ABSTRACT

Coerciveness built in the process of compulsory acquisition (CA) induces a perception of unfairness among the affected landowners and may alleviate with fair compensation and due process. This research focuses on the latter and aims to identify issues of unfairness perceived by the affected landowners using six criteria of procedural fairness from the legal literature including ethicality, representativeness, bias-suppression, accuracy, correctability and consistency. While procedural unfairness is a concern in many geographies (see for Scotland), this research adopts a case-study approach given the geographical specificity of CA laws and examines Indian process for its relatively recent modification under the newly enacted CA act of 2013. The paper undertakes a qualitative content analysis of court case reports on the Bangalore–Mysore Infrastructure Corridor project and interview transcripts of forty-seven landowners whose land was acquired using Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act of 1966 (a precursor to the new act). This research argues that fixing following issues is crucial to improving the landowners’ perception of fairness: ethical behaviour by the acquirers; representativeness of the affected landowners; quality information throughout the process; accountability of acquirers; neutral review of objections; unbiased assessment of compensation; and inexpensive conflict resolutions.

摘要

在强制征用 (CA) 过程中建立的强制性会在受影响的土地所有者中引起一种不公平的感觉，并且可以通过公平补偿和正当程序来缓解。本研究侧重于后者，旨在使用法律文献中的六个程序公平标准，包括道德性、代表性、偏见抑制、准确性、可纠正性和一致性，确定受影响土地所有者所感知的不公平问题。虽然程序不公平在许多地区都是一个问题（参见苏格兰），但鉴于加利福尼亚州法律的地理特殊性，本研究采用案例研究方法，并根据新颁布的 2013 年加利福尼亚州法案检查了印度相对较新的修改程序。该论文对班加罗尔-迈索尔基础设施走廊项目的法庭案例报告以及根据 1966 年卡纳塔克邦工业区发展法案（新法案的前身）获得土地的 47 名土地所有者的采访记录进行了定性内容分析。本研究认为，解决以下问题对于提高土地所有者对公平的看法至关重要：收购方的道德行为；受影响土地所有者的代表性；整个过程的质量信息；收购方的责任；对异议的中立审查；公正的薪酬评估；和廉价的冲突解决方案。本研究认为，解决以下问题对于提高土地所有者对公平的看法至关重要：收购方的道德行为；受影响土地所有者的代表性；整个过程的质量信息；收购方的责任；对异议的中立审查；公正的薪酬评估；和廉价的冲突解决方案。本研究认为，解决以下问题对于提高土地所有者对公平的看法至关重要：收购方的道德行为；受影响土地所有者的代表性；整个过程的质量信息；收购方的责任；对异议的中立审查；公正的薪酬评估；和廉价的冲突解决方案。