In India, the land acquiring procedure had been laid down in the colonial law of Land Acquisition Act 1894. After 120 years of its enactment and being criticized for not having a proper definition of ‘public purpose’, no proper ‘social impact assessment’ done, no ‘prior consent’ the implementation of the colonial law was quite difficult. In order to implement the land acquisition process in an effective manner, the “Right to fair compensation and transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013” was enacted replacing the erstwhile 1894 Act by recognizing the issues related to ‘development-induced displacement’. The new Act brought in sea changes like proper definition of public purpose; mandatory Social impact assessment; fixed timelines and therefore it fasten the process of acquisition and in addition it focuses on fair compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement. Although laudable for its purposes and objectives of its enactment, the Act suffered from primary/core issue of “dilution of the Act/rules framed by the central by the state amendments or rules”. Recently, the dilution of central law by Tamil Nadu state amendments was struck down in the case of “Caritas India v Union of India” . In addition, to dilution, the high cost in acquisition process and forceful acquisition emerged as a blockade for its effective implementation. In such cases, there is increasing tendency among the states to look into alternative land assembly strategy. One of the viable strategies that the states in India are executing is the “Land Pooling” strategy. Therefore, this paper would analyze the core issue of dilution of the LARR Act 2013 and to analyze how land pooling strategy would be considered as viable alternative to LARR Act 2013 in providing sustainable futuristic tool in light of rapid urbanization and to provide suitable suggestions for its better implementation.