizing the acquisitions by the private entities for their profit ventures, NAPM, along with many other social movements of the country from 15 states will be assembling at the Jantar Mantar from August 3rd till 5th under the banner of 'SANGHARSH'. We continue to demand enactment of a COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ACT which will protect the land, resource and livelihood rights of the communities and ensure democratic participation of the people in deciding developmental plans for public purpose.
Medha Patkar Prafulla Samantara Anand Mazgaonkar Dr. Sunilam
Rajendra Ravi Akhil Gogoi Madhuresh Kumar D. Gabriele
Sr. Celia Ramakrishna Raju Vimalbhai Shrikanth
National Alliance of People's Movements
National Office: Room No. 29-30, 1st floor, 'A' Wing, Haji Habib Bldg, Naigaon Cross Road, Dadar (E), Mumbai - 400 014;
6/6, Jangpura B, Mathura Road, New Delhi 110014
Phone : 011 26241167 / 24354737 Mobile : 09818905316
Web : www.napm-india.org
Full text: Draft Land Acquisition and Resettlement and Rehabilitation Bill, 2011ibnlive.com
Posted on Jul 30, 2011 at 09:34am IST
The government has put the draft Land Acquisition and Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Bill, 2011 in the public domain as part of the pre-legislative consultative process.
Here is the full text of the draft LARR Bill, 2011:
Ministry of Rural DevelopmentGovernment of IndiaJuly 27
Draft for Discussion
I. ForewordII. Overview of the Draft BillIII. Text of the Draft Bill
Infrastructure across the country must expand rapidly. Industrialisation,especially based on manufacturing has also to accelerate. Urbanisation isinevitable. Land is an essential requirement for all these processes.Government also needs to acquire land for a variety of public purposes.In every case, land acquisition must take place in a manner that fully protects the interests of land-owners and also of those whose livelihoodsdepend on the land being acquired.Under our Constitution, land is a State subject but land acquisition is aConcurrent subject. So far, the basic law governing the land acquisitionprocess has been the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Although it has beenamended from time to time, it is painfully evident that the basic law has become archaic.Land markets in India are imperfect. There is asymmetry of power (andinformation) between those wanting to acquire the land and those whoselands are being acquired. That is why there has to be a role for thegovernment to put in place a transparent and flexible set of rules andregulations and to ensure its enforcement.Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) need to beseen necessarily as two sides of the same coin. R&R must always, in eachinstance, necessarily follow upon acquisition of land. Not combining thetwo – R&R and land acquisition – within one law, risks neglect of R&R.This has, indeed, been the experience thus far.This
Bill seeks to balance the need for facilitating land acquisitionfor various public purposes including infrastructure development,industrialisation and urbanisation, while at the same time meaningfully addressing the concerns of farmers and those whose livelihoods aredependent on the land being acquired.The issue of who acquires land is less important than the process of landacquisition, compensation for land acquired and the R&R process,package and conditions.
Bill specifies these irrespective of theratios of private and government acquisition. The objective is to makethe process of land acquisition easy, transparent and fair for both sidesin each instance. This
Bill covers all cases (0-100%, 50-50%, 70-30%, 90-10%, 100-0% and all other possible combinations in between),
(Follow IBNLive.com on Facebook and on Twitter for updates that you can share with your friends.)
#Land Acquisition Bill #Jairam Ramesh #LARR Bill
2011 land acquisition protests in Uttar PradeshFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. (Consider usingmore specific clean up instructions.) Please improve this article if you can. The talk page may contain suggestions. (May 2011)
This article or section may be slanted towards recent events. Please try to keep recent events in historical perspective. (May 2011)
The government of Uttar Pradesh, India, has faced protests against its proposed enforced land acquisition in 2011. These protests have been centred on the village of Bhatta Parsaul, Greater Noida and have resulted in sporadic incidents of violence since January of that year. In August 2010 there had been protests against the state government in Delhi and these had resulted in three deaths.
The issue is controversial because around 65% of the Indian population is economically dependent on agriculture but the government has the power to requisition any private land which it thinks is needed for a "public purpose". Past examples of this included several acquisitions by regional authorities across India for the purpose of developing Special Economic Zones to boost the economy and create jobs. In this instance, the state government of Uttar Pradesh has requisitioned the land for the building of the Yamuna Expressway, a road linking Agrato Delhi.
History: Land acquisition laws in IndiaLaws relating to land acquisition in India, by the government from the governed, date back to 1800s. Amongst these were:
- Regulation I of 1824, Bengal Code which aimed to enable the officers of the Government to obtain, at a fair valuation, land or other property for public purposes. This code was used by the British to acquire land for salt manufacture.
- Bombay Presidency, Act XXVIII, 1839 which aimed to enable the British to acquire land for public purposes in the Islands of Bombay and Colaba.
- Act VI of 1857, British India which repealed local Acts above, and laid down one law for acquisition of land in the whole of British India.
- The India Act XVIII, 1885 which enacted rules for expedient acquisition of land in British India for mines and minerals. Prior laws did not cover cases where resources were situated under the land which the Government sought to acquire. The 1885 Act addressed this, as well included rules laid down in sections 7785 of the English Railway Clauses Consolidation Act.
- The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 was a comprehensive law enacted in British India. This Act of 1894 is the basis for Indian government's current procedures for land acquisition for public purpose.
- The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 has been controversial and was challenged in the past. The Act was reviewed by various committees appointed by the Government of India. For example, in 1967, a committee was appointed by Resolution No. 6-6/67-Gen II by the Government of India to study, consult and recommend principles to amend the 1894 Act. This committee was chaired by Anand Mulla, had over 20 members selected from different sections of Indian society, and it submitted its report. As a result of such reviews, The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 has been amended several times, after India's indepedence from Britain in 1947, by various democratically elected governments of India. The Amendments have been duly passed in some cases by the central government, and in other cases by the state governments in India, such as the Amendment and Validation Act of 1967 by the state of Karnataka.
- The Land Acquisition Act of 1894 is not the only Act surviving from the times of British India. Indian Penal Code of 1860 forms the backbone of criminal law in India. Modern India's laws, like the laws of many economically developed countries such as the United States, are largely based on English common law. The Land Acquisition laws in India have the same historical foundation and are similar to the Eminent Domain laws in Europe and United States.
The need of land for infrastructure development in IndiaSince its independence in 1947 and through 1991, India's economic progress was slow. With market reforms and economic liberalization in India starting in 1991, India has emerged as a rapidly growing economy , . This economic growth demands infrastructure , .
According to a McKinsey report, India has ~500 kilometers of paved road per 1000 square kilometers, but the road quality is well below global standards, close to 90% of highways are structurally inadequate to support the 10.2 tonne load per axle that trucks carry. Similarly, McKinsey believes India's port and power generation infrastructure is already stretched, and major improvements are needed to support India's economic growth.
