Telangana
,
Kochaguttapalli
,
Siddipet
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Annapurna Reservoir Submerges Homes, Families Forced To Relocate Without Compensation
Reported by
Nihar Gokhale
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
53
People Affected
2020
Year started
Land area affected
Households affected
53
People Affected
2020
Year started
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Irrigation Dam
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

The Siddipet district administration in Telangana evicted at least six families on April 19, 2020, during the Covid-19 lockdown as their homes fell in the submergence zone of the Annapurna Reservoir (formerly known as Ananthagiri reservoir). The eviction drive took place even as the land acquisition proceedings were stayed by the Telangana High Court. Annapurna Reservoir is a six-kilometre-long dam that is part of the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Project, an ambitious programme of the state government to supply water from the Godavari river to the arid regions of Telangana. The dam has so far submerged 324 acres of forests and three villages in Ellanthakunta and Chinnakodur blocks in Siddipet district. In 2016, 154 families from Kochaguttapalli village had opposed the land acquisition for the reservoir as it was carried out under a state government order (known as G.O. 123) instead of the Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Act, 2013. In 2017, the Telangana high court struck down the GO, after which the state began to acquire land under the LARR Act. On April 9, 2019, the high court granted a stay on the land acquisition after a petition was filed by 11 families. They claim that after the preliminary notification of acquisition in 2017, the government did not make a declaration under Section 19 (1) of the LARR Act. As per Section 19 (7), if no declaration is made within 12 months, the preliminary notification would be deemed cancelled, unless the government issues an extension to the deadline. The 12-month deadline ended on December 27, 2018, and the government extended it by two months to February 28, 2019. The petitioners argued in the high court that an extension cannot be granted after the deadline. The court issued a stay order until something conclusive was decided on the matter. The stay order was in place when the evictions took place in April 2020. The families were not given prior notice and were not allowed to take cash, gold and other valuables with them, according to eyewitness accounts. They were forced to shift to the project rehabilitation and resettlement colony in another village. Three days later, their homes got submerged in the reservoir waters. Alkaturki Laxman, a resident who was evicted, told Article-14 that the demolitions took place without notice and that the officials did not pay heed to peoples demands to take their belongings. We were crying and pleading, but they didnt listen to us, Laxman said. On April 26, the state government told the high court that only six families were opposed to the acquisition and that 148 families had accepted compensation. But according to a news report, 30 families were evicted. The matter is pending before the high court.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

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?

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):

1928

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Author
Reported by
Nihar Gokhale

Telangana

Kumar Sambhav is a social entrepreneur and award-winning journalist, leading innovative research in accountability investigations. He is the founder of Land Conflict Watch and is currently working as India Research Lead with Princeton University’s Digital Witness Lab.

Read More

Latest updates
Rajasthan
Rajasthan

UIT Bikaner's Jorbeer Housing Project on Stalls Following Rajasthan High Court Order

Rajasthan
Rajasthan

Jaipur Development Authority Acquires Land for Township Project, Ending Conflict

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Farmers land acquired under Mansarovar Housing Scheme in Lucknow

Maharashtra
Maharashtra

Citizens unite against cycle track around Powai, Vihar Lakes in Mumbai

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Families displaced by Mandal Dam in Jharkhand opppose project resumption

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Jharkhand approves Adani's thermal plant, farmers allege violation of LARR Act

Gujarat
Gujarat

Pastoral Community in Gujarat's Banni Grasslands Demands Titles Recognising Community Forest Rights

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Builder Encroaches Upon Farmers Land in Gosaiganj Lucknow, 150 Allottees in Lurch

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Complaint against procedural violations

Annapurna Reservoir Submerges Homes, Families Forced To Relocate Without Compensation

Reported by

Nihar Gokhale

Legal Review by

Edited by

Updated by

Updated by

Published on

September 30, 2020

May 17, 2022

Edited on

September 30, 2020

Sector

Infrastructure

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Irrigation Dam

Starting Year

2020

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

People Affected by Conflict

53

State

Telangana

Sector

Infrastructure

People Affected by Conflict

53

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Starting Year

2020

Location of Conflict

Kochaguttapalli

Siddipet

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Irrigation Dam

Land Conflict Summary

The Siddipet district administration in Telangana evicted at least six families on April 19, 2020, during the Covid-19 lockdown as their homes fell in the submergence zone of the Annapurna Reservoir (formerly known as Ananthagiri reservoir). The eviction drive took place even as the land acquisition proceedings were stayed by the Telangana High Court. Annapurna Reservoir is a six-kilometre-long dam that is part of the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Project, an ambitious programme of the state government to supply water from the Godavari river to the arid regions of Telangana. The dam has so far submerged 324 acres of forests and three villages in Ellanthakunta and Chinnakodur blocks in Siddipet district. In 2016, 154 families from Kochaguttapalli village had opposed the land acquisition for the reservoir as it was carried out under a state government order (known as G.O. 123) instead of the Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Rehabilitation (LARR) Act, 2013. In 2017, the Telangana high court struck down the GO, after which the state began to acquire land under the LARR Act. On April 9, 2019, the high court granted a stay on the land acquisition after a petition was filed by 11 families. They claim that after the preliminary notification of acquisition in 2017, the government did not make a declaration under Section 19 (1) of the LARR Act. As per Section 19 (7), if no declaration is made within 12 months, the preliminary notification would be deemed cancelled, unless the government issues an extension to the deadline. The 12-month deadline ended on December 27, 2018, and the government extended it by two months to February 28, 2019. The petitioners argued in the high court that an extension cannot be granted after the deadline. The court issued a stay order until something conclusive was decided on the matter. The stay order was in place when the evictions took place in April 2020. The families were not given prior notice and were not allowed to take cash, gold and other valuables with them, according to eyewitness accounts. They were forced to shift to the project rehabilitation and resettlement colony in another village. Three days later, their homes got submerged in the reservoir waters. Alkaturki Laxman, a resident who was evicted, told Article-14 that the demolitions took place without notice and that the officials did not pay heed to peoples demands to take their belongings. We were crying and pleading, but they didnt listen to us, Laxman said. On April 26, the state government told the high court that only six families were opposed to the acquisition and that 148 families had accepted compensation. But according to a news report, 30 families were evicted. The matter is pending before the high court.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Private

Type of Common Land

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):

1928

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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:

No items found.

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Telangana High Court

Case Number

Writ Petition Nos. 3420 of 2019, 9146 of 2019 and 25664 of 2019

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

Displacement

Other harassment

Reported Details of the Violation:

Six families, who were living in the submergence zone of the Annapurna Reservoir, were evicted without prior notice. They were not allowed to take cash, gold or any other valuables. Three days later, their houses were completely submerged.

Date of Violation

April 19, 2020

Location of Violation

Kochaguttapalli

Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

District Collector of Siddipet, Irrigation & Command Area Development Department

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?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Information on the use of criminal law

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?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

Other Land Conflicts in Telangana

cross
    Not a member yet?
    Sign up now
    Conflicts Map
    Conflict Database
    About Us