Farmers stake claim to Raisina Hill

Demand right on land acquired by the British when they shifted the Capital from Calcutta to Delhi

Flanked by Rashtrapati Bhavan, India Gate, Supreme Court and Delhi High Court, Raisina Hill is the seat of the Indian government.

Back in 1912, the area was Raisina village. The British government, which decided to shift the Capital from Calcutta — present day Kolkata — to Delhi, acquired land from about 300 families, mostly farmers, who lived here.

Now, 105 years later, some farmers have moved the High Court praying that the land, which once belonged to their ancestors, be returned to them. If not, they have sought compensation as per the market rate.

Revenue records

One among these farmers is Mahavir, whose ancestor Kaalu owned 100 acres of land in Raisina village. According to revenue records, Kaalu’s son Nathu was the co-owner and the father-son duo cultivated the land themselves.

Armed with a chart to prove his descent, Mahavir said that as per revenue records, compensation was announced for both Kaalu and Nathu but was not paid. His prayer, in fact, led the High Court to remark that “if over 100 acres of land is returned, the Rashtrapati Bhavan and even the HC would go”.

Physical possession

His counsel Surat Singh told a Bench of Justices B.D. Ahmed and Ashutosh Kumar that since his ancestors were not paid compensation, the same be returned if it was vacant, or he be paid compensation. Relying on the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which was enforced January 1, 2014, onwards. According to this, where an award has been made five years or prior to the commencement of the Act itself, but physical possession of the land has not been taken by the government, or the compensation has not been paid, the acquisition proceedings shall be deemed to have been lapsed.

“We want to know if their is a time limit for bringing up such cases against the government,” the Bench said, asking if their were records to prove the petitioner’s claim. “We can understand if someone challenges an acquisition that might have taken place in the 1980s or 1970s. But, 1912, we have to see,” it said.

The petitioner also told the court that the government was building on the land illegally and creating third party interests. The counsel, meanwhile, said that when private parties like the Scindias could own a house in the area, why couldn’t a farmer own one where his predecessors lived.

Notification

It must be noted that in December 1911, the Chief Secretary of the Punjab government had issued a notification for acquiring 150 villages, including Raisina, when the Capital was being shifted from Calcutta to Delhi. Compensation had been announced for the land owned by Kaalu and Nathu, but this was not paid, said Dr. Singh.

Compensation policy

As per the policy back then, farmers were entitled to 50 per cent of the compensation. The petitioner prayed that the compensation announced in 1912 be declared lapsed. Referring to the revenue record, Dr. Singh said the then compensation amount had been deposited in the Bank of Bengal, which was merged into the State Bank of India. Some land owners claimed compensation, while a few did not. According to Mahavir, Kaalu and Nathu did not claim the compensation.