Two judicial powerhouses — the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) — came close to clashing over judicial procedure. However, quiet negotiations brought peace.
ET spoke to those familiar with the chief justice's approach on the matter, many senior lawyers and some former Supreme Court justices for this report. Some spoke on the condition that they not be identified.
The origins of the differences between the bench and the bar were in determining the proper procedure on the matter of seeking adjournments and listing of cases. Chief Justice HL Dattu has been keen to reduce case backlog, specifically, mark it down from 61,000 currently to 50,000 by May, people familiar with his thinking told ET.
To that end, CJI Dattu, who demits office in December, had taken the view some time back that cases are best not deferred and had been asking lawyers to prepare accordingly, court officials said. Also, the time between listing a case and hearing it was reduced. Conventionally, cases are listed weeks before the actual hearing.
The land Bill, which seeks to amend the land acquisition Act of 2013, has faced severe criticism from opposition parties and activists. While passing the Bill in the Lok Sabha, the NDA government had introduced nine amendments to get opposition parties on board, but it has failed to do so. A few days ago, 14 parties marched to the Rashtrapati Bhavan, led by Sonia Gandhi, in protest against the bill.
Modi in his radio address said the amendments were made in consultation with state governments and they were free to further amend the law. Further, the PM argued, the NDA's version of the Bill ensured higher compensation for farmers for a wider range of acquisitions not covered in the 2013 bill.
The Bill passed in 2013 stipulated higher compensation for farmers besides mandating consent of a majority of land losers (ranging from 70-80%) for the acquisition of land. Further a social impact assessment (SIA) has to be carried out to determine the impact on the livelihood of those losing land. However, land acquisition under 13 Acts of Parliament were exempted from the law, as these had their own procedures.
Under the NDA's version of the law, those losing land under the 13 Acts -- dealing with atomic energy, highways and metro railways among others -- were entitled to the higher compensation stipulated under the 2013 Act, though the consent and the SIA provisions would not apply. "If we hadn't approved this amendment, then the farmer would have continued losing land to projects with low compensation," he said. The PM said acquisitions under the 13 central Acts accounted for a majority of state takeover of land.
TIME FRAME FOR PROJECTS
Modi also pointed out that the law would stipulate a time frame for projects for which land had been acquired to be completed, in response to the criticism that the NDA's version of the law had done away with a provision that land would be returned if a project was not completed in five years. "It is a lie that you cannot go to the courts against any case of land acquisition," he said, adding that the law would reduce the red tape in the buying of land.
Modi also dealt with the heart of the case against the Bill, that it had widened the areas exempt from the consent and SIA clauses.
The newly exempted sectors include public-private-partnership (PPP) projects and industrial corridors. Modi said PPP project were finally public projects.
"We have only said that in such cases, there is no need for consent," he said, adding that public projects were always undertaken with people's good in mind. The PM said suggestions made by farmers have been incorporated in the new Bill and that if someone still felt some changes are required, the government is willing to take up suggestions.
"Do we want our children to live in the slums of Delhi and Mumbai?... These industrial corridors will be owned by the government and will provide employment," he said.
OPPOSITION HITS OUT
But the Opposition was not impressed. Congress leader Manish Tiwari said, "It seemed like crony capitalists through the PM were telling poor farmers of the country that land will no longer be acquired in acres but in kms. The government has changed the rules of the game. Land is no longer acquired in acres."
Tiwari said Modi's radio address was a masterful exercise in chicanery and subterfuge to put a pro-farmer spin around an ordinance that is clearly against farmers. Activists who had protested against the land Bill also said the government needs to do much more than providing verbal assurances to farmers.
PV Rajagopal of Ekta Parishad who has been campaigning against the amendments for many months said the government needs to first take note of people who have been displaced due to land acquisition in the past many months. "Also, unless the government makes the process of acquiring land transparent, how can one know how much the corporates have benefited at the cost of farmers. The PM should also introduce a white paper where we are told how much land is being put to public use and how much is going to corporates and at what price."
Dinesh D Kulkarni of Bharatiya Kisan Sangh, a sangh affiliate organisation that had earlier opposed the amendments, however, said the PM's assurance to the farmers was timely and showed good intent. "We are largely happy with the changes that were introduced to the Bill after we met some ministers of the government. What are industrial corridors have been defined now and conditions of land being given to hospitals have also been explained."
"The only concern we have now that states might have more power over lease of land. We hope the Centre has a say over that too. The farmers cannot be left to the mercy of the state governments."
Copyright © 2015 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment