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

Five Dalit Families Demand Promised Residential Plots in Gitapur Village of Ahmedabad District, Gujarat

Reported by

Aditi Patil

Legal Review by

Edited by

Updated by

Published on

February 10, 2018

March 4, 2024

Edited on

February 10, 2018

State

Gujarat

Sector

Land Use

People Affected by Conflict

33

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

0

ha

Starting Year

2013

Location of Conflict

Gitapur

Bhagapura

Ahmedabad

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Caste-based Conflict

Distribution of Residential Plots

Land Conflict Summary

On January 16, 2018, five