Why can't an individual own a piece of agricultural property when he is into something else? The bone of contention in this case seems to be the reason that Mr. Bachchan is not a "farmer". There is absolutely no rule that one cannot be a full-time farmer while still being committed to another career. And if this theory does not hold good, then does it mean that farmers should not do anything other than farming? In other words, is it a crime if they go try to sell their produce (which is commerce!). I've personally seen several farmers who have all the facilities at their disposal, but do not tend to their lands - what about that? If the lands obtained by Mr. Bachchan were not done so adopting unfair means he is being accused of, we should simply let him be..! Finally, what about all the thousand of acres of benami land and properties being owned by our dear Netas? Why are they above the Bachchans and the rest of us..? If somebody like "Behen" Mayawati has spent a lifetime "serving" people, how in the world did she get so rich..? The reasons are all so obvious, and those who are really the culprits should be taken to task!
RE:WHY NOT?
by sanju baba on Jul 20, 2007 08:36 AM Permalink
well you are right .. every one has the right to buy .. but if the farmers are not protected ..people like bachchan will drive them out even from gram shabhas ... no one stopped him buying land in metros .. WHY LOOT the farm land ??
