Farmers to lose 40% of land in non-town planning areas under Gujarat's common construction rules: Note

By A Representative
The Gujarat government’s recent move to put into force Common Gujarat Development Control Regulation (GDCR) is all set to go controversial. If till now each city or urban area in the state had its own GDCR, the view has gone strong that, while normally anyone would welcome planned approach to development in the state, the state’s policy makers have chosen ad-hocism while coming up with Common GDCR.
Well-known civil rights activist Krishakant of the top environmental group Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti, Vadodara, who has circulated a note containing the type of objections that should be raised to Common GDCR, has said, already there are “a plethora of amendments being effected” to it, underlining, “This suggests that the government’s interest is not in the planning of spaces but the real estate value and advantage to their near ones.”
Pointing out that the Gujarat government “needs to be challenged on the way they are handling the urban spaces”, as the new Common GDCR intends to “interfere in rural areas too in a manner that can lead to chaotic development”, the note he has circulated wants objections to the Common GDCR should be sent the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Gujarat by May 25, 2018, as demanded by the government.
The note particularly raises objections to the Rule No 8.9.6 on Page 129, which talks of “contribution of land for any development in non-town-planning (TP) areas”.
Here, it says, there is a provision that “the competent authority shall enforce owners/applicants for any development in conformation with zoning or use, where the TP scheme is not declared except agriculture zone use and gamtal (village common land), competent authority … category shall enforce owners/applicant to contribute the land admeasuring up to 40% of land in … for providing roads, public purpose and multipurpose activities”.
The note says, “These Common GDCR rules are following Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act 1976. In this original Act there is no provision of contribution of land by the owners/applicant of land in non-TP areas. Yet, after 42 Years of the Act how this contribution of 40% land provision is made in published Common GDCR?”
The note alleges, “The provision shall result in a big monetary loss, because no compensation would be paid to the original farmers who possess the land near to urban areas and such provision shall be not in accordance with the natural principles of justice.”
It adds, “By incorporating such provision, the government has avoided the procedure of acquisition of land and avoided payment of compensation to the farmers. This is an absolute case of violation of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.”
The note further says, in cases where there is new tenure land, and the farmer has already paid premium to the government for change of use of land, he or she would have part with 40% of such land as contribution, “which will result in a big monitory loss to farmers.”
According to the note, “When a farmer applies for non-agricultural (NA) permission, he or she has to pay a big amount as conversion tax and other charges as scrutiny fee and development charges for taking permission from the authority.” Even here the authority would “enforce the famer to contribute 40% of such land … for the public purpose.”
“Moreover”, the note asserts, “This 40% land would be taken from each Serial No as and when required. It means, the land taken will be in fragments and will not serve the purpose of providing public amenity in a proper way.”
“So such contributed land shall not serve the very purpose for providing roads and public purpose and multipurpose activities, mentioned in this rule”, the note says, adding, “Even rule No 8.9.6 (2), (3) and (4) are absolutely hypothetical and such planning shall not be possible.”
“Thus, this provision is against the natural principle of justice, bad in law and hence should be removed from the Common GDCR”, it says.

Comments

From plagiarism to proxy exams: Galgotias and systemic failure in education

By Sandeep Pandey* Shock is being expressed at Galgotias University being found presenting a Chinese-made robotic dog and a South Korean-made soccer-playing drone as its own creations at the recently held India AI Impact Summit 2026, a global event in New Delhi. Earlier, a UGC-listed journal had published a paper from the university titled “Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis,” which became the subject of widespread ridicule. Following the robotic dog controversy coming to light, the university has withdrawn the paper. These incidents are symptoms of deeper problems afflicting the Indian education system in general. Galgotias merely bit off more than it could chew.

Covishield controversy: How India ignored a warning voice during the pandemic

Dr Amitav Banerjee, MD * It is a matter of pride for us that a person of Indian origin, presently Director of National Institute of Health, USA, is poised to take over one of the most powerful roles in public health. Professor Jay Bhattacharya, an Indian origin physician and a health economist, from Stanford University, USA, will be assuming the appointment of acting head of the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA. Bhattacharya would be leading two apex institutions in the field of public health which not only shape American health policies but act as bellwether globally.

The 'glass cliff' at Galgotias: How a university’s AI crisis became a gendered blame game

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan* “She was not aware of the technical origins of the product and in her enthusiasm of being on camera, gave factually incorrect information.” These were the words used in the official press release by Galgotias University following the controversy at the AI Impact Summit in Delhi. The statement came across as defensive, petty, and deeply insensitive.

Farewell to Saleem Samad: A life devoted to fearless journalism

By Nava Thakuria* Heartbreaking news arrived from Dhaka as the vibrant city lost one of its most active and committed citizens with the passing of journalist, author and progressive Bangladeshi national Saleem Samad. A gentleman who always had issues to discuss with anyone, anywhere and at any time, he passed away on 22 February 2026 while undergoing cancer treatment at Dhaka Medical College Hospital. He was 74.

Growth without justice: The politics of wealth and the economics of hunger

By Vikas Meshram* In modern history, few periods have displayed such a grotesque and contradictory picture of wealth as the present. On one side, a handful of individuals accumulate in a single year more wealth than the annual income of entire nations. On the other, nearly every fourth person in the world goes to bed hungry or half-fed.

From ancient wisdom to modern nationhood: The Indian story

By Syed Osman Sher South of the Himalayas lies a triangular stretch of land, spreading about 2,000 miles in each direction—a world of rare magic. It has fired the imagination of wanderers, settlers, raiders, traders, conquerors, and colonizers. They entered this country bringing with them new ethnicities, cultures, customs, religions, and languages.

Thali, COVID and academic credibility: All about the 2020 'pseudoscientific' Galgotias paper

By Jag Jivan* The first page image of the paper "Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis" published in the Journal of Molecular Pharmaceuticals and Regulatory Affairs , Vol. 2, Issue 2 (2020), has gone viral on social media in the wake of the controversy surrounding a Chinese robot presented by the Galgotias University as its original product at the just-concluded AI summit in Delhi . The resurfacing of the 2020 publication, authored by Dharmendra Kumar , Galgotias University, has reignited debate over academic standards and scientific credibility.

'Serious violation of international law': US pressure on Mexico to stop oil shipments to Cuba

By Vijay Prashad In January 2026, US President Donald Trump declared Cuba to be an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to US security—a designation that allows the United States government to use sweeping economic restrictions traditionally reserved for national security adversaries. The US blockade against Cuba began in the 1960s, right after the Cuban Revolution of 1959 but has tightened over the years. Without any mandate from the United Nations Security Council—which permits sanctions under strict conditions—the United States has operated an illegal, unilateral blockade that tries to force countries from around the world to stop doing basic commerce with Cuba. The new restrictions focus on oil. The United States government has threatened tariffs and sanctions on any country that sells or transports oil to Cuba.

Conversion laws and national identity: A Jesuit response response to the Hindutva narrative

By Rajiv Shah A recent book, " Luminous Footprints: The Christian Impact on India ", authored by two Jesuit scholars, Dr. Lancy Lobo and Dr. Denzil Fernandes , seeks to counter the current dominant narrative on Indian Christians , which equates evangelisation with conversion, and education, health and the social services provided by Christians as meant to lure -- even force -- vulnerable sections into Christianity.

Search This Blog