Telangana
Lacchagudem, Koyagudem, Dantelathanda, Kothathanda and Jethyathanda villages of Tekulapalli mandal
,
Koyagudem village, Tekulapalli Mandal
,
Khammam
Published :
Apr 2026
|
Updated :
Compensation delays, legal non-compliance, and tribal displacement in the Koyagudem OC-II mining project, Telangana
Reported by
Avani Mishra
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Rakshit Dhingra, Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
105
Households affected
504
People affected
2007
Year started
816
ha.
Land area affected
105
Households affected
504
People Affected
2007
Year started
816
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Coal Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Unclassifed
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Coal Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

On 21 October 2024, land oustees of Koyagudem open cast-II (OC-II) mine in Tekulapalli mandal in the district protested in front of RDO office demanding the state government to pay pending compensation for the lands acquired for the mine.

The Koyagudem Open Cast mining complex (OC-I, OC-II, OC-III) is part of the Godavari Valley coalfields and has been operational since the mid-2000s. The environmental clearance for OC-II, spread across 678 hectares, was granted in 2007. The OC-II project involved land acquisition of 816.11 hectares, including diversion of 600 hectares of forest land. It further proposed an expansion plan to increase coal production capacity, requiring additional acquisition of agricultural and village lands.

Approximately 105 tribal families from belonging to Lacchagudem, Koyagudem, Dantelathanda, Kothathanda and Jethyathanda villages reportedly lost their agricultural lands for the mining project.

The grievances of Koyagudem mining project's land oustees are particularly related to non-payment of compensation, inadequate rehabilitation, and lack of effective consultation. In addition to the compensation, the affected families also demanded a job to one person from each family.

They alleged violations of Sections 26–30, 31–32, 38, and 41 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, especially given that Koyas inhabiting the region have a Scheduled Tribe status.

Earlier, cases of environmental norms violations were detected in five coal mines of the Singareni Collieries, which operates the Koyagudem OC-II mine. The Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) of Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) had then directed the Telangana State Pollution Control Board (TSPCB) to take action against Singareni Collieries for expanding the coal production capacity in the five coal mines without obtaining any environment clearance for the expansion from MoEFCC.

The cause has since then received support from former MP Midiam Babu Rao and CPM leader Brinda Karat, in addition to Telangana Rythu Sangham.

Since the government failed to pay compensation, the displaced people approached the High Court. According to a report by the Telangana Today, the High Court had twice given verdict in favour of the displaced people in the years 2011 and 2024, yet the government failed to implement the orders.

As of March 2026, protests by land oustees continue with demands for enforcement of compensation and court orders with no conclusive evidence (from available sources) confirming full resolution of compensation claims by those displaced.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for compensation

Demand for rehabilitation

Demand for employment

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for livelihood and employment of one person per affected family.

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

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?

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 underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land, Grazing, Other natural resource collection/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Data Unavailable

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

167

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

2017

Page Number In Investment Document:

2

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

District administration, Kothagudem

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Singareni Collieries Company Limited (SCCL)

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

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:

Telangana Rythu Sangham

5
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?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us