DMK’s expediency on land acquistion in Tamil Nadu Premium

DMK faces challenges in acquiring land for infrastructural projects. It must ensure that the concerns of farmers are addressed and compensation is fair.

It is a reversal of role for the ruling DMK. The party, which had opposed the acquisition of land for infrastructural projects and expansion of roads when it was in the Opposition, finds itself in an awkward position, facing challenges and opposition from owners of lands.

The DMK opposed the Centre’s Land Acquisition Bill in 2015 and organised Statewide protests. Likewise, incumbent Chief Minister M.K. Stalin, who was the Leader of the Opposition at that time, came out strongly against the Centre for its petition in the Supreme Court seeking early hearing of an appeal challenging the Madras High Court verdict quashing the land acquisition for the Chennai-Salem expressway project. He said the Centre and the State should drop their plan of implementing the project and make a transparent announcement in this regard. He also demanded consultations with farmers and the public, and find an alternative way to implement the project without impacting the environment.

After coming to power, the DMK said it was not against the Chennai-Salem greenfield corridor project as it was projected to be. State Highway Minister E.V. Velu said the DMK was particular that the concerns raised by the farmers should be addressed first before going ahead with acquiring land for the project.

It is not just the Chennai-Salem Expressway and the acquisition of land for Parandur Airport near Chennai. The DMK has also been criticised for keeping silent over the Neyveli Lignite Corporation’s (NLC) land acquisition for expansion.

When the villagers were up in arms against the Parandur airport, the then Industries Minister Thangam Thennarasu, who held talks with them, said villagers giving their land for the project would be compensated with an amount above the current market value. He also promised that the water bodies in the region would be protected and maintained by the government, and a high-level committee would be formed to monitor the water bodies and recommend maintenance measures. However, local villagers had then questioned what use would the water bodies be when the inhabitants are displaced.

Nonetheless Mr. Thennarasu in a way echoed the views of Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen, who expressed his views on acquisition of land for industrial purposes in Singur and Nandigram in West Bengal.

Commenting on the practice of the government paying a price much higher than the value of the land in the free market, Mr. Sen had said in an interview to The Telegraph, “From that point of view, it was fair. Had there been no industry, they would have got the best value for the land. [Had the land not been taken for industry, the price they got would have been considered the best value].”