Will land pooling plan in Vizag succeed?

The YSR Congress party government’s decision to go in for land pooling in Visakhapatnam for providing house sites for the weaker sections housing scheme is running into controversy.

The government is planning to acquire 6,116 acres of land under land pooling scheme at Sabbavaram, Pendurti, Gajuwaka, Paravada, Padmanabham, Bhimunipatnam, Anandapuram, Pedagantyada, Visakha rural and Anakapalli zones.

The government proposes to acquire land from the owners and distribute them among the poor. In return, the land owners are being offered developed plots at the rate of 900 square yards per acre. The land pooling is applicable both to patta and assigned lands.

Naturally, the opposition parties are criticising the government’s decision. They are reminding how the YSRC had described the previous Telugu Desam Party government’s land pooling scheme for the capital city in Amaravati and dubbed it as a “real estate activity.” Readmore!

According to a senior journalist, there is a big difference between the land pooling in Amaravati and that in Visakhapatnam.

The farmers in Amaravati gave away their lands for the land pooling and accepted one-fourth of their lands in the form of plots, hoping that their land values will go up once the capital city comes up.

As expected, the value of their plots started shooting up as the capital works gained momentum. But when the Jagan Mohan Reddy government stalled all the works in Amaravati, their plot values started crashing.

“In Visakhapatnam, the government wants to acquire the land from farmers under land pooling for weaker section houses. If the farmers are given the plots along with housing for the poor, they would be the biggest losers, as they would not get the expected returns from the plots. And nobody would come forward, unless they are given the plots in the commercial areas,” the journalist said.

However, these farmers cannot do anything, if the government acquires their lands under Land Acquisition Act. But it will cost a bomb for the government, as it would have to pay heavy monetary compensation to the farmers.