Land Acquisition OR Life Acquisition

Public Interest is above individual interest. On the basis of this land acquisition is done for public interest, like construction of road, rail links, public utilities, etc. And in most cases agricultural land is acquired. Farmers are paid an amount which is very impractical and very low as compared to the market value.
First the acquisition of land for Public Interest is questionable. Is it really for public interest, because interest and profit of a private company cannot be public interest. Providing land to companies to set up factories at very low rates cannot be justified as public interest. When the landowners are given only a bit of what they own, in the name of development. Japan is far more developed than India, but in Japan there is more practical law for land acquisition than India. Japanese government not only provide "full compensation" rather than "just compensation" but also loss due to acquisition and expense of moving to the new place.

This PDF tells more about the Japanese compensation law.
http://www.hosyoukikou.jp/zisyukenkyu/CONTENTS/CompensationSystemOfJapan.pdf


The idea to move a farmer from his land and giving him some money cannot be understood, it is like telling Sachin Tendulkar to play Hockey instead of Cricket. A farmer is skilled in farming and that needs land as a primary resource. How some amount of money can replace the land? Farmer cannot cultivate crops on govt designed coloured paper [Money]. A farmer needs land to cultivate crops.
Firstly, Land should be provided to farmer for land. Secondly, the cost of land must be decided according to market price. Thirdly, the compensation should also include the loss in terms of money for the transfer of landowners, business, residence, agriculture, etc.

Land acquisition cannot be done in a way that feels like we are under British control.
Long Live Democracy.