Manesar land case: farmers to file claim for compensation with admin soon
The decision was taken at a panchayat held in Manesar to discuss the farmers’ collective course of action after the Supreme Court upheld the 2004 land acquisition notification on Mondaygurgaon Updated: Mar 15, 2018 22:53 IST
Around 300 land owners from the villages of Manesar, Nakhrola and Naurangpur, who were affected by land acquisition process between 2004 and 2007 against a state government notification that was later repealed, decided to file claim for compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act on Thursday.
The decision was taken at a panchayat held in Manesar to discuss the farmers’ collective course of action after the Supreme Court upheld the 2004 land acquisition notification on Monday.
The apex court’s decision came nearly five years after land owners of the three villages moved the Punjab and Haryana high court demanding cancellation of the land acquisition or adequate compensation against the land acquired.
The high court, however, rejected their plea and the land owners later moved Supreme Court, which found merit in their claim and gave a landmark judgment on March 12, 2018, stating that government and its functionaries played a crucial role in diverting 688 acres to private developers.
Omprakash, one the main complainants, said, “We will file our petition with the land acquisition officer in Gurgaon to claim our compensation in a day or two. The district administration will be responsible for disbursement of our claim as per the direction of the Supreme Court. The panchayat will wait and watch every movement of the state government.”
The judgment states that 688 acres is now deemed to have been acquired by the Haryana urban development authority (Huda) and the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (HSIIDC). The two authorities are also responsible for settling all claims for alternate plots or compensation by land owners/homebuyers within the next two months.
“The state government will decide which of the two departments will decide the mechanism of compensation disbursement. We are in touch with our legal consultant to file claims with the administration. Hopefully, this will be done by Monday,” said Naresh Yadav, another complainant and farmer.
The government sent acquisition notice in 2004 and quashed it in August 2007 and later the government set up a committee to decide whether the parcel of 688 acres needed to be acquired or not.
“It was the government’s intention to divert land to different builders by releasing the land (by cancelling acquisition notification). In January 2010, a report by the committee constituted by the BS Hooda-led state government said the government did not need to acquire land (for setting up an industrial township),” said Ranvir Yadav, advocate in the matter. He confirmed that farmers will soon file a petition for compensation with the administration.