Land owners are protesting against the Haryana State Government's move to denotify land which was acquired from them for the construction of the 72km long DadupurNalvi Canal. The Government reasoned that the project, which was proposed in 1985, was unfeasible as land owners were demanding higher compensation and decided to call it off in September 2017. According to reports dated September 7, 2018, farmers have been asked to deposit the compensation received along with interest. The Haryana Government had proposed a 72 km long canal between Dadupur (Yamunanagar) and Nalvi (Kurukshetra) in 1985 to carry water that would be received from the SutlejYamuna Link canal. Around 2246.53 acres of land was acquired for the project and out of this, 1019.29 acres was set aside for the main canals. The land owners whose land was acquired from 2005 onwards were not satisfied with the compensation decided by the lower courts and approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court in 2016 ordered compensation at the rate of Rs. 116.83 lakh per acre plus incidental charges. This roughly came up to over Rs 3 crore per acre for those whose land was acquired for the project. But the Haryana Cabinet on September 27, 2017, after spending 304 crores, decided to scrap the project and return the land to farmers citing that the project was unfeasible after the increase in compensation. Congress and other opposition leaders have criticised the BJP led government for scrapping the project crucial for the state's water management and are arguing that the government asking for the return of compensation provided them them as 'injustice.' In January 2020, As their demands were not heard, farmers led a protest and tried to fill the a section of DadupurNalvi canal near Adhoya village. Speaking with Land Conflict Watch, Kulbir, former Sarpanch of Dadupur village in Yamunanagar district said that there are farmers who are awaiting compensation for land acquired in 2005. "Farmers are collectively against the de notification of the land and are fighting a legal battle awaiting for fair compensation," he said.
Demand for more compensation than promised
Protest against de-notification of acquired land
Has the Conflict Ended?
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Land Acquisition Laws
Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Section 18: Any interested person who does not accept the award may have the matter referred by the collector to a court; Sections 23 and 24: These provisions list matters that must be considered and neglected (respectively), while determining the amount of compensation; Section 31: Collector must pay interested persons in terms of the Section 11 award; Section 48: Government must compensate land owners for any damage caused by the notification of land acquisition and proceedings thereunder, in case it chooses to withdraw from the acquisition.
The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
Section 26 and 27 read with Schedule I: Calculation of market rate and determination of compensation amount to be paid; Section 28: Factors to be considered while determining compensation include cost of relocating residence or place of business; Section 31(1) read with Schedule II: R&R award for affected families; Section 77: Payment of compensation to interested persons or deposit in Authority
Kedar Nath Yadav v. State of West Bengal and Ors. (2017) 11 SCC 601 (para 47)
This is the Singur land acquisition case, where the SC quashed the acquisition proceedings for being violative of the 1894 Act. The SC also decided that farmers who had taken compensation in lieu of land did not need to return the compensation amount as they had been deprived of their lands and its fruits for 10 years.
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community? What was the decision of the concerned government department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Status of Case In Court
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
High Court of Punjab and Haryana
Regular First Appeal No. 3356 of 2010
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Whether criminal law was used against protestors
Official name of the criminal law. Did the case reach trial?
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Nature of Protest
Advocacy (for inclusion in courts), Protests/marches
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
Name, Designation and Comment of Corporate Authorities Approached
Other Parties Involved in the Conflict: