The Supreme Court on Monday reprimanded the Karnataka government for challenging a high court ruling that enhanced compensation rates for farmers whose lands were acquired for the Hipparagi irrigation project. The court dismissed the state’s appeal, emphasizing that the government must ensure the survival of its distressed farming community, where thousands of farmers die by suicide each year.
The case involved land acquisition in 2005 for the Hipparagi project, with the Special Land Acquisition Officer initially offering compensation of Rs 59,000 per acre for irrigated land and Rs 24,557 per acre for dry land. However, in 2009, a reference court increased the compensation to Rs 1.7 lakh per acre. Despite an appeal being pending before the Karnataka High Court, the irrigation department decided to settle pending cases by offering Rs 3.69 lakh per acre, escalating 5% annually. In March 2021, the High Court further enhanced the compensation to Rs 5 lakh per acre, extending it to all farmers whose lands were acquired for the project.
SC Rebukes State for Delay in Compensation
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan criticized the Karnataka government’s delay in providing fair compensation, despite its appeal against the High Court’s order. “You acquire their lands but are not ready to pay them a fair compensation. The farmers are a distressed lot,” the bench observed. The court also suggested that if the state was unwilling to pay the enhanced compensation, it could consider returning the lands to the farmers under its eminent domain powers.
The court’s concern was underlined by the alarming statistics from the state’s revenue department, which reported 1,216 farmer suicides between April 1, 2023, and August 4, 2024. Between 2013 and 2022, the state saw 8,245 farmer suicides, with districts like Belagavi, Haveri, and Dharwad being the worst affected. Drought, crop damage, and mounting debt were cited as key factors contributing to the distress.
State’s Argument on Delay Rejected by Court
The state had argued that the High Court erred in condoning an 11-year delay in filing a petition for enhanced compensation and contended that the farmers had already received compensation as per the reference court’s ruling. It claimed that the entitlement to further enhanced compensation would place an undue financial burden on the project and set a precedent for perpetual litigation. However, the Supreme Court dismissed these arguments, stressing that the farmers’ suffering should not be compounded by legal delays or financial constraints.
In its judgment, the court underscored the need for timely and adequate compensation to help alleviate the hardships faced by farmers, reiterating the state’s duty to support its most vulnerable citizens.
