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

Countrywide protest by gig workers puts spotlight on algorithmic exploitation

By A Representative A nationwide protest led largely by women gig and platform workers was held across several states on February 3, with the Gig & Platform Service Workers Union (GIPSWU) claiming the mobilisation as a success and a strong assertion of workers’ rights against what it described as widespread exploitation by digital platform companies. Demonstrations took place in Delhi, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Maharashtra and other states, covering major cities including New Delhi, Jaipur, Bengaluru and Mumbai, along with multiple districts across the country.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

'Gandhi Talks': Cinema that dares to be quiet, where music, image and silence speak

By Vikas Meshram In today’s digital age, where reels and short videos dominate attention spans, watching a silent film for over two hours feels almost like an act of resistance. Directed by Kishor Pandurang Belekar, “Gandhi Talks” is a bold cinematic experiment that turns silence into language and wordlessness into a powerful storytelling device. The film is not mere entertainment; it is an experience that pushes the viewer inward, compelling reflection on life, values, and society.

Budget 2026 focuses on pharma and medical tourism, overlooks public health needs: JSAI

By A Representative Jan Swasthya Abhiyan India (JSAI) has criticised the Union Budget 2026, stating that it overlooks core public health needs while prioritising the pharmaceutical industry, private healthcare, medical tourism, public-private partnerships, and exports related to AYUSH systems. In a press note issued from New Delhi, the public health network said that primary healthcare services and public health infrastructure continue to remain underfunded despite repeated policy assurances.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

The Epstein shock, global power games and India’s foreign policy dilemma

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat* The “Epstein” tsunami has jolted establishments everywhere. Politicians, bureaucrats, billionaires, celebrities, intellectuals, academics, religious gurus, and preachers—all appear to be under scrutiny, even dismantled. At first glance, it may seem like a story cutting across left, right, centre, Democrats, Republicans, socialists, capitalists—every label one can think of. Much of it, of course, is gossip, as people seek solace in the possible inclusion of names they personally dislike.

Gujarat No 1 in Govt of India pushed report? Not in labour, infrastructure, economy

By Rajiv Shah A report by a top Delhi-based think tank, National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), prepared under the direct leadership of Amitabh Kant, ex-secretary, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), Government of India, has claims that Gujarat ranks No 1 in the NCAER State Investment Potential Index (N-SIPI), though there is a dig. N-SIPI has been divided into two separate indices. The first one includes five “pillars” based on which the index has been arrived it. These pillars are: labour, infrastructure, economic conditions, political stability and governance, and perceptions of a good business climate. It is called N-SIPI 21, as it includes a survey of 21 states out of 29.

Planning failures? Mysuru’s traditional water networks decline as city expands

By Prajna Kumaraswamy, Mansee Bal Bhargava The tropical land–water-scape of India shapes every settlement through lakes, ponds, wetlands, and rivers. Mysuru (Mysore) is a city profoundly shaped by both natural and humanly constructed water systems. For generations, it has carried a collective identity tied to the seasonal rhythms of the monsoon, the life-giving presence of the Cauvery and Kabini rivers , and the intricate network of lakes and ponds that dot the cityscape. Water transcends being merely a resource; it is part of collective memory, embedded in place names, agricultural heritage, and the very land beneath our feet. In an era of rapid urbanization and climate-induced land–water transformations, understanding this profound relationship with the land–water-scape is strategic for sustainability, resilience, and even survival.

Search This Blog