Cabinet Secretary: No Plan to Change Land Acquisition Law Despite Project Delays
Land acquisition issues plague 35% of major projects, yet no law change is planned.
Photo by Satish Dharmavarapu
India's Cabinet Secretary, Rajiv Gauba, has stated there are no immediate plans to amend the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, despite 35% of major infrastructure projects facing delays due to land acquisition challenges. This is a surprising revelation, given the persistent issues. The government is instead focusing on better implementation of the existing law and improving coordination between central and state agencies.
The Project Monitoring Group (PMG) portal, which tracks projects over ₹500 crore, shows that land acquisition and environmental clearances are the primary hurdles. This impacts crucial sectors like railways, roads, and power, directly affecting India's economic growth and development targets.
Key Facts
35% of big projects face land acquisition issues
UPSC Exam Angles
Provisions and implications of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013
Constitutional aspects of land acquisition and Right to Property (Article 300A)
Challenges in infrastructure development and their impact on economic growth
Role of central and state governments in project implementation and federal cooperation
Government initiatives for project monitoring and ease of doing business (e.g., PMG, Gati Shakti)
Environmental clearances and their interplay with land acquisition
Visual Insights
Key Statistics: Infrastructure Project Delays & Government Stance (2026)
Highlights critical figures related to infrastructure project delays in India and the government's current approach to the Land Acquisition Act.
- Major Projects Delayed by Land Acquisition
- 35%
- Project Monitoring Group (PMG) Threshold
- ₹500 Crore
- Cabinet Secretary's Stance on LARR Act, 2013
- No Immediate Change
A significant proportion of major infrastructure projects (over ₹500 crore) face delays primarily due to land acquisition challenges, impacting economic growth.
Minimum investment value for projects tracked by the PMG portal, indicating the scale of projects under scrutiny for bottleneck resolution.
Despite persistent delays, the government is prioritizing better implementation and coordination over amending the existing Land Acquisition Act.
More Information
Background
Latest Developments
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. With reference to the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act), consider the following statements: 1. The Act mandates a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) for all land acquisitions, irrespective of the purpose. 2. Consent of 80% of affected families is required for land acquisition for private companies or public-private partnership projects. 3. The 'urgency clause' under the Act can be invoked only for national security or natural calamity projects, bypassing the SIA requirement. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: B
Statement 1 is incorrect. While SIA is generally mandated, the Act provides for exemptions in certain cases, such as for minor irrigation projects or projects notified by the government. Statement 2 is correct. The Act requires the consent of 80% of affected families for land acquisition for private companies and 70% for public-private partnership projects. Statement 3 is incorrect. While the urgency clause can be invoked for national security or natural calamities, it does not completely bypass the SIA requirement; rather, it allows for a post-facto SIA or a modified process, and compensation must still be paid. The urgency clause can also be invoked for other critical projects, not just national security or natural calamity, but with higher compensation.
2. In the context of land acquisition in India, which of the following statements correctly describes the constitutional position of the 'Right to Property'?
- A.It is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution.
- B.It was removed from the list of fundamental rights by the 42nd Amendment Act and made a legal right.
- C.It is a legal right under Article 300A, which ensures that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law.
- D.The state cannot acquire private property for public purpose without the consent of the owner, as per Article 300A.
Show Answer
Answer: C
Statement A is incorrect. The Right to Property was originally a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31. Statement B is incorrect. It was removed from the list of fundamental rights by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, not the 42nd Amendment. Statement C is correct. After the 44th Amendment, it was moved to Article 300A in Part XII of the Constitution, making it a legal right, which means a person can be deprived of property only by a valid law. Statement D is incorrect. While Article 300A requires 'authority of law' for deprivation, it does not mandate the owner's consent for acquisition for public purpose, as long as the acquisition is done through a valid law (like the RFCTLARR Act) and provides for compensation.
3. Consider the following statements regarding the Project Monitoring Group (PMG) portal: 1. It is an institutional mechanism under the Cabinet Secretariat to fast-track projects with investments above ₹500 crore. 2. It primarily focuses on resolving issues related to land acquisition, environmental clearances, and other infrastructure bottlenecks. 3. The PMG portal is part of the broader 'PM Gati Shakti National Master Plan' for integrated infrastructure development. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: A
Statement 1 is correct. The PMG was set up under the Cabinet Secretariat (initially under the Prime Minister's Office) to monitor and fast-track projects above ₹500 crore. Statement 2 is correct. The news explicitly mentions land acquisition and environmental clearances as primary hurdles tracked by the PMG. Statement 3 is incorrect. While the PMG's objectives align with the 'PM Gati Shakti National Master Plan' (which aims for integrated planning and synchronized implementation of infrastructure projects), the PMG portal itself is not 'part of' Gati Shakti in the sense of being a component or sub-scheme of it. PMG existed before Gati Shakti and serves a similar but distinct function of grievance redressal for stalled projects, whereas Gati Shakti is a comprehensive digital platform for planning and execution. They are complementary but distinct initiatives.