Land Pooling Policy put on hold: Punjab Advocate-General assures no action till August 7

Just about a week after Punjab’s Land Pooling Policy came under the judicial scanner, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday questioned the state on the provision for rehabilitation of landless labourers and others dependent on land for their sustenance. The state was also directed to inform the court whether an environmental impact assessment had been carried out before notifying the policy.

The queries came as state Advocate-General Maninderjit Singh stated before the Bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Deepak Manchanda that the policy would be kept on hold and no further steps would be taken till August 7 — the next date of hearing.

At the outset, Maninderjit Singh sought time to inform the court whether a social impact assessment was also conducted prior to the policy’s notification, and to respond to the arguments raised by the petitioner.

Taking note of the submissions, the Bench observed that the Supreme Court in the case of “Resident’s Welfare Association and another versus the Union Territory of Chandigarh” had held that an environmental impact assessment study was required before permitting urban development. Senior advocate Shailendra Jain was assisting the court as amicus curiae.

Before parting with the order, the Bench directed: “Advocate-General, Punjab, shall also inform this court as to whether there is any provision in the policy, for rehabilitation of the landless labourers and others, who do not own any land but are dependent on the land for their sustenance.”

Among other things, petitioner Gurdeep Singh Gill had earlier contended that the policy was an act of colourable legislation, allegedly framed under a Central law that contained no enabling provision for such a scheme. His counsel Gurjeet Singh Gill, Manan Kheterpal, and Rajat Verma also sought directions for quashing the notification and the policy as ultra vires, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 read with Article 300-A of the Constitution.

A writ of prohibition was also sought to restrain the state from proceeding further under the policy, along with a direction to act strictly under the provisions of the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act (LARR) if acquisition was to be undertaken.

They argued that the policy — issued vide notification dated June 4 — had no statutory backing under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act). The plea asserted that the LARR Act did not empower the state to frame any such pooling policy and that the only applicable legislation for such a scheme was the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995.

By bypassing the framework of the 1995 Act and invoking the LARR for the policy, it was contended, the State had resorted to colourable legislation. It was further argued that no social impact assessment report was prepared or published, nor were any gram panchayats or gram sabhas consulted, as mandated under the LARR Act. “The respondents have acted in patent disregard to mandatory provisions of Sections 4 to 6 and 10 of the LARR, 2013,” the plea stated.