Recently, Steel Authority of India Ltd. (now referred to as SAIL) issued a notice for evacuating 19 villages in Bokaro as they live on unused land acquired by SAIL. After the issuance of the notice above, the issue of displaced persons in Bokaro once again drew the attention of numerous local political leaders and organisations speaking to rehabilitate displaced persons.
Fifty years have passed since the acquisition of land for the establishment of the Bokaro Steel Plant, but to date, the issue of displaced persons in the district of Bokaro has not been resolved. Nineteen villages of displaced persons in Bokaro district are still waiting to get basic amenities of life like clean water and electricity. Although they are entitled to vote in the assembly and general elections but, they are not entitled to vote in Panchayat or Municipal elections because these 19 villages do not come under the authority of either Panchayat or Municipal corporation and that is why they are not getting the benefit of various Welfare Schemes like Pradhan Mantri Gramin Awaas Yojana and Har Ghar Jal Yojana of the Modi Government.
Many landowners whose land was acquired 50 years back have still did not get compensation. SAIL has not still completely implemented plans and schemes for the acquired land. The People of these 19 villages is still waiting to get rehabilitated. Whilst explaining the difference between compensation and Rehabilitation in land acquisition, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Narmada Bachao Andolan vs State of M.P. AIR 2011 SC 1989 explained the scope of Rehabilitation in the following words:
“Rehabilitation, on the other hand, is the restoration of the status of something lost, displaced, or even otherwise a grant to secure a dignified mode of life for a person who has nothing to sustain himself.
This concept, as against compensation and property under Article 300-A, brings within its fold the presence of the elements of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Those needy have to be assured a permanent source of basic livelihood to sustain themselves. This becomes necessary for the State when it relates to the Rehabilitation of the already depressed classes like Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and marginal farmers to meet the requirements of social justice.”
In the absence of a rehabilitation plan, there has been a continuous violation of the fundamental rights of these displaced persons for more than fifty years; even though Rehabilitation is the responsibility of the State Government, no markable steps have been taken by either the Bihar Government before 2000 or the Jharkhand Government since its formation. Former Chief Minister Raghubar Das said displaced families have had a major role in the betterment of the State in 2018.
Fundamentals rights of these persons guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India are continuously violated by the incumbent State Government of Jharkhand.
On 27.07.2021, an organisation of people who had given land to Bokaro Steel Plant to set up its unit wrote to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to save the township from encroachments. The organisation’s members, Bokaro Visthapith Rayyat Sangh, have argued that they gave up their land to the Bokaro Steel Plant, not for settlers to move in. They further alleged that Bokaro Steel Plant is neither utilising the empty land nor saving it from encroaching.
As far as the law on the return of unused land is concerned, it has been envisaged under sub-section (2) of section 24 of THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 which reads as follows:
“(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act.”
Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Indore Development Authority vs Manohar Lal Sharma, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 316 whilst giving elaborate explanation to the provisions under section 24 of the 2013 Act held that the word ‘or’ used in Section 24(2) between possession and compensation should be read as conjunctive. The Honourable Court laid down the principle in the following words:
“The word ‘or’ used in Section 24(2) between possession and compensation has to be read as ‘nor’ or as ‘and’. The deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 takes place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to commencement of the said Act, the possession of land has not been taken nor compensation has been paid. In other words, in case possession has been taken, compensation has not been paid then there is no lapse. Similarly, if compensation has been paid, possession has not been taken then there is no lapse.”
In this case, the Honourable Supreme Court further held that the expression ‘paid’ in the main part of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 does not include a deposit of compensation in court. The Hon’ble Court held as follows:
“In case a person has been tendered the compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of the Act of 1894, it is not open to him to claim that acquisition has lapsed under Section 24(2) due to non-payment or non-deposit of compensation in court. The obligation to pay is complete by tendering the amount under Section 31(1). Land owners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013.”
As per the Supreme Court Judgement in the case of Indore Development Authority vs Manohar Lal Sharma, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 316, old acquisition proceedings do not lapse merely because of lack of physical possessions. For the lapse of the acquisitions proceedings under the old Act and the return of unused land, two things need to be proved:
- the concerned authority has not taken Physical Possession; and
- The authority has not tendered compensation amounts.
As per the law, it is practically impossible for the displaced persons to get unused land from the Bokaro Steel Plant. So, their only option is to get rehabilitated on some other land. Further, it shall be the responsibility of the Government of the State of Jharkhand to make plans and schemes for their Rehabilitation instead of demanding the return of unused land from the Bokaro Steel Plant.
Rehabilitation of such displaced persons includes the following steps by the state government:
- Appropriate quantity of land in the empty areas in the city to rehabilitate the displaced;
- One job for each family of displaced in Bokaro Steel Plant;
- Implementation of welfare schemes in their areas;
- Providing basic amenities of life like clean water and electricity in villages Etc.
Since SAIL has acquired this land, it is imminent that SAIL will take possession of it shortly, and recently, SAIL has issued notice to evacuate these 19 villages. If SAIL forcibly removes these persons without being rehabilitated, it will make people displaced in their homeland. So, the onus is upon State Government to make plans and schemes for rehabilitating these displaced persons in a time-bound manner. The incumbent JMM Government failed to initiate plans and schemes for the Rehabilitation.
If the BJP Comes to power, the Government must prioritise the schemes for the Rehabilitation in Jharkhand.
Comments