Parliamentary Panel Meet on Land Law Cancelled Amid Objections to Medha Patkar, Prakash Raj’s Presence

A political controversy unfolded on Tuesday after BJP MPs boycotted a meeting of the parliamentary Standing Committee on Rural Development and Panchayati Raj.

Their protest was triggered by the presence of activist Medha Patkar and actor-turned-activist Prakash Raj, who had been invited to depose before the panel.

Meeting on Land Acquisition Cancelled

The meeting was scheduled to discuss the implementation and effectiveness of the “Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013”.

However, it was eventually cancelled due to lack of quorum after the BJP-led NDA members staged a boycott.

According to BJP MPs, the committee chairman Saptagiri Sankar Ulaka, a Congress MP from Odisha, had not informed them about the invited witnesses.

They accused him of calling “anti-nationals” and “urban Naxals” to the meeting. Ulaka, however, clarified that the names had been cleared by the Lok Sabha Speaker’s office, but the BJP members refused to listen.

Boycott Led to Lack of Quorum

Of the 29 members on the panel, only 14 were present. With eight NDA MPs walking out, the meeting could not proceed.

BJP sources also claimed that former prime minister and JD(S) leader H D Deve Gowda had joined the boycott, though Congress sources denied this.

Sources revealed that the BJP MPs were agitated upon seeing Medha Patkar and Prakash Raj present in the meeting hall. They refused to enter unless Patkar was sent back.

Patkar, known for her role in the Narmada Bachao Andolan, has been criticised by BJP leaders for opposing the Sardar Sarovar Dam project in Gujarat. Prakash Raj is known for his critical views on the BJP.

BJP MPs Question Choice of Invitees

The BJP MPs confronted Ulaka over inviting “anti-nationals”. One BJP MP reportedly remarked that if people like Patkar and Raj were invited, they might as well invite the Prime Minister of Pakistan.

Another MP expressed concern over “urban Naxals” being allowed into Parliament.

BJP MP Sanjay Jaiswal said, “We boycotted the meeting because we were kept in the dark about who was coming as witnesses. We entered and saw Medha Patkar sitting there. We should have been given the list of these people and which NGO they belong to. How could the chairman keep such information from us?”

Opposition Defends Decision to Invite Civil Society

BJP members also objected to the chairman’s rejection of their suggestion to first hear officials from the Department of Land Resources, and the ministries of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and Tribal Affairs.

BJP MP Raju Bista questioned why they should listen to someone “whose background we don’t know”, referring to Prakash Raj.

In response, Ulaka explained, “We had such meetings several times. It is a normal procedure; the agenda was set, officers from the ministries concerned and the stakeholders, including those who are working in NGOs and other civil society representatives, were invited. The Speaker’s office was informed and the list was approved.”

Congress MP Calls BJP Behaviour ‘Anarchy’

Congress MP Imran Masood criticised the BJP MPs’ conduct, calling it “anarchy”.

He stated, “If you have called someone, you should listen to them, irrespective of whether you agree with them or not. They walked out. This is anarchy. You are not following parliamentary procedure. Why can’t you listen? The BJP people didn’t want to hear about issues related to land acquisition of marginalised people.”

Broader Panel Agenda and Next Meeting

In addition to Patkar and Raj, ten other civil society representatives were also invited.

The committee, which influences policy discussions but whose recommendations are not legally binding, has previously discussed topics such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), Rashtriya Gram Swaraj Abhiyan, and Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana.

A source familiar with the matter said, “When the proceedings were about to begin, some members objected to the presence of Patkar and Raj, pointing out that they had not been informed. Later, 11 MPs, mostly from the NDA, walked out and in the absence of quorum the meeting was cancelled and is likely to be held on July 14.”

NDA Members Object to Medha Patkar’s Involvement

NDA members were particularly opposed to Patkar due to her campaign against the Narmada project, which they claim could have left one-third of Gujarat drought-affected if blocked.

The Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which was the subject of the meeting, sets rules for land acquisition and provides for fair compensation, rehabilitation, and resettlement for affected persons.

Ulaka Defends Invite List and Process

Jaiswal reiterated that they were only informed about ministry representatives and NGOs, not about Patkar and Raj.

Ulaka maintained that inviting civil society members is standard procedure. “We had invited them to share their views on how to strengthen the Act…they would have submitted their views without being privy to the submissions made by the ministry representatives,” he said.

He added that the Speaker’s office had been informed about the list in advance, following protocol. “What were the NDA MPs scared of? We could have heard the two and the report would eventually be drafted after consensus between the committee members,” Ulaka remarked.