India has launched an array of projects to meet these infrastructure needs. According to MoSPI, India's Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, as of January 2011, over 140 mega infrastructure projects were in progress, financed by the central government of India, each worth over Rs. 10 billion ($225 million), and a combined total of over Rs. 5,37,628 crores ($100+ billion). Of these, as of January 2011, 50% of the projects were delayed between few months to as much as 6 years. The Government of India claims one of the causes for these delays is land acquisition issues such as high land compensation demanded by farmers.
In addition to mega projects by India's central government, numerous large projects are under progress led by state governments or private entrepreneurs. For example, the Uttar Pradesh government has launched a number of energy projects and expressway projects such asYamuna Expressway and the Ganga Expressway. The Haryana government has launched the KMP Expressway project.
Infrastructure is also necessary in India for disaster relief and disaster prevention. According to The Indian Red Cross, the Indian sub-continent is highly prone to droughts, floods and other natural calamities. Floods are the most regular and devastating, with an average of 18.6 million hectare of land is flooded annually, and over 40 million hectare of land is flood prone. Drought is an eternal feature of Indian livelihood. 18% of the country's total area, and 68% of the total cultivated area is estimated as drought prone. Approximately half of the Indian population is affected by drought annually. Earthquakes and cyclones are other major sources of disasters, with the Indian Ocean amongst one of the six key cyclone prone regions in the world. According to India's Ministry of Home Affairs, between 1990–2000, about 30 million people were affected by disasters every year, over 4000 people lost their lives every year in India, and the nation suffers heavy losses in economic assets from these disasters every year. India's Ministry of Home Affairs reports that it is the poor and the under-privileged who are worst affected by natural disasters; additionally, these disasters retard socio-economic development, further impoverishing the impoverished. The routine flood relief, drought relief, and other disaster relief efforts lead to diversion of scarce resources from development to rehabilitation and reconstruction. As a result, the Government of India has sought a paradigm shift by focusing on investments in mitigation, which it believes are much more cost effective than expenditure on relief and rehabilitation. Disaster mitigation infrastructure investments are amongst the priorities of the Indian government. These infrastructures require land.
The World Bank estimates India will add over 90 million people to its population between 2009 and 2015 (an average of 15 million people per year). India needs homes to house its growing population. Even without the needs of its growing population, India faces shortages of urban and rural housing for its existing population. Homes and housing projects require land.
The government of Uttar Pradesh has launched several initiatives on infrastructure and urban development. Three of these focus on expressways, namely: Yamuna Expressway, Ganga Expressway and Upper Ganga Canal Expressway. Each of these expressways pass along the major rivers and rural regions of Uttar Pradesh. The infrastructure development department of the government of Uttar Pradesh, in its 2007 proposal request for one of these expressways, cites the following benefits for the infrastructure project and the associated land works identified in the proposal:
- Provide flood protection to large population and number of villages along river
- Decongest the increasing traffic on the existing network of roads
- Fast and safe connectivity resulting in savings in fuel, travel time and transportation cost to society
- Employment opportunity to people
- Development of local industry, agriculture and handicrafts
- Development of tourism and pilgrimage
- Transporting, processing and marketing of agricultural products
- Reduction in accidents
- Reduction in pollution
- Better approach to medical and educational services
- Quick transportation of perishable goods like fruits, vegetables and dairy products
The International Monetary Fund has identified land acquisition as a significant constraint to India's infrastructure needs. The IMF believes structural reforms are needed in India to lower the cost of infrastructure, encourage private investment, and allow more efficient use of public resources.
According to The World Bank, about 60% of India's land is agricultural land and 70% of India's population is rural. All infrastructure projects, and particularly roads that connect cities and farmlands, impact the farmers and their ability to earn a livelihood from farms.
2007-2011 Land acquisitionsThe Yamuna Expressway Project is located in the state of Uttar Pradesh. The expressway aims to connect New Delhi and Agra, and open up avenue for industrial and urban development. The authority for its implementation was initiated by the democratically elected state government of Uttar Pradesh in April 2001. The land acquisition process began in September, 2007.
The first 40 kilometers of the Yamuna Expressway is located in District Gautam Budh Nagar, passing Noida, followed by 20 kilometers in District Aligarh, passing Tappal. The next 90 kilometers are in District Mathura, followed by approximately 15 kilometres in District Agra, with the expressway ending near Etmadpur, a village in District Agra. The expressway has been paved to be six lanes, with space to expand to eight lanes. The total width of the six lane dual carriageway is about 38 meters, and will be about 45 meters when the expressway is expanded from six lanes to eight lanes. The total length of the expressway is 165 kilometers. The total land dedicated for the Yamuna Expressway is about 7.5 square kilometers (~3 square miles).
Uttar Pradesh, one of the states in northern region of India, has total area of 294,411 square kilometers (113,673 square miles).
The Yamuna Expressway Project is larger than just the expressway. The Project aims to dedicate land for industrial and urban development.
The Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority has notified 133 villages for land acquisition purposes.
Land acquisition process in Uttar PradeshIn 2011, the state government of Uttar Pradesh announced "Karar Niyamavali" as the guiding policy for land acquisition by the government from the citizens of its state.
"Karar Niyamavali" policy's section 6 provides certain protections to any farmer whose land has been fraudulently transacted. The rules require that any such transaction be considered for appeal and cancelled. The farmer whose land has been fraudulently transacted has a right to compensation and damages from the state government whenever fraud is discovered and reported.
The announced policy for land acquisition by Uttar Pradesh has three parts,:
- Infrastructure projects such as highways and canals will be based on "karar niyamavali" (mutual agreement) process
- Planned development will be based on "karar niyamavali" process
- Commercial projects led by private developers will require the developers to get prior consent of 70 percent of affected farmers before the project can be reviewed by the state. The private developer will be required to give 16 percent of the developed land back to the farmers.
The land acquisition policy announced in June 2011 by the state government of Uttar Pradesh provides the following compensation to the farmers from whom land is being acquired,:
- An annuity for 33 years of Rs. 23,000 per acre ($510 per acre every year), plus an increase of Rs. 800 per acre every year; or,
- A lumpsum upfront payment of Rs. 2,76,000 per acre ($6,100 per acre)
Land acquisition controversiesThere have been past controversies elsewhere in India regarding land acquisition proposals, including those of 2008 regarding the Singur Tata Nano controversy at Singur in West Bengal, and protests in 2009 at Chandigarh.
In addition, there have been allegations of arrangements between politicians, the police, bureaucracy and the land mafia, including in the states of Punjab and Uttar Pradesh. The allegations claim that the nexus has used the existing land acquisition law, which dates from 1894, for commercial or corporate gain.
