The organizations—Rashtriya Kisan Union and Kisan Mazdoor Sangathan from Uttar Pradesh, Kisan Jagriti Manch and Bhartiya Kisan Union from Haryana and Khet Bachao Jeewan Bachao Sangharsh Samiti from Bihar were called as witnesses before the panel to express their views on the issue.
The Joint Committee of Parliament on land acquisition bill, headed by S S Ahulwaia met for the third day today to hear the views of the stakeholders.
Sources said that farmers’ representatives, including those hailing from Bhatta Parsaul from where Rahul Gandhi had begun his agitation against forcible acquisition of farmers’ land in 2011, voiced their strong reservations to a number of provisions of the Ordinance and questioned the rationale behind replacing the 2013 land law.
The Committee decided to send a questionnaire related to the provisions of the ordinance to the witnesses so that they can give their views on all the relevant points concerning the bill when the committee meets again on Monday.
When some members of the ruling party interrupted and tried to reason with the farmers about the need for the bill, Opposition members objected saying the farmers should be allowed to express their views openly.
At this, Ahluwalia told the BJP MPs not to interrupt saying the representatives of farmers bodies have been called as the panel wants to hear them out thoroughly.
Interestingly one of the farmers’representatives wanted to conclude his submission with some lines from a ghazal of singer Jagjeet Singh but was cut short.
The farmer leaders said that any amendment or change in section 24 (2)of the Act will cause great loss to the farmers, whose land have been acquired under the old Act of 1894 and they have not accepted any compensation till date.
They said that if there is an amendment in section-24 (2) of 2013 land law, those farmers will be forced to accept compensation as the 1894 Act.
The leaders also said that the committee should recommend that no change should be made in the retrospective clause under section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Rejecting the government’s claim that procedural difficulties in the acquisition of lands required for important national projects was required to be mitigated and hence changes were required, they also also said that the attempts to seek exemption from consent and social impact assessment in five categories is “alarming”.
PTI