In recent months, tensions have been escalating across Punjab’s farming belt as the state government, led by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), faces growing accusations of forcibly acquiring land from farmers under the guise of a “voluntary” land-pooling policy. While officials maintain that the policy is meant to modernise urban development and provide long-term benefits to landowners, farmers across various districts believe that the scheme is neither voluntary nor just. They claim they are being pressured into giving up fertile agricultural land without adequate compensation or clear safeguards.
At the heart of the controversy is the Punjab Urban Development Authority’s (PUDA) aggressive push to acquire approximately 24,000 to 25,000 acres of agricultural land around Ludhiana and other rapidly urbanising areas. Government ministers have repeatedly emphasised that the land-pooling model is designed to replace the older, colonial-era land acquisition laws with a more farmer-friendly approach, where landowners would receive a share in developed plots and monetary returns. However, farmers and activists on the ground allege that they are not being given any real choice, and that coercion, misinformation, and bureaucratic pressure are being used to corner them into submission.
Farmer unions, such as the Bhartiya Kisan Union (BKU) and the Samyukt Kisan Morcha, as well as several regional outfits, have launched statewide protests against the scheme. They argue that the policy disproportionately harms small and marginal farmers, many of whom lack the legal literacy or political clout to negotiate fair terms. Critics say the fine print of the policy offers no clarity on how and when replacement plots will be handed over, whether compensation will match current market rates, or how farmers will survive in the interim period between land acquisition and delivery of returns. The fear that the land will eventually fall into the hands of private developers and builders only worsens their anxiety.
One particularly contentious issue is the removal or weakening of certain provisions of the national Land Acquisition Act, which was designed to protect farmers against exactly such scenarios. Political parties across the spectrum—including the Congress, Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD), and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—have joined the opposition chorus, accusing the Mann government of collusion with corporate interests and violating the spirit of democratic governance. BJP leader Sunil Jakhar recently alleged that key clauses related to consent and social impact assessment have been omitted from the Punjab government’s version of the policy, making it easier for authorities to claim land without full farmer agreement.
Adding weight to these concerns, the North American Punjabi Association (NAPA), led by Satnam Singh Chahal, issued a scathing condemnation of the state government’s actions. The organisation estimates that over 150 villages and nearly 50,000 farming families stand to lose their livelihoods, homes, and generational wealth under this policy. NAPA fears that if implemented in its current form, the scheme could result in economic losses exceeding ₹2 lakh crore and inflict irreversible damage to Punjab’s already fragile agricultural economy. The diaspora’s involvement underlines the global concern among Punjabis about land, which is often both a cultural identity and a financial backbone for families.
Furthermore, several instances have emerged where village panchayats have resisted government attempts to auction communal or panchayati lands for development. In some cases, legal petitions have led to temporary stays from courts, offering brief respite to protesting villagers. Yet, the overall atmosphere remains one of distrust and uncertainty. Many fear that what begins as “voluntary pooling” will soon morph into full-scale land grabs backed by state machinery, especially given the high commercial value of the targeted lands.
In response to the backlash, Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and Finance Minister Harpal Singh Cheema have accused the opposition and “land mafia” of misleading the public. They insist that farmers will receive developed plots worth far more than their current land value, along with modern infrastructure, roads, sewage, and parks. But these assurances have done little to quell the rising anger in rural Punjab, where memories of previous land acquisition betrayals still linger.
In essence, Punjab stands at a crucial crossroads. While infrastructure and planned urbanization are vital for the state’s progress, bulldozing over the interests of its farmers—the very backbone of its economy and culture—could spark prolonged unrest. Unless the government adopts a more inclusive, transparent, and participatory approach, what is intended as development could become yet another chapter in the long history of exploitation of Punjab’s farming community