Protest timelineThe cause of the May 2011 protests in Uttar Pradesh are disputed: the protestors claim that they are a direct consequence of the land acquisition has been challenged by the state government, which has stated that the acquisitions had been completed by July 2010 and that the 2011 protests were due to "anti-social" elements encouraging the violence. The farmers believe that the compensation paid by the state government for their land was inadequate, whereas the government believes it to be generous.
6 MayThree officials from the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, a public transport body, were kidnapped by inhabitants of Bhatta Parsaul village while in the area to conduct a survey.
7–9 May 2011Violence erupted on 7 May as police moved in to rescue the abducted men, This included a three hour gun battle between the villagers and police force, which led to the death of two policemen and two civilians, as well as several injured casualties. A number of local farmers were arrested, entry to the village was effectively shut off and Section 144 (a measure to limit unlawful assembly) was imposed in an attempt to quell the troubles.
The violence continued on 8 May and the state government deployed 2,000 policemen on 9 May.
11 May 2011Rahul Gandhi, the president of the Indian youth congress reached the village after eluding the police. He conducted a dharna and was subsequently briefly taken into "preventative custody".
16–19 May 2011Gandhi claimed that he had seen evidence that many farmers had been murdered and some women raped during the state reaction to the protests. He had seen a heap of ash in the village "with dead bodies inside". There were claims that the situation was now being exploited for political ends by the Congress Party, of which Gandhi and his extended family are prominent members, with elections being due to take place in the state. However, an investigation by the BBC could find nothing to support the allegations, although there was anger regarding the violent beatings and similar actions which had occurred. It was suggested that the numerous farmers who were missing had simply fled the village and not yet returned. Gandhi subsequently attempted to backtrack on his remarks, claiming that he had been misrepresented and then that he had based his comments on conversations with the villagers, but the BBC reporter maintained that he had in fact made the allegations as originally reported. The governing Bahujan Samaj Party subsequently announced that Gandhi's allegations were baseless.
Proposed new Land Acquisition ActManmohan Singh, Prime minister of India, has[when?] promised to amend the old land acquisition bill and to introduce a new Land Acquisition Act in the Monsoon parliamentary seesion of 2011. JD-U[vague] leader Sharad Yadav has demanded that the government stops land acquisition until parliament has enacted a new law, although it is unclear whether he was referring to the state government or that of India as a whole.
- ^ a b "Uttar Pradesh farmers protest spreads". BBC. 9 May 2011. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
- ^ a b c d Das, Ayaskant (11 May 2011). "Digvijay demands three-point relief for Bhatta farmers". The Times of India. TNN. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
- ^ a b "Uttar Pradesh farmers protest in Capital over land acquisition". livemint.com. 27 August 2010. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
- ^ a b c d e "Rahul Gandhi arrested for joining farmers' land protest". BBC. 12 May 2011. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
- ^ a b c d Berverley, Henry (1888). The Land Acquisition Acts. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink And Co.. Retrieved July 2011.
- ^ "The Land Acquisition Act, 1894". Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice.
- ^ Kumar, Virendra (1979). Committees and Commissions in India, 1947-1973. New Delhi: Naurang Rai.
- ^ Jain, M (2006). Outlines of Indian Legal and Constitutional History. Nagpur: Wadhwa & Co.. ISBN 9788180382642.
- ^ "In India, doubts gather over rising giant's course". The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ "Best Countries for Business - #77, India". Forbes.
- ^ "Country Strategy for India, 2009 to 2012". The World Bank.
- ^ a b "India: Rapid Growth with Promising Medium-term Prospects". The International Monetary Fund.
- ^ "Building India, Financing and Investing in Infrastructure". McKinsey&Company.
- ^ "20th Report on Mega projects, January 2011". Government of India, MoSPI.
- ^ "21st Report on Mega projects, February 2011, see section 7 of Executive Summary; also see Reports 14-20 from the same source". Government of India, MoSPI.
- ^ "Indian Red Cross Society, Programmes and Activities".
- ^ a b "Disaster Management in India, Ministry of Home Affairs India, NDMD".
- ^ "World Development Indicators: see page 37". The World Bank.
- ^ a b "Report on Trend & Progress of Housing in India 2006, see Chapter 2 at page 13 and page 72". National Housing Bank, Ministry of Finance - Government of India.
- ^ "Development of 8 Lane Controlled Expressway, see page 3-6, 27, etc". Government of Uttar Pradesh Department of Infrastructure Development.
- ^ "World Development Indicators - see page 127-131". The World Bank.
- ^ "Yamuna Expressway Concept and Background".
- ^ "Yamuna Expressway Path".
- ^ "Macroeconomic Analysis of Uttar Pradesh". Planning Commission, Government of India.
- ^ "Yamuna Expressway Actions Points for Future Development".
- ^ a b "Karar Niyamavali: Uttar Pradesh land acquisition - Determination of compensation rules (see page 1 for policy in local language, and page 5 for english translation)". Government of Uttar Pradesh.
- ^ a b "Don't cut me off with a shilling - Land acquisition issues have forced a national debate". Business Standard.
- ^ "New Land Acquisition Policy". Government of Uttar Pradesh.
- ^ "Manimajra land acquisition: Rs 18.75 lakh per acre, says Admn, farmers protest". Indianexpress.com. 27 February 2009 accessdate=2011-05-12.
- ^ "Politicians, mining and land mafia ruling roost in A.P.". The Hindu: Andhra Pradesh. Press Trust of India (Chennai, India). 29 May 2010. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
- ^ "Ex-DGP alleges nexus between land mafia and politicians, cops, babus; seeks CBI probe". Express India. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
- ^ a b Joshi, Rajesh (19 May 2011). "Scorched village in farmer 'atrocity' row". BBC. Retrieved 2011-05-20.
- ^ Farmers' stir: Opposition slams Mayawati on land acquisition
- ^ Congress defends Rahul's visit to farmers' village
- ^ Promises made to farmers by Mayawati a charade: Kalraj, IBN Live News
- ^ "Farmers' stir: BJP cries foul over Rahul's dharna in Bhatta - The Times of India". The Times Of India.
- ^ Khurshid criticises BJP for attacking Rahul
- ^ Joshi, Rajesh (19 May 2011). "Rahul Gandhi atrocity claims 'baseless'". BBC. Retrieved 2011-05-20.
- ^ "Govt to move bill to amend Land Acquisition Act: PM to RLD". The Times of India. 10 May 2011. Retrieved 2011-05-10.
- ^ "'Mayawati govt hand in glove with land mafia'". Indianexpress.com. 8 May 2011. Retrieved 2011-05-12.
View page ratings
Rate this page
I am highly knowledgeable about this topic (optional)
Categories: Protests in India | 2011 in India
Maoists should state what kind of talks they want: Mamata Banerjee
Asking the Maoists to "come back to mainstream", West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee today said they should state whether they would like talks at the political or administrative level for which a venue could be fixed.
