Twentyone families belonging to the Bhil tribal community face the threat of being evicted from 18 hectares of farmland in Karamdi village on the outskirts of Ratlam city. On paper, the land belongs to the government and is classified as grazing land. A silver lining for the farmers came in the form of a Supreme Court ruling on April 29, 2019, which upheld the temporary stay on their eviction issued by the Ratlam civil court in 2016. In January 2019, the farmers filed another petition before the Madhya Pradesh high court, stating that under an 1984 state law, they should receive titles to the grazing land. On January 9, the high court ordered a stay on the industrial cluster. The petition is being heard. In 2015, the state had proposed to set up a namkeen industrial cluster for the production of Ratlami Sev (a popular snack in the city) over 18 hectares of grazing land, which included approximately 12 hectares of farmlands belonging to the Bhils. In 2016, the government began excavation on the site, damaging the standing crop of the farmers. Twelve Bhil families are now landless and work as daily wage earners to make ends meet. In the past three years, the farmers have filed cases at all levels of the judiciary. In February 2016, they filed a suit in the Ratlam civil court, seeking protection from eviction. The court granted an immediate oneyear temporary stay on the eviction. But the stay order was overruled in March by an appeals court in Ratlam and then by the high court. The farmers appealed this before the Supreme Court, which, in November 2016, ordered a stay on the construction of the cluster. However, in April 2017, the government resumed construction, leading the farmers to file a contempt petition, which is still being heard. The cluster has been constructed, and more than 50 plots have been allotted for commercial purpose, according to the state government's website. Ratlam District Collector Ruchika Chauhan declined to comment when contacted by LCW. In an application to the Union Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, the state government claimed that the cluster is necessary to support the city's namkeen makers who are losing market share to largesized competitors. In affidavits to the local courts, the government has claimed that the land is rocky and that the Bhil farmers are merely encroachers. Shailendra Gandhi, president of the Ratlami Sev Evam Namkeen Mandal, dismissed the Bhils' claims as _bakwaas _(bogus). "This is just a _saazish _(agenda) by the Indore namkeen lobby and opposition politicians because they don't want our industry to grow," he said. Ankit Luniya, an entrepreneur setting up the first namkeen unit in Ratlam, said the land was rocky and that the cluster did not take up farmland. The Bhils, on the other hand, claim to have been cultivating on this land for the last 80 years and to have been recorded in revenue surveys dating back to 1967. The farmers claim that their forefathers had worked hard on the rocky land to make it cultivable and that they should be given patta or permanent lease so that they can continue to cultivate. The Bhils are landless and grow food on their farms. The origin of the conflict between the Bhils and the state can be traced back to 2009, when the government proposed a foodprocessing park over 32 hectares of the grazing land, including the entire area cultivated by the Bhils. The district officials had attempted to evict some farmers then, but they returned to the land and the government did not pursue the project.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand for legal recognition of land rights
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common
Non-Forest (Grazing 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?
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?
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):
₹
22
Type of investment:
Investment Made
Year of Estimation
Has the Conflict Ended?
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Forest and Scheduled Area Governance 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:
Forced evictions/dispossession of land
Constitutional inconsistencies between state and Union land laws
Scheduled Tribe status or lack of status
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)
Madhya Pradesh High court
Case Number
W.P. No.2234/2016, W.P. 431/2019
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Displacement
Physical attack
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
In February 2016, government officials visited the area proposed for the namkeen cluster with JCB and razed the farms of the Bhil farmers despite their protests. Twelve families were forcefully evicted.
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
District Administration, Ratlam; Department of Industries and Commerce, Government of Madhya Pradesh; Union Ministry of Micro, Medium and Small Industries
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam (Ujjain) Limited
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
Yes
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra VIkas Nigam (Ujjain) Limited (A Government of Madhya Pradesh company)
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Adivasi Ekta Maha Sabha
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?
Violent protest during public hearing for cement plant expansion in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills
Residents of Narela's Bajitpur Thakran oppose demolition of temples for defence institute, demand sports complex
Adivasis in Chhattisgarh's Hasdeo protest relentlessly against mining project in forest
Lawyer bodies protest against Assam government’s decision to relocate Gauhati High Court
Demands for Ram Temple, Babri Mosque at same site divides Ayodhya
Supreme Court Allows Land Reclamation for Mumbai Coastal Road Project
Farmers Refuse Land for Pune Outer Ring Road Project in Maharashtra
Slum Dwellers in Gujarat's Surat Stage Protest against Demolition, Forced Eviction