New Delhi: Parliamentary affairs minister M. Venkaiah Naidu rejected the suggestion to send the Land Bill to the parliamentary standing committee, saying it needed to be passed by April 5 or the ordinance would lapse. The minister also hinted that the government would keep an open mind on the social impact assessment clause in the Bill.

The Lok Sabha is likely to conclude discussion on the bill on Tuesday and put it to vote.

Countering the claims of the Opposition that there had been no need to change the land law enacted during the UPA government in 2013, Mr Naidu in his 40-minute intervention asserted that the government’s decision to issue an ordinance was not unilateral but based on the suggestions and views of all the states. He referred extensively to the views and suggestions made by the states at a conference organised by the government in June 2015, and to letters written by former Maharashtra chief minister Prithviraj Chavan and former Union commerce minister Anand Sharma expressing serious reservations about the adverse consequences of the Land Acquisition Act of 2013.

The Congress, however, has maintained that the party would vote against the bill in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday if its demand to refer the legislative proposal to the standing committee was not accepted. Meanwhile,

Congress president Sonia Gandhi chaired two meetings of the party parliamentary affairs committee and all its 44 Lok Sabha MPs to discuss the strategy over the bill.

The party is issuing a three-line whip to its members in the Lower House asking them to be present and vote against the measure.

NDA ally Shiv Sena has also struck a discordant note on the bill, with the party having submitted a letter listing suggestions to amend the bill to Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

In the Lok Sabha, Shiv Sena MP Arvind Sawant said the government should look at the possibility of taking the lands of farmers on lease rather than acquiring it as it would ensure a steady flow of income to the displaced. The BJD and Trinamul Congress also vociferously opposed the bill.