Reported by
Legal Review by
Edited by
Updated by
Published on
September 19, 2018
April 3, 2024
Edited on
April 2, 2024
September 19, 2018
Farmers in Cortali village in Sanguem tehsil and Nagvem village in Quepem tehsil in South Goa had opposed the setting up of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) campus as it was proposed to be built on farmlands and hill slopes falling within the periphery of both the villages. The site was finalised by a panel constituted by the Ministry of Human Resource and Development after the Goa government failed to procure land at the earlier proposed site in South Goa's Loliem village due to public opposition.
Giving in to public demand, then Chief Minister (now deceased) Manohar Parrikar announced in June 2017 that the campus would be shifted from Loliem to Sanguem. About 250 acres of land at the new site was already owned by the state government and the remaining 70 acres were yet to be acquired.
The South Goa District Administration began preparing for the land acquisition process in October 2017. One tenant, at the time, threatened to commit suicide if his land was acquired. A public meeting was organised in Sanguem in February 2018 which saw nearly 400 people raise their voice against the proposed campus. They claimed that they were not consulted before the site was finalised. They also said that the project site comprised forest areas with dense tree cover, including cashew plantations. While government officials said that the land was fallow and uncultivated, several farmers contested the claim, highlighting that they cultivated two crops per year on the land and that the site fell under the command area of the Selaulim irrigation project. They said they were not against the project but the location chosen for the project and had suggested alternate sites in Sanguem. The South Goa district administration had assured the farmers of a compensation of Rs 450 per square metre.
In June 2018, the district administration issued notices to the farmers to seek their consent for the project. The farmers threatened to agitate before the district headquarters if the process for setting up the IIT was not stopped. Prasad Gaonkar, an independent MLA from Sanguem, appealed to the people to support the project and was quoted in a news report as saying, "I will see that the farmers losing land due to the project are given maximum compensation, including jobs."
Later, yielding to mounting pressure from the farmers, the Goa government, in August 2019, decided to shift the IIT campus to another alternative site. The move came after the Union government had asked the state to finalise land for the new IIT by August 31 on an ultimatum that if the site was not finalised by the given date, the IIT would be moved out of the state. On August 30, the state government approved the allotment of government land in Guleli village in North Goa's Sattari district, where a permanent IIT campus was proposed to be built.
The protesting farmers held a prayer service at the Holy Cross Church to celebrate their victory and also put up banners in the area congratulating Chief Minister Pramod Sawant for his "wise thinking" to shift the project out of Sanguem.
The project faced opposition at the new site in Melauli, forcing the government to scrap it again and announce a four-member panel to choose a new site in January 2021. In May 2021, four shortlisted sites were announced, including an area near the earlier site at Sanguem.
Sanguem MLA Subhash Phaldessai claimed that at a special meeting held to discuss the project, 95 per cent attendees had agreed to the site. He said that the 7.5 lakh-square metre site identified at Cotarli was the same as the one shortlisted earlier, but left out the privately-owned portions.
In July, there were reports citing clashes between ‘pro-IIT’ farmers and those protesting the project. The latter group said that they own and cultivate the land. Refuting Phaldessai’s claim that the land was barren, they claimed that the area has housed cashew and coconut plantations for generations. According to a Mongabay report, the root of problem dates back to 1971, when community lands and other commons were registered as government land during an “ad-hoc, unscientific land survey” by the government.
The opposition remained consistent till November 2022, when the Centre deemed the site at Sanguem "inadequate" for the IIT campus. It said that while the land offered was 6.8 lakh-7.2 lakh sqm, only 2.8 lakh-3.2 lakh sqm would be available for construction. It also added that construction would be challenging as the land is not a flat terrain.
Opposition against environmental degradation
Refusal to give up land for the project
Rural
Common and Private
Forest and Non-Forest
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Project scrapped
Original Project Deadline
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Agricultural land
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
Type of investment:
Year of Estimation
Page Number In Investment Document:
Has the Conflict Ended?
Yes
When did it end?
November 2022
Why did the conflict end?
Community's original demands were met
In August 2019, the Goa government decided to shift the IIT campus to an alternative site. The move came after the Union government had asked the state to finalise land for the new IIT by August 31 on an ultimatum that if the site was not finalised by the given date, the IIT would be moved out of the state. On August 30, the state government approved the allotment of government land in Guleli village in North Goa's Sattari district. The village residents who had opposed the IIT campus in Sanguem celebrated their victory with a prayer service. In May 2021, the project was moved back to Cotarli after getting scrapped in Melauli. It covered earlier-identified areas but left out parcels that were privately owned, the government said. This was vehemently opposed by residents. In November 2022, the conflict came to an end after the Centre rejected the site stating that it is unsuitable for construction of an IIT campus.
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Environmental Laws, Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Other
Legislations/Policies Involved
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Violation of free prior informed consent
Legal Status:
Out of Court
Status of Case In Court
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Case Number
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Nature of Protest
Protests/marches
Objections as part of official procedures
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
South Goa district administration, Ministry of Human Resource Development
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
No
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?
Image Credit:
Image Credit:
© 2023 Nut Graph LLP
All Rights Reserved.