The Maoists, who had offered to hold parleys with her government, should make it clear whether they preferred political or administrative-level talks, Banerjee said.
She said that an empowered committee was negotiating with Maoists in Junglemahal, "My government's priority is to resolve the issue through negotiations."
"Their (Maoists) movement is ideological. They don't believe in democracy. But we do. I don't mind the ideological conflict. But I mind atrocities on the common people. This should stop," Banerjee said.
Asking the Maoists to come forward and work for development and peace, she said, "If any of you want to come to the mainstream, we have announced a special package for you."
The chief minister also expressed suspicion that the CPI(M) was 'playing tricks' in guise of Maoists in some cases.
Mamata Banerjee slams Pranab Mukherjee over constitutional provisions remark
Slamming Pranab Mukherjee's reported comment that constitutional provisions would be followed for financial assistance to West Bengal, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee today asked whether the Centre followed constitutional provisions during the Singur and Nandigram episodes.
"You (Centre) yourself came out to salvage the CPI(M) government in the state several times, but in the case of forcible farmland acquisition in Singur and the Nandigram massacre did you follow theConstitution?" she asked during an interview with Bengali TV news channel 'Star Ananda'.
"I am not taking his (Pranab Mukherjee's) utterances in good spirit. We are not seeking a package from Centre in an arbitrary manner. We are keeping a watch on the situation," she said.
"I can tolerate everything. But not an insult to the people of West Bengal. We are not seeking alms from Centre. It is our right. Bengal should be considered as a special case as we are carrying on with a paralysed economy," she said.
Mukherjee had reportedly said at a meeting with party MLAs yesterday that the Centre could not go beyond constitutional provisions in assisting the state financially.
"It is not unconstitutional to seek financial assistance for Bengal which has been left bankrupt during the 35-year rule of the Left Front," Banerjee retorted.
Stating that her government had inherited a debt burden of over Rs2 lakh crore, Banerjee, whose party Trinamool Congress is the second largest ally of the ruling UPA, questioned why the Centre did not monitor the financial situation in West Bengal during Left Front rule.
Claiming that the Prime Minister himself had favoured a special financial package for the state, she said, "I met the Prime Minister once with the demand and also met the Union Finance Minister. The state Finance Minister Amit Mitra also met the Union Finance Minister in Delhi."
CM imprint in bill draft- Munda welcomes protection for tribals
|SUMAN K. SHRIVASTAVA|
Ranchi, July 29: The proposed land acquisition bill unveiled by the Centre today will not override provisions of two landmark laws that seek to protect the interests of tribal landowners, thereby addressing a serious concern of states like Jharkhand where bulk of the land being eyed by industry is in forests inhabited by tribals.
On a day the Draft National Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation & Resettlement Bill, 2011, was put in the public domain, chief minister Arjun Munda welcomed Union rural development minister Jairam Ramesh's clarification that the proposed law would not have any provision for exemptions from rules under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) and Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act that require plot takeovers to be cleared by gram sabhas or panchayats.
"The draft bill has vindicated our stand. We cannot avoid these laws. We will have to build confidence among villagers and also educate them. People must know what is actually required from them. Otherwise, they will rise in revolt," the chief minister told The Telegraph.
The draft bill is in tune with Munda's thinking. His July 9 statement ruling out direct purchase of land by private investors in scheduled areas may have set the cat among pigeons in a state that is trying its best to assuage big-ticket investors whose projects aren't making headway because of serious land acquisition issues.
But, the chief minister stuck to his stand. The purchase and acquisition of land in scheduled areas would have to be routed through gram sabhas, he had pointed out, adding that such a provision already existed in the PESA Act, 1996, and that no fresh circular was needed to enforce it.
The Forest Rights Act, 2006, seeks to recognise the rights of forest dwellers who have been living in such areas for generations, but whose claims had not been officially acknowledged before.
PESA extends panchayat laws to areas that have been included under the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution. The overall aim of PESA is to safeguard the traditional rights of the tribals to natural resources.
PESA Act says the gram sabha or panchayat has to be consulted before acquiring land in scheduled areas for development projects and before resettling or rehabilitating people affected by such projects.
As many as 12 districts of the state, namely Ranchi, Lohardaga, Gumla, Simdega, Latehar, East Singhbhum, West Singhbhum, Seraikela-Kharsawan, Sahebganj, Dumka, Pakur and Jamtara, come under Scheduled Areas, besides some parts of Garhwa, Palamau and Godda.
At least two dozen investors have begun work on MoU signed to set up plants in scheduled areas. Among them are Tata Steel in Manoharpur (Seraikela), JSW in Sonahatu (Ranchi), JSPL in Asanboni (East Singhbhum), Bhushan Power & Steel in Potka (West Singhbhum), Corporate Ispat Alloy in Sini (Seraikela-Kharsawan), Hindalco Industries in Sonahatu (Ranchi) and Abhijeet Group in Chandwa (Latehar).
Most have reacted cautiously to the new development, not disputing the right of local elected representatives in deciding the fate of land, admitting nevertheless that the process would take more time.
Assistant vice-president of Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) Amar Biruli pointed out that under the Chotanagpur Tenancy (CNT) Act, there was a provision of getting villagers' consent to transfer the land with a permission from the deputy commissioner.
"There is a committee headed by the development commissioner to see whether the norms were followed in purchase of land or not," he pointed out, but added that his company would consult gram sabhas too before deciding on a plot.
A. Prasad, senior executive president of Adhunik Alloy and Power Ltd, which is setting up a 1080MW power plant at Kandra in Seraikela-Kharsawan district, accepted that henceforth consent of the gram sabha would be a part of the game. "We will go for that, too," he added.
R.N. Chaubey, regional director of JSW, said his company would follow the guidelines but added it would be a time- consuming process. "In fact, government acquiring land and handing it over to industrialists would have been the best way out," he added.
Finally, industry representatives indicated they would like to see clarity on the part of the government on land acquisition. "The state government should issue a circular giving fresh directives to deputy commissioners as well as industrialists. The fresh circular should be in black and white," said one of them.
July 30, 2011 8:42:05 PM
Gainda Singh was a landlord in Gurgaon, Haryana. A prominent builder with right connections wanted to develop a housing colony on his land. He approached the Land Acquisition Officer, Gurgaon, and told him that he required land for a 'development' project. In reality, he wanted to build a golf course. He prepared a draft and used his influence to get it included in the 10th Five-Year Plan of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Government of Haryana. The project was approved. Gainda's land was acquired and the task of his rehabilitation and resettlement was handed over to a Rehabilitation and Resettlement Administrator.
