Singur Act: Where the state failed

The Calcutta High Court has scrapped the Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development Act 2011 as it goes against the Clause 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Article 254 of the Constitution, said Advocate Subhankar Sarkar of Calcutta High Court.

According to him, the State Act on a matter of concurrent list should have Presidents’ accent before implementation. Without that, it is ‘Unconstitutional and Void’.

Commenting on verdict at the Calcutta High Court, a retired IAS Aurobinda Banerjee from Chennai listed some of the major flaws in the Act. He noted:

a) The Act was running concurrent with the old 1894 act, which the centre was in the process of amending, but the process was not complete. In these circumstances the central act naturally takes precedence over state legislation. The state act again was not even signed by the President!

b) The state Act did not mention compensation, which the first High Court verdict noted and suggested two fresh insertions to set matters right. This was contrary to the High Court’s own assertion that the Act was ‘Constitutional’. Again, how could a judge suggest amendments to an official act, which is passed by elected assembly, on his own, without reference to the assembly concerned?

c) The TMC government even on Friday called for the ‘return of 400 acres’ to those unwilling. In reality, owners of only 40 acres, not 400 acres, could have been listed by the TMC leader. The Court knows this, so official claims about ensuring public interest are obvious nonsense

d) The Division bench naturally took note that the government had simply thrown out the Tata Motors forcibly, as had been done by the Left Front in its time by forcibly throwing out the farmers, in trying to re-acquisition of the land that had been officially given to the Tatas. It was implemented i) without serving a notice to the Tatas as per law and (b) making arrangements for any compensation. In other words, it was confiscation, not re-acquisition of land.

And last but not the least; the TMC government claimed that its legislation was sponsored in ‘public interest’. It cannot be ‘public interest’ if the government supports the case of a handful of ‘unwilling’ farmers, ignoring 87 percent farmers, who surrendered land and got compensation. The party now heading the government got the entire project derailed, which never happened in India before, by misleading the 13 percent farmers.