Reported by
Legal Review by
Edited by
Updated by
Published on
September 19, 2016
March 11, 2023
Edited on
September 19, 2016
In 2014, after the establishment of Telangana as a separate state, the government of Andhra Pradesh proposed to build a new capital city, Amravati. The project is spread across 25 villages in three mandals (Thulluru, Manglageiri and Tadepalli) of Guntur district and was initially planned to be completed by July 2018. A land area of about 54,000 acres was acquired for the capital city, comprising primarily agricultural land. The World Bank committed to invest USD 300 million (approximately 2,244 crore as of July 20, 2020) for the project.
Instead of land acquisition, the Andhra Pradesh government gave three options to the people to take their land. First, to give up their land under the Land Pooling rules notified under the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority Act, 2014, where instead of compensation, they will get reduced land ownership (of the developed land) in exchange once the city is developed. This would include a range of other benefits and support measures, such as annual payments for the land given to the government. The second option was to give land under the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, in exchange for a compensation. The final option was through "negotiated settlements", where the people could negotiate if they wanted compensation for land or preferred land in exchange of land.
At least 21,374 households chose to give up their land under the Land Pooling Scheme. Soon, Amravati was touted as a successful model of land pooling for the rest of the country and an alternative and comparatively peaceful method for acquiring land for infrastructure projects. The people were promised that the Capital city would be built within the next 10 years. The government also promised to return, on an average, 30 per cent of the "developed" land to the original land owners, along with an annual compensation, apart from exempting the owners from capital gains tax and stamp duty on the first sale.
However, in 2015, people from Undavalli, Penumaka and Rayapudi villages protested, alleging that they were forced to give up the land under the Land Pooling Scheme, while the government stated that the land was given voluntarily. Manam Bose Reddy, a farmer from Undavalli, told the media, "They sent the police after us; they surrounded the borders of the whole village. The police picketing was arranged in a way that we could not move around. All of this scared the farmers; they felt threatened and gave away their lands."
Farmers also demanded equal compensation after alleged claims of discrimination in compensation. Patta owners (land title holders) were promised a developed plot of 1,050 square yards per acre of pooled land, but the assigned land owners (those who are allotted temporary land titles under the Andhra Pradesh Assigned Land Act, 1977) were only promised 600 square yards of the developed plot. The government also made other promises to the farmers, including rent of up to ₹50,000 per acre for 10 years, jobs for family members of those who gave their land for the project, reimbursement of children’s education fees, residential and commercial plots, all major infrastructure facilities like roads, power lines and drainage and free health cards. However, the government failed to deliver on the promises.
In 2019, after the Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy government came to power, news reports stated that the earlier government had engaged in illegal dealings related to the Amravati project. The finance minister of the state, B.R. Reddy, alleged that “the land pooling scheme (LPS), under which land was acquired, and land allocation to various organisations were being scrutinised. There is suspicion that people with insider knowledge about the location of the capital city purchased land in the region and profited by selling it to the government under the LPS”.
In July 2019, the World Bank dropped out of the project. The World Bank had apparently considered widespread complaints lodged by farmers over the forcible takeover of their fertile lands by the previous government in the name of land pooling for the capital city's development.
On December 17, 2019, Chief Minister Jaganmohan Reddy had mooted the idea of having three capitals for Andhra Pradesh, with the executive capital in Visakhapatnam, the legislative capital in Amaravati and the judicial capital in Kurnool, spread over the three predominant regions of the state. The idea did not go down well with the masses.
Since its proposal, farmers had been staging demonstrations against the possible relocation of the state capital from Amravati. The farmers sought reassurance from the government that the capital would continue in Amravati and their promises would be fulfilled.
At least 64 farmers have lost their lives in the Amravati movement. Many of them died of heart attacks after protesting for days under the sun, refusing to erect tents.
In the last week of August 2020, protests over the capital trifurcation completed 250 days. The protests, which started in December 2019, had intensified in July 2020, when Governor Biswa Bhusan Harichandan assented to the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority Repeal Bill, 2020, and the Andhra Pradesh Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Bill, 2020. Both the bills are influential in the three-capital project as they order a shift of key functions out of Amravati.
Meanwhile, responding to a petition filed by farmers, the Andhra Pradesh High Court had ordered a stay on the project until August 27, 2020.
Refusal to give up land for the project
Discrimination in compensation- demand for equal compensation
Urban and Rural
Private
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
Original Project Deadline
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
54000
Type of investment:
Year of Estimation
2014
Page Number In Investment Document:
2
Has the Conflict Ended?
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Land Acquisition Laws, Constitutional Law, Central/State Government Policy
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:
Controversial land acquisition by the government
Constitutional inconsistencies between state and Union land laws
Forced evictions/dispossession of land
Use of old/outdated laws
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Pending
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
High Court of Andhra Pradesh
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
Campaigns (grassroots organisations/press releases/media)
Protests/marches
Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Government of Andhra Pradesh; Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority (APCRDA)
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?
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Local land owners
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.
