2.The land was acquired 2 years ago and the value of land has increased exponentially and so the compensation is not adequate today.

A. The reason why the land value has increased in this manner is because of the project and the entire surrounding community has gained from this.

B. The key to being fair is quick disposal of the compensation amounts so that they can be invested. This is what activists should be fighting for and if delayed, penal interest rates should be applied.

3.Farmers are not used to handling large sums of money and would squander it threatening their futures. Can activists engage the help of financial experts to offer financial products to farmers where they would get as much as they were earning and reinvest a part of the earning to take care of future inflation? The compensation to be arrived at could consider such a scheme.

4.The land is fertile and produces 2 - 3 crops per year, so projects like this need to be established in a location which is not as fertile. This should have been addressed at the outset. However, as large opportunities are at stake, let’s move forward.

A. Is it possible from the land records to identify the actual number of crops grown on each plot and work out the farmer’s net earning from a plot, as per available price data?

B. Based on this could a preference type of share/debenture be structured by the company or state government, where the farmer would be paid for example, 15 per cent of the earnings from the plot for 10 years, after which it would convert to equity? This as a bonus to the farmer for giving up his land, for the larger good.

... contd.