The Administrator found a place for Gainda in a corner of the Gurgaon railway station. He was kind enough to buy for him a mat and a wooden stand on which Gainda's name was displayed in bold letters. A metallic bowl was also kept in front of him. The compensation to be paid to Gainda was worked out by the Administrator. Since the Haryana Government did not have any budgetary provision for such compensations that year, a due slip was prepared and dropped in the bowl.
Gainda was happy, particularly with the signboard reading, "Lord Gainda Singh". People would often ask him, "How did you become a 'Lord', Gainda?" And, he would reply, "Oh! That, you see I was a landlord. Now the land has been taken away and I have become a lord."
This story, which is quite popular in Haryana — it is also widely circulated in Punjab where Gainda Singh is presented as a Sardar — may seem humorous, but it truly showcases how distorted the entire mechanism of land acquisition and rehabilitation has become in the country.
DEVELOPMENT is just an excuse
What one is witnessing today in western Uttar Pradesh, adjacent to Delhi, was not very long ago the cause of violent agitation in West Bengal. In 2007, when farmers of Singur and Nandigram rose in arms against land acquisition, the CPI(M)-led Government tried to pacify them by talking about 'development'.
It backfired, bringing down the 34-year-old Left Front regime in the State.
Singur, Nandigram and now the Noida-Greater Noida region — they all showcase what is wrong with India's land acquisition system: That the country still pursues, even after 60 years of Independence, the colonial Land Acquisition Act, 1894, that forces its citizens to hand over land for undefined 'public interest' without consensus or consultation. This has been going on for well over a century, when the British enacted the Bill to take over vast tracts of land. It continued during the Nehruvian era, when the Act was misused to divest people of their traditional land rights, for building dams, factories, sports complexes, etc. Then, at least, the supposed objective was 'public good', as in the case of Bhakra Nangal and Tehri Dams. But now even that pretension is gone, as is being witnessed in the Noida-Greater Noida case. What's more unfortunate is the fact that terms like 'development' and 'compensation' are merely presented to hide the colossal land grab underway in the country. The truth is that there was not even a Relief and Rehabilitation Bill in the country till Nandigram and Singur came out all blazing.
The latest land war began in the Noida-Greater Noida region on May 7 when farmers felt that they had been cheated by the Government, which acquired their land cheaply for the Yamuna Expressway project. In 2007, the Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (YEA) notified 256 villages for the development of the area along the Greater Noida-Agra expressway. And look at the fraud (one can call it a daylight robbery): While the YEA offered Rs 850 per sq m to the farmers, it was sold to private builders at Rs 5,500 per sq m. As for builders, they are today selling the land at a whopping Rs 18,000 per sq m!
To acquire land from people, the Government uses the principle of 'eminent domain'. This means that the right of the state to its property is absolute, while that of the citizen is conditional. The citizen holds his property subject to the right of the state to take it away for a public purpose upon paying the owner due compensation to be ascertained according to law. Under this principle, the state can take a private property only for a public purpose after paying a due compensation. The operational words are "public purpose".
Uttar Pradesh, under Mayawati, has blatantly flouted this principle, though she is not alone to do so in the country. With just a year to go for the Assembly elections, she seems weary now. And, she has every reason to be so, as she virtually has a finger in every land deal in the region. Since 2007, when Mayawati took over as Chief Minister, her administration has acquired more than 2,000 acres of land from farmers by invoking the 'public interest' clause. But the land acquired has not seen a single hospital built, a school inaugurated, or even an industry established. Instead, almost three-fourth of the 2,000 acres of land was given to the builders on a platter. Such was the collusion between the Government and developers that the authorities acquired land without any public hearing in 2009, clearly undermining Sections 4-9 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Incidentally, by the time the Government cleared the decks for builders, the realty sector was hit by the economic meltdown. The Government was unable to sell the acquired land. The Mayawati Administration, therefore, devised a plan whereby builders were handed over possession of the land through auction on payment of 10 per cent of the total amount. They were allowed to pay the rest in six-monthly installments for the next 10 years.
From Nandigram to Noida
Like Nandigram, land lies at the core of the ongoing Noida embroglio. Like Nandigram, police fired to quell protests by farmers whose land was being acquired for commercial purposes. Like Nandigram, which provided once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to Mamata Banerjee to throw the communists out of West Bengal, the Noida dispute could mark the beginning of the end of the Mayawati regime in Uttar Pradesh.
But to expect a Nandigram in Noida is farfetched. After all, the realities of the Noida-Greater Noida region are starkly different from those of Nandigram, so are the actors and stakeholders involved. First, villagers in Nandigram had from the beginning opposed the chemical hub that the then Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee Government had proposed to build on their farmland. In western Uttar Pradesh, most villagers had taken compensation for land they had agreed to sell for the development of the Yamuna Expressway and several commercial projects around it. They began protesting only when they found out that the developers, who had been allotted those land, were making a huge profit from a resale. This explains why there has been no protest in neighbouring Ghaziabad — which is witnessing the emergence of an equally ambitious highrise project in Crossings Republik just a few kilometres away from the epicentre of the ongoing crisis — where farmers have benefitted by negotiating directly with the developers.
Also, despite Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi trying hard to sensationalise the issue, the police action — or reaction — seems far from being atrocious in western Uttar Pradesh. This, again, stands in sharp contrast to police firing in Singur and Nandigram. What, however, distinguished Noida from Nandigram is the leadership: Rahul can't simply do a Mamata. He is more about tokenism than a gritty effort to protect the interests of farmers bypassed by crony capitalism. Unlike Mamata, he is primarily the construct of media management.
WAKING UP TO REALITY
As we are witnessing land wars across the country, the UPA Government has unveiled a new draft Bill putting in place a transparent, legal framework aimed at giving adequate compensation to landowners and ensuring rehabilitation of those displaced. The draft National Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011, plans to make "consent" of 80 per cent of the families for acquisition mandatory. "In case of urban areas, the award amount would be not less than twice that of the market value determined whereas in rural areas it would be not less than six times the original market value," the draft says.
The draft Bill, however, gives State Governments the flexibility to acquire land either in full or in part for private companies for public purpose. Here lies the problem. Land being a State subject, the system of acquisition and rehabilitation is going to remain chaotic. To make the matter worse, a number of agencies have been created to look after the issue, making the arena messier. It's, however, the entry of private builders and real estate sharks, acting as a front for political leaders, bureaucrats and businessmen, that makes the situation more complicated.
In these circumstances, an administrative framework is required to make the entire process of rehabilitation and resettlement smooth, hassle-free and transparent. The country requires a national policy to regulate as well as coordinate various land acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement processes.
The UPA Government, however, doesn't seem in a hurry to do so. Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh's recent decision not to bring the Land Acquisition Bill in the monsoon session of Parliament is indicative of that approach. The delay proves the Government's indifference towards the issue.
