The farmers’ anger over land acquisition is legitimate. As Oliver Goldsmith says in his poem ‘The Deserted Village’: “Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey, Where wealth accumulates and men decay…”

The first-ever attempt to have a Land Acquisition Act by a government in India was in 1824 in Bengal, when it was enforced for ‘public purpose’ – laying railway tracks and building Secretariat and Defence establishments. The law was amended thrice, made all encompassing in 1870 and expanded in 1894. This Act is still prevalent, of course with 21 amendments.

In 2004, the UPA government brought in the concept of Special Economic Zone and Section 17 of this Act empowered the government to ‘take over any land without consent of the farmer or landlord for public purpose’. Many state governments, including those of Mayawati and Mulayam Singh Yadav, misused this provision. These governments sold off huge tracts of land acquired in Noida and Lucknow to private real estate agents seven years after acquisition. Fortunately, the Supreme Court struck down the deal stating it was ‘illegal acquisition of land’.

Karnataka’s story is no different as the government indulged in denotification in a hush-hush manner without bothering to define the ‘public purpose’ for which the land was being acquired.

Our farmers should not behave like Luddites – a group of early 19th century English workmen who destroyed labour-saving machinery as a protest. Instead, they should concentrate on policy inputs. One must understand from Mamata Banerjee’s case in Singur or KIADB scam in Karnataka that land should be made available to industries through open market and not through the government. The issues the farmers’ lobby should perhaps try to focus on are:

* Is the land earmarked for acquisition arable or infertile?
* Does the acquired land include pastures, forest, wasteland, dumping ground, river beds and river banks, char land, or one which the poor depend on for fuel fodder or food?
* Does the landowner have right to refuse or will he get back the land if it is not used for ‘public purpose’?
* Will the compensation really compensate for the loss of land – both permanent and annual?
* Check if the Rehabilitation and Resettlement package is being implemented.

The planning corridors in India do not echo the voice of Gandhi, Tagore, Vinoba Bhave or Pannalal Dasgupta. Industrialisation, globalisation and modernisation is the buzzword. The government of the day finds the Parliamentary Standing Committee’s recommendations on land acquisition “retrogressive”. Union ministers Anand Sharma and Jairam Ramesh both disagreed with the recommendations of the Committee, though the Land Acquisition Bill only stated that “no land should be acquired by the government for industries”.

On the other hand, farmers’ suicides are highlighted to stall land acquisition, which hampers development. Even though farmers’ suicides have not exceeded the number of housewives and self-employed persons committing suicide in this country, they makes headlines. Gheraos, rasta rokos or mobbing of events or interrupting conferences will do no good to farmers. The public policy pursued by the State government should be brought under scrutiny by experts and thinkers.

—As told to Prathima Nandakumar