Class 9: Housing and Land Development Dr. M.K. Satish 06 Oct 2016

Land Acquisition Act 2013 The consent of 80 per cent of landowners concerned was needed for acquiring land for private projects and of 70 per cent landowners for public private projects The term public purpose which was left vague in the LAA 1894 was restricted to land for strategic purposes, infrastructural projects, PAFs, planned development or improvement of village or urban sites or residential purpose for weaker section and persons residing in areas affected by natural calamities or displaced Compensation was increased to four times the market value in rural areas and twice the market value in urban areas R&R package for the affected families with additional benefits to the SC/ST families

Major Issues from an Industry perspective Mandatory R&R would have huge cost implications which may result in three fold increase in the cost Requirement to seek consent of 80 per cent of affected families would considerably increase the time taken to acquire land. Industry felt that the actual time taken would be much higher than the 50 months laid out in the Act, as there are likely to be delays at each stage due to absence of timelines and implementation difficulties Lack of clarity in definition of urban and rural areas SIA would make the acquisition process extremely complex, lengthy and difficult Provision to return the acquired land, which was unutilised for five years, would hamper large infrastructure projects since they took longer periods to kick start

Major Issues from an Industry perspective Manufacturing sector was heavily dependent on the governments for acquisition and should be included in the definition of public purpose The definition of affected families,‘ who were eligible for R&R, was too broad because it included livelihood losers‘ working in the affected area for three years prior to acquisition of land and whose primary source of livelihood was affected

Land Acquisition Process under 1894 Act

Land Acquisition Process under 2013 Act

Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Bill 2015 Provisions of other laws in consonance with the LARR 2013 The Bill 2015 exemptes 13 laws (such as the National Highways Act, 1956 and the Railways Act, 1989) from its purview.  However, the LARR Act, 2013 required that the compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement provisions of these 13 laws be brought in consonance with the LARR Act, 2013 Exemption of five categories of land use from certain provisions The Bill creates five special categories of land use: (i) defence, (ii) rural infrastructure, (iii) affordable housing, (iv) industrial corridors, and (v) infrastructure projects including Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects where the government owns the land The LARR Act, 2013 requires that the consent of 80% of land owners is obtained for private projects and that the consent of 70% of land owners be obtained for PPP projects.

Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Bill 2015 Projects in the areas of i) defense and defense production ii) rural infrastructure iii) affordable housing iv) industrial corridors v) social infrastructure projects including PPPs in which ownership lies with the government, were exempted from conducting SIA and taking the consent of affected families. Definition of public purpose was widened to include private hospitals and private educational institutions The term private company was changed to private entity‘ to encompass other forms of companies like proprietorship, partnership, corporation, non profit organization, and other non governmental entities Companies Act 1956‘, which was the reference for the definition of Company‘ was replaced by Companies Act 2013‘ The period after which unutilised land had to be returned was extended to any period specified at the time of setting up the project. LARR 2013 required land, which remained unutilised for five years, to be returned to the original owners or the land bank.

Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Bill 2015 The LARR Act, 2013 requires that a Social Impact Assessment be conducted to identify affected families and calculate the social impact when land is acquired The LARR Act, 2013 imposes certain restrictions on the acquisition of irrigated multi-cropped land and other agricultural land Return of unutilised land: The LARR Act, 2013 required land acquired under it which remained unutilised for five years, to be returned to the original owners or the land bank.  The Bill states that the period after which unutilised land will need to be returned will be: (i) five years, or (ii) any period specified at the time of setting up the project, whichever is later

Magarpatta City-Pune Magarpatta City covers 430 acres of land that was owned by about 120 farmer families with 800 individuals Magarpatta Township Development and Construction Company Limited Converting their land into a value-added finished product that gave them benefits and returns Satish Magar- Leader Educational accomplishments, political connections, largest land holding and the trust that the Magar community

Case of Hyderabad HITEC City (Hyderabad Information Technology and Engineering Consultancy City)-1997 HITEC City a 65 Hectare special zone is a joint venture of Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIIC) and Larsen and Toubro Limited (L&T) Encouraged by the success of HITEC City the government of AP in 2001 declared the areas surrounding the HITEC City as a special development zone and named it as Cyberabad Incentives to IT companies- land at lower rates Higher FSI 100 percent reimbursement of stamp duty, transfer duty and registration fee on the first transaction Exemption from Urban Land Ceiling Act (minimum extent of 25 acres in the periphery and minimum of 5 acres within city limits

Case of Hyderabad Of the total of 5229 Ha of area notified under Cyberabad about 3374 Ha (65%) had already been developed Land Development Strategy- Limited Acquisition Model State has acquired land primarily for development of trunk infrastructure and nodal amenities In internal sector development the state has involved the private sector and the private developers can assemble the land in Cyberabad and develop commercial and residential sectors The state has developed the internal sector by itself wherever it owns large parcels of land Hence the internal development within sectors in Cyberabad is subject to the configuration of assembled land parcels By allowing private developers to assemble the land in Cyberabad the state has reduced its cost on land acquisition and also has given an opportunity to land owners to sell their land to private developers at market price

Land allocation and incentive disbursement process

Case of Navi Mumbai 12.5 percent scheme In 1990 CIDCO introduced the 12.5 percent scheme PAP is given back developed land which is 12.5% of the land acquired from him The plot allotted to the individual has 1.5 FSI and 15% commercial component permissible on the plot

Amaravati The core of Amaravati will be built on 33,000 acres of land owned by individual farmers between Vijayawada and Thullur along the banks of the Krishna river It will be India’s first planned capital city to come up from scratch in decades It has already become India’s largest experiment in a process known as land pooling Land Pooling Landowners voluntarily sign ownership rights over to a single agency or government body This agency develops the land by building roads and laying sewage lines and electricity connections Once this is done, it returns a smaller portion of the land to the original owners But since the plot now has more amenities, its price has probably risen to  match the market value of the owners’ original landholding

Amaravati For 1 acre the landowner gets about 0.2 acres of developed land (part would be residential and part commercial) Annual compensation of Rs 30,000 per acre for 10 years Fertile land owners get a compensation of Rs. 50,000 per acre for 10 years Land Pooling as alternative to land acquisition Land, not money is the primary medium of exchange In land pooling the farmer get some land back. By the time, market land values would have increased Process is voluntary and less cumbersome Is land pooling model working? landowners have consented to pool 31,000 acres of the 33,000 acres required for the capital area Remaining land would be through land acquisition where govt would provide the 4 times the market value for land

Thank You