The draft National Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011, was needed because the National Policy on Rehabilitation and Resettlement, 2007, was poorly drafted. The document was full of contradictions and inconsistencies. The most important defect being the fact that it was addressed to nobody in particular. The document seemed to be talking in the air.
The 2007 resolution seemed to create complications by bringing the issue of special claims of the weaker sections, like "Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Marginal Farmers and Women". Acquisition of land affects all categories of people irrespective of the fact that one is a Scheduled Caste or a Brahmin. Rights of all the affected people have to be protected. When a man needs protection, you don't ask him about his caste but save him before doing anything else.
Also, it created confusion by talking about development in the acquisition clause. Under the Land Acquisition Act, however, a land can be acquired only for 'public purpose'.
No doubt, the 2011 draft seems a way forward, more so as it includes the 80 per cent consent rider to any acquisition move. But it doesn't seem to to make the acquisition and rehabilitation process simpler and transparent.
Learn from Haryana
The Mayawati Government should take a cue from Haryana to execute a trouble-free land acquisition. Besides offering attractive market rates, the Haryana Government has ensured that the farmers buy more land in the State. Mayawati can also look at how Ghaziabad has managed its urbanisation drive trouble-free by making farmers deal directly with developers. If Noida is today burning, it's primarily because the authorities have tried to distort the acquisition process in connivance with builders.
Last but not the least, the need of the hour is to amend the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After all, the Uttar Pradesh Government has been acquiring land through this British-era Act, under which the State can acquire land citing emergency needs. This Act takes away the right of the landowners to file counter-claims or complaints.
-- The writer is a retired Director, Ministry of Culture
Singur Tata Nano controversy
| || |
Singur gained international media attention since Tata Motors started constructing a factory to manufacture their $2,500 car, the Tata Nano at Singur. The small car was scheduled to roll out of the factory by 2008.
The state government of West Bengal facilitated the controversy by using an old rule to conduct an eminent domain takeover of 997 acres (4.03 km2) of farmland to have Tata build its factory. The rule is meant for public improvement projects, and the West Bengal government wanted Tata to build in its state. Opponents included displaced farmers and land-rights people.
Small car manufacturing facility
The choice of Singur was made by the company among six sites offered by the state government. The project faced massive opposition from displaced farmers. The unwilling farmers were given political support by West Bengal's opposition leader Mamata Banerjee. Banerjee's "Save Farmland" movement was supported by celebrity environmental activists like Medha Patkar, Anuradha Talwar and Arundhati Roy. Banerjee's movement against displacement of farmers was also supported by several Kolkata based intellectuals like Aparna Sen, Kaushik Sen, Shaonli Mitra and Suvaprasanna. Ultra left activists also shared the platform with Banerjee's Trinamool Party. The Tatas finally decided to move out of Singur on 3 October 2008. Ratan Tata blamed violence by Banerjee and her supporters for the pullout decision. On 7 October 2008, the Tatas announced that they would be setting up the Tata Nano plant in Sanand, Gujarat.
Perspective of those who favour the Tata project
In the 1950s the Indian state of West Bengal was one of the most industrialized states in the country. Bidhan Roy, its first chief minister, founded large industrial plants in Durgapur, Asansol, Kalyani, Howrah and Calcutta proper. In the 1960s and 1970s, disruptions by theBangladesh War, the Naxal movement and militant trade unionism by leftist parties led by Jyoti Basu slowed down industrial development. Consequently other states such as Maharashtra, Gujarat, Punjab, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka attracted industrial investment and experienced job growth.
The rapid rise in the population of West Bengal has not been accompanied by significant economic growth. Key indicators such asunemployment rates, poverty rates, infant mortality rates, job growth rates, per capita income, mobile phone penetration rates lag the more industrialised states of India. Local politicians gained power by promising agricultural land to landless farmers, but given West Bengal's population density, the land-holdings are small and the yields are insufficient to sustain poor families. While the shift from agriculture to industrial jobs requires re-training, given India's economic growth, it provides an opportunity for earning higher income.
Several states have proposed to offer land to Tata Motors if they abandon the project in Singur.
The people staying in the proposed land were forced to evacuate by the government. The compensation given was considered inadequate and the new housing facilities offered were delayed. This led to the protest of the peasants backed by opposition political parties, who thought it would be a good opportunity to end the communist rule of Bengal.
The company has made substantial promises. According to their claims, Singur would become a mini-auto city and approximately 70 vendors would set up shop along with the factory. The total investment planned is to the tune of Rs 1,000 crore. The project had, however, generated controversy right from the start, particularly on the question of state acquisition of fertile agricultural land for private enterprises.
The land acquisition controversy
On 23 September 2008, Tatas decided to leave Singur in West Bengal, the decision is reported to have been made by the Tata management and the Bengal government had been informed. On 3 October it became official that TATA will leave Singur (WB) when Ratan Tata announced it in a press conference in Kolkata.
While the ruling party has gone all out for acquisition of 997 acres (4.03 km2)  of multi-crop land required for the car factory, questions have been raised about the party forcible acquisition which was made under the colonial Land Acquisition Act of 1894. Others say the provisions of this act were allegedly not been met.
The law has provisions for state taking over privately held land for public purposes but not for developing private businesses. The illegality of the acquisition has been substantially conceded by the Kolkata High Court.
The Tata Motors site is the most fertile one in the whole of the Singur, and the Singur block, in turn, is among the most highly fertile in West Bengal. Consequently, almost the entire local population depends on agriculture with approximately 15000 making their livelihood directly from it. With the number of direct jobs to be created no more than about 1,000, many of which are expected to go to outsiders, the local populace feel understandably threatened for their livelihood. Environmental degradation is also feared.
Chief protesters include the opposition parties spearheaded by the Trinamool Congress under Mamata Banerjee and Socialist Unity Centre of India. The movement has received widespread support from civil rights and human rights groups, legal bodies, social activists like Medha Patkar and Anuradha Talwar, Booker prize-winning author Arundhati Roy and Magsaysay and Jnanpith Award-winning author Mahasweta Devi. Other intellectuals, writers like the poet Joy Goswami, artists like Suvaprasanna, theatre and film personalities like Saonli Mitra,Aparna Sen etc. have pitched in. The state police force has been used to restrict their access to the area. The Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen has on the other hand appeared to defend the decision to set up the factory. He however opposed forcible acquisition of land.
The protesters have been trenchantly attacked, verbally by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)) leaders and physically by the party's supporters. Benoy Konar, member of the party's state committee, famously declared that protesting intellectuals would be greeted by women supporters of the party by showing their behinds .
Preliminary surveys by officials of the state and Tata Motors faced protests, and manhandling on one occasion, from the villagers organized under the Save Singur Farmland Committee with Trinamool Congress forming its chief component. It is reported that Naxalite elements hold sway over the direction the agitation takes and the Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee takes no decisions without consulting them.
