{"id":1327,"date":"2015-03-19T05:59:59","date_gmt":"2015-03-19T05:59:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/developmentdebate.in\/2015\/03\/19\/unutilised-sez-land-forcible-land\/"},"modified":"2025-07-15T08:27:14","modified_gmt":"2025-07-15T08:27:14","slug":"unutilised-sez-land-forcible-land","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/developmentdebate.in\/?p=1327","title":{"rendered":"Unutilised SEZ Land: Forcible Land Acquisition for What!"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n <\/p>\n
\u00a0Nesar Ahmad<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
As the opposition to the bill proposing amendments in the Land Acquisition
\nand Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 intensifies within and outside of the
\nParliament, the government has provided data on unutilised land acquired for
\nSEZ in 20 states of the country.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
A major argument made by the government and supporters of
\nthe corporate led growth in favour of the bill amending the Land Acquisition and
\nRehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 is unavailability of land for the industrialization.
\nThe data provided by the government in an answer to a Rajya Sbaha question
\nabout the land acquired and used for the Special Economic Zones, however, is telling
\nanother story. Sometime ago in its report on SEZ lands, CAG also found not only
\ncases of land acquired for SEZ being vacant, but also being diverted to other uses
\nlike real estate and not adhering to the conditions like generating employment.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n
Now the Modi government has also admitted to the fact in the
\nRajya Sabha that as high as 40% of the total land acquired for SEZ
\nacross 20 states of the country remains unutlised up to March 13, 2015. In a
\nwritten reply to a Rajya Sbaha question, Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman, State Minister
\nof Commerce and Industry (Independent Charge) provided following figures on the
\nunutilized land in various state of the country.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
States\/UT-wise area of notified Special
\nEconomic Zones (In hectares<\/i>)<\/span><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
(Up to
\n13.03.2015)<\/span><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
Sl. No.<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
States\/UT<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Total Area Notified<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Total Area Utilized<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Area lying Vacant in Processing Area<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Percentage of area lying Vacant <\/span><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
1<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Andhra Pradesh<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
11187.06<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
4493.96<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
2213.45<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
19.79<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
2<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Chandigarh<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
58.46<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
23.62<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
34.84<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
59.60<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
3<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Chhattisgarh<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
101.28<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
22.04<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
79.24<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
78.24<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
4<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Goa<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
249.48<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
0<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
249.48<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
100.00<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
5<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Gujarat<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
12382.83<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
6818.58<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
4795.29<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
38.73<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
6<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Haryana<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
415.49<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
36.57<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
293.69<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
70.69<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
7<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Jharkhand<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
16.42<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
0<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
16.42<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
100.00<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
8<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Karnataka<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
2302.74<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
841.83<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
1039.12<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
45.13<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
9<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Kerala<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
971.99<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
390.38<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
455.99<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
46.91<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
10<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Madhya Pradesh<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
1551.13<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
209.93<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
726.96<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
46.87<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
11<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Maharashtra<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
6579.7<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
1754.51<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
3123.52<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
47.47<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
12<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Manipur<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
10.85<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
0<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
10.85<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
100.00<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
13<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Nagaland<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
340<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
0<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
340<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
100.00<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
14<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Odisha<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
491.08<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
300.06<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
191.01<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
38.90<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
15<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Punjab<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
46.12<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
8.39<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
30.92<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
67.04<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
16<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Rajasthan<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
773.3<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
136.78<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
636.51<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
82.31<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
17<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Tamil Nadu<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
5266<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
2222.85<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
2795.01<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
53.08<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
18<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Telangana<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
2048.96<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
1957.22<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
469.51<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
22.91<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
19<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
Uttar Pradesh<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
753.92<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
219.2<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
476.77<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
63.24<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
20<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
West Bengal<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
235.84<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
190.71<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
45.13<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
19.14<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
TOTAL<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
45782.64<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
19626.63<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
18023.71<\/span><\/b><\/b><\/div>\n<\/td>\n
\n
39.37<\/span><\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
Source: Answer to a written question by Ms. Nirmala
\nSitharaman in Rajya Sabha on March 18, 2015.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
As the above table shows, in four states 100% of the SEZ land
\nacquired remains unutilized, while in seven out of 20 states 50% of the total
\nland acquired under SEZ remains unutilized. In six other states from close to 40
\n% to 50% of the total land acquired for SEZ remains unutilized.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/a>The states with 100% unutilized are Nagaland, Manipur, Goa and
\nJharkhand. Some of the states with high rate of unutilized SEZ lands include
\nChhattisgarh (78.24%), Haryana (70.69%), Rajasthan (82.31%), Uttar Pradesh
\n(63.24%),, Tamil Nadu (53.08%), Punjab (67.04%), Chandigarh (59.60%).<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Another interesting fact is more than 77% of notified SEZ
\nland is concentrated in four states \u2013 Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra and
\nTamil Nadu. These states have acquired 35,415 hectares of land out of 45,782 hectares
\nof total land acquired by the 20 states for which data is provided by the
\nMinister. What is important here is these four states are also among the states
\nwith high ratio of unutilized SEZ land. About 20% of the total SEZ land remains
\nunutilized in Andhra Pradesh; about 39% in Gujarat; 47% in Maharashtra and 53%
\nof the SEZ land in Tamil Nadu remain unutilized.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\nThe land acquired for SEZs is but a small share of the total
\nland acquired for numerous projects by the government in the name of
\ndevelopment. In fact there is no record of the total land acquired under now
\nredundant Land Acquisition Act 1894 and various other union and state
\ngovernment acts, still in effect, designed to acquire private land for public
\npurposes. How much of that land remains unutilized is also not known. According
\nto a government committee on land reforms, more than 2.1 million ha of
\nagricultural land has been transferred for non-agricultural purposes during
\n1990-2003. However, there are no details on how much of these lands are acquired
\nby the government. What is known, however,
\nis most of the acquired land belonged to poor and marginalized farmers, majority
\nof them being tribals and dalits communities. \u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
The government, therefore, must go for a country wide survey
\nof status of all the acquired land, before making law for unbridled and easy
\nand cheaper land acquisition for corporate in the name of public purpose.Photo curtsey: http:\/\/www.stockpicturesforeveryone.com\/<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n