Chandigarh
Dadu Majra
,
Dhanas
,
Chandigarh
Published :
Mar 2020
|
Updated :
Chandigarh Farmers Allege Land Acquisition for Urbanisation in Garb of Public Purpose
Reported by
Meenakshi Kapoor
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
110
Households affected
528
People affected
2018
Year started
7
Land area affected
110
Households affected
528
People Affected
2018
Year started
7
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Roads
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Roads
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

The finance department of Chandigarh Administration notified in November 2018 that it was in the process of acquiring 17.8 acres of land in Dhanas (5.57 acres) and Dadu Majra (12.23 acres) villages. This was to connect Dakshin Marg in Chandigarh to PR-4 road along the Chandigarh-Punjab border. The length of the proposed road is about 1.8 kilometres.
In the notification for the land acquisition, which was issued on June 11, 2018, the government shared that the Social Impact Assessment for the project had already been conducted and accordingly, 110 families had been identified whose agricultural land would be acquired. It stated that no family would be displaced.
Under the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, even if land acquisition does not involve displacement, the rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) scheme in a project must mention the impacts, details of consultations conducted and compensation. The R&R scheme for this project mentioned that the land was being acquired for ‘public purpose’ i.e. building a road and not for urbanisation.
The land acquisition was challenged in the Chandigarh high court by those who have lost their lands. The petitioners (Jaspal Singh and Others) have contended that the government is trying to implement an urbanisation project in the garb of land acquisition for public purpose to deny land losers their right to 20 per cent of the developed land in case of urbanisation, as stipulated in Schedule II of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013.
To support their case, the petitioners challenged the stated purpose of the project by highlighting that an alternate route of Dhanas-Mullanpur-Siswan connecting Punjab to Dakshin Marg in Chandīgarh is only two kilometres away from the proposed land acquisition site, so the objective of the project is urbanisation and not connectivity. A single-judge bench forwarded the petition to the chief justice suggesting that the case be heard as a public interest litigation.
The petitioners also stated that for the first time, the land acquisition was being initiated without updating the revenue record of the land in question. They claimed that the records had not been updated for ‘decades’. Updating of records before any land acquisition is a standard practice of the revenue department to inform the public about the rights of ownership over the land.
As of October 1, 2019, the Chandigarh Administration declared Dhanas and Dadu Majra as ‘Resettlement Areas’ for the R&R scheme. It calculated the compensation amount for the residents of Dhanas at the rate of INR 1.88 crore per acre and INR 1.15 crore per acre for the residents of Dadu Majra. The petitioners suspected that the Chandigarh Administration issued the policy for land acquisition through negotiation just before the acquisition to avoid paying fair compensation to the land owners as prescribed under the Land Acquisition Act. On November 20, 2019, the court issued a notice of motion on the petition.
LCW wrote to the district commissioner to get a response on the petitioners' claims, but no response was received.
In May 2020, the Chandigarh Administration announced a new compensation package of INR 74.67 crore amount under Section 26 of the LARR Act.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for more compensation than promised

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Private

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Chandigarh Administration

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Jaspal Singh

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Meenakshi Kapoor

Meenakshi is an independent researcher currently based in Himachal Pradesh. She has a Master's in Environmental Management from the Forest Research Institute. She has formerly worked with the Centre for Policy Research, Namati and Kalpavriksh on issues of environmental compliance and regulation. Her interest in the politics of regulatory action gave her the opportunity to study institutions such as the Coastal Zone Management Authorities and the ESA Monitoring Committees. She has also researched on natural resource governance and large-scale land-use change in Indonesia and Myanmar and is experienced in extensive research, writing and advocacy on the Coastal Regulation Zone law of India. Besides researching and reporting from the hills, she enjoys farming, cooking her harvest, tending to her plants and pets, reading in the sun and counting the number of hues at sunset.

Show more work
Latest updates
East Jaintia Hills
Meghalaya

Violent protest during public hearing for cement plant expansion in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills

Narela
Delhi

Residents of Narela's Bajitpur Thakran oppose demolition of temples for defence institute, demand sports complex

Surguja
Chhattisgarh

Adivasis in Chhattisgarh's Hasdeo protest relentlessly against mining project in forest

Kamrup Metropolitan
Assam

Lawyer bodies protest against Assam government’s decision to relocate Gauhati High Court

Faizabad
Uttar Pradesh

Demands for Ram Temple, Babri Mosque at same site divides Ayodhya

Mumbai
Maharashtra

Supreme Court Allows Land Reclamation for Mumbai Coastal Road Project

Pune
Maharashtra

Farmers Refuse Land for Pune Outer Ring Road Project in Maharashtra

Surat
Gujarat

Slum Dwellers in Gujarat's Surat Stage Protest against Demolition, Forced Eviction

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for more compensation than promised

Complaint against procedural violations

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us