The state government imposed the prohibitory Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code for initially a month and then extended it indefinitely. The imposition has been declared illegal by the Kolkata High Court 
While landless peasants and share-croppers fear losing out entirely, sections of the locals, particularly those owing allegiance to the CPI(M) have welcomed the factory. These count chiefly among the owners of bigger portions of the land even as discrimination in the compensation has been alleged.
A section of those promised jobs at the factory have boycotted classes while training in protest against the alleged going back on the promise.
In the 2011 state assembly elections, while the sitting Trinamool Congress MLA, Rabindranath Bhattacharya retained the Singur seat,Becharam Manna, the convener of Krishi Jami Raksha Samiti, won the adjoining Haripal seat  
Fencing off the land
The land earmarked for the project was taken control of by the state administration amidst protests and fencing off commenced on December 1, 2006. Mamata Banerjee, who was prevented from entering Singur by the state police, called a statewide bandh in protest while legislators belonging to her party turned violent in the legislative assembly causing damage to furniture.  Later, she went on a 25-day hunger strike.During this period she presented affidavits of farmers apparently unwilling to part with their land.
The fenced off area has been regularly guarded, besides large contingents of policemen, by cadres of the CPI(M) party. They were accused of the multiple rape followed by burning to death of teenage villager Tapasi Malik who was active in the protests, on December 18, 2006.Negligence and political interference in the probe into her death have been alleged. Later, CPI(M) activist Debu Malik and based on his statement, CPI(M) zonal committee secretary Suhrid Dutta were arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation in connection with the crime.
Intermittent attacks by villagers have since continued on the fence. However, continuing agitations against the project appeared to have proved ineffective and a farmer who lost land committed suicide
On the other hand the pro-factory villagers siding with the CPI(M) have made accusations against the Naxalite faction of the 'Save Singur Farmland Committee' of threats and violence against them.
Construction of plant
Tatas ceremonially initiated the construction of the plant on 21 January 2007. The Tata Group announced on October 3, 2008 that they are pulling out of Singur due to the political unrest and agitation by the Trinamool Congress against the construction of the plant.
Other aspects of the process of setting up the factory that have come under severe criticism are the government's secrecy on the details of the deal and the chief minister's furnishing of false information, including in the legislative assembly Vidhan Sabha. In particular, the concessions being given to Tata Motors have not been publicly revealed. The falsehoods of the chief minister chiefly pertain to claims made by him of having acquired 912 acres (3.69 km2)  through voluntary consent of the owners without the use of force.
The Kolkata High Court declared the acquisition prima facie legal. The air seemed to have cleared somewhat when the High Court ordered the state government to submit correct figures following which an affidavit but was not satisfied with the result . In a fresh affidavit filed later in June 2007, the government admitted to 30 per cent of the land was acquired from farmers without consent. The affidavit remains unclear on whether the lack of consent is based on insufficiency of the compensation or refusal to sell altogether.
Business houses' role
The critics of the government's industrialization policy have argued on the other hand that while India is moving towards a "free market" economy, government has been acting as a broker for the private sector by forcing private citizens to give up their property at throw away prices.[who?]
Tata pulls out
On October 3, 2008, after a brief meeting with the Chief Minister, Mr. Ratan Tata declared his decision to move the Nano Project out of West Bengal. Mr. Tata specifically mentioned his frustration with the opposition movement at Singur Project led by Trinamool Congress chief Ms. Mamata Banerjee. Ms Banerjee responded by referring to actions by Tatas and the state government.
It took 14 months to build a new factory in Sanand, Gujarat compared with 28 months for the Singur factory.
- ^ The Hindu Business Line, 26 November 2006
- ^ a b c The Economist August 30, 2008 edition. U.S. Edition. "Nano wars". Page 63.
- ^ The Hindu Business Line, 13 December 2006
- ^ The Telegraph 14 October 2006
- ^ The Business Standard
- ^ Countercurrents.org, 30 December 2006 Headline Singur
- ^ Tehelka Mar 03, 2007
- ^ doccentre.net Report on Public Hearing
- ^ The Times of India December 8, 2007: Do you need a visa to enter Bengal?
- ^ The Indian Express 15 January 2007
- ^ Banerjee doesn't take decisions without Naxal elements' OK:The Indian Express August 31
- ^ The Times of India February 15, 2007
- ^ The Telegraph December 10, 2006
- ^ The Telegraph 23 June, 2007 Job cry from Tata trainees
- ^ "Haripal". Assembly Elections May 2011 Results. Election Commission of India. Retrieved 2011-05-19.
- ^ "Singur". Assembly Elections May 2011 Results. Election Commission of India. Retrieved 2011-05-19.
- ^ The Statesman 23 December 2006
- ^ The Statesman 19 December 2007
- ^ The Statesman 22 January 2007
- ^ The Indian Express 29 June 2007 CPM local boss arrested for Singur girl's murder
- ^ The Indian Express 26 May 2007
- ^ DNA - India - 'Save Singur' turns sour - Daily News & Analysis
- ^ The Telegraph 22 January 2007
- ^ The Indian Express November 24, 2006
- ^ The India Daily February 24 2007 Calcutta High Court says Singur land acquisition appears illegal -all eyes now on communists in West Bengal
- ^ IBN 10 June 2007: 30 pc Singur farmers not compensated
- ^ The Times of India 8 June 2007: State files Singur affidavit
- ^ "Tata pulls out of Singur, blames Trinamool stir - The Financial Express". www.financialexpress.com. Retrieved 2009-03-10.
- ^ "If Tata pulls out, Trinamool will be solely responsible: CM". Chennai, India: www.hindu.com. 28 September 2008. Retrieved 2009-03-10.
- ^ 
- ^ 
|— town/ cd block —|
|Coordinates||22°01′N 87°59′ECoordinates: 22°01′N 87°59′E|
|Time zone||IST (UTC+05:30)|
• 6 metres (20 ft)
Nandigram is a rural area with two commuunity development blocks in Haldia subdivision ofPurba Medinipur district of the Indian state of West Bengal. It is located about 70 km south-west of Kolkata, on the south bank of the Haldi River, opposite the industrial city of Haldia. The area falls under the Haldia Development Authority.
In 2007 the West Bengal government decided to allow Salim Group to set up a chemical hub at Nandigram under the special economic zone policy. This led to resistance by the villagers resulting in clashes with the police that left 14 villagers dead, and accusations of police brutality.
|This section is empty. You can help by adding to it.|
People of Nandigram
Although this part of Bengal has not been actively highlighted in Indian History during British period, the area had been a part of active politics from the British era. With the help of the people of Nandigram, "Tamluk" was freed from the British by Ajoy Mukherjee, Sushil Kumar Dhara, Satish Chandra Samanta and their friends for a few days (which is the only part of modern India to be freed twice), before India gained de facto freedom in 1947.
In post Independent India, Nandigram had been a centre of learning and played a major part in the development of Haldia, a satellite town of Calcutta (Kolkata). Fresh vegetables, Rice and fish are being supplied to Haldia from Nandigram. Like Haldia, Nandigram has a natural strategic geographic location for business and farming. The Ganga (Bhagirathi) and Haldi (downstream of Kanshabati) cover the edges of Nandigram, and thereby the land is fertiled by both the rivers.
Although 60% of the area has a Muslim population, but this area has never been in the clutches of Hindu-Muslim riot. The Nandigram town is dominated by brahmins (the Tewaris, Mukherjees, Pandas).
Conflict over proposed chemical hub
| ||The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (January 2008)|
The controversy over the state government plan to build a chemical hub in Nandigram led opposition parties to organise against the acquisition of land. The Trinamool Congress, Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI), Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and Indian National Congress cooperated to establish the Bhumi Uchhed Pratirodh Committee (BUPC, 'Committee against Land Evictions'). A large number of erstwhile supporters of the ruling CPI(M) party also joined them. The apparent aim of the BUPC was to protect the farmers' lands. However the top leadership of the ruling party, determined to ride roughshod over all opposition, painted the agitation as one against industrialisation. The official propaganda carried by pro-government media talked of jobs for the large number of unemployed youths of the state of West Bengal and made claims of a boost to development in the area. According to the version propagated by the party, the region would have become an industrial belt and would have attracted further investments and jobs to the state. The main opposition party, the TMC, maintains however that they are opposed not to industrialization per se but poorly planned projects carried out with inhuman methods.
The situation came to a head when the MP from nearby Haldia took a pro-active role in the project. The Haldia Development Authority under him issued a notice for land acquisition. Several supporters of both the CPI(M) and the BUPC were violently attacked by opponents with their houses vandalised. Both sides amassed huge quantities of arms and several clashes resulted in incidents allegedly of arson, murder and rape. However, the BUPC got the upper hand owing to its commanding greater public support and allegedly supported by Maoists, did not allow police and CPI(M) cadre to enter for over 3 months by digging up roads.
When the ruling party sought to reestablish its previous domination, it mobilised the administration in the name of removing blockades and restoring "normalcy". On the night of March 14, 2007, the party's cadre allegedly bolstered by hired hardened criminals from the state and outside, conducted a joint operation with the state police. They unleashed a reign of terror, killing at least 14 people (the officially admitted number, very likely a gross underestimate), maiming many more and allegedly committing numerous infanticides and rapes. There were allegations of removal of evidence in the form of dead bodies and injured persons.
Several writers, artists, poets and academicians took a strong position against the police firing which in turn brought significant international attention.
However, there has been some division among the intelligentsia in Bengal. While Mahasweta Devi, Aparna Sen, Saonli Mitra, Suvaprasanna,Joy Goswami, Kabir Suman, Bratya Basu along with noted envioronment activist Medha Patkar condemned the government; Soumitra Chatterjee , Nirendranath Chakraborty, Tarun Majumdar defended the Chief Minister on development issue. Just after the bloodbath of Nandigram on 14 March, pro-government intellectuals have spoken in favour of the Chief Minister which includes the novelists Buddhadeb Guha and Debesh Roy, the litterateur Amitava Chaudhuri, the poet Mallika Sengupta, the actors Dilip Roy, Sabyasachi Chakraborty, andUsha Ganguly, the singers Amar Pal, Shuvendu Maiti, Utpalendu Chaudhuri, and Indranil Sen, the sarod exponent Buddhadev Dasgupta, the historian Aniruddha Roy, the football luminary P K Banerjee, the noted architect Sailapati Guha, the scientist Saroj Ghosh, and the poetNirendranath Chakraborti who presided over a gathering at Science City Auditorium, kolkata. However, noted Leftist intellectuals such as Sumit & Tanika Sarkar, Praful Bidwai & Sankha Ghosh refused to buy the argument in favour of development & remained critical of the government.
As a direct aftermath of the West Bengal government's Special Economic Zone policy, in the panchayat elections of May 2008, CPI(M) and its left front allies were defeated in Nandigram and adjoining areas by the Trinamool Congress-SUCI alliance. The Trinamool Congress-SUCI alliance and the Congress wrested the Zilla Parishads from the CPI-M in three districts of the 16 districts of West Bengal out of the hands of CPI(M) after about 30 years.
In March 2001, Nandigram II Block of Medinipur District claimed to have achieved full toilet coverage in the entire block.
| ||This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page. (July 2008)|
There is no rail connection directly to Nandigram, and road ways are ill-developed. Buses, jitney trekkers and van rickshaws are the primary public vehicles inside the villages.
Nearest Railway station - Mograjpur connected from Digha - Tamluk. Nearest busy bus stop - Chandipur (Math). 5-7 direct busses are available from Howrah station while other direct busses ply from Digha, Haldia, Geonkhali, Mecheda. Tekkers at half an hour interval are available from (Math) Chandipur.
Nandigram is connected by ferry with Haldia (which has been currently irregularised by Haldia Municipality). This ferry service is an important mode of transport for farmers and small traders of Nandigram, who uses this service to reach Haldia market for selling their commodities. Haldia Municipality runs this ferry service.
Within the village, houses are not very close to each other so one has to walk for many a mile as van rikshaws are incapable of travelling on the small mud roads (aal path).
The area has a college - Nandigram College affiliated to Vidyasagar University, and there are several schools namely - Nandigram BMT Siksha Niketan, Nandigram Girls' High School, Asadtala Banamali Sikshaniketan, Ryapara Girls' High School, Khodam Bari Higher Secondary School, Hanschara High School, Muradpur Sikshaniketan.
- ^ Haldia Development Authority
- ^ The Telegraph - Calcutta : Frontpage Story on Nandigram
- ^ "Trinamool wins Nandigram bypoll". Press Trust of India.
- ^ "Nandigram says 'No!' to Dow's chemical hub"
- ^ Nandigram people's struggle "heroic" : Clark
- ^ http://pd.cpim.org/2007/0429/04292007_bengal-2.htm
- ^ http://www.thestatesman.net/page.arcview.php?clid=1&id=231689&usrsess=1 Cracks in Red Citadel
- ^ The Hindu 11 May 2003
- ^ Subhendu Ray and Kanchan Chakraborty (2007-05-07). "Without the ferry, Nandigram remains cut off". Indian Express. Retrieved 2008-10-27.
- Left Articles on Nandigram
- Nandigram Documentary by Medical Service Centre
- Nandigram Gets Solace from Buddhadeb
- Frontline story on Rural Resistance, October 2006
- Nandigram Another good archive at Counterviews
- Regularly updated (and archived) news about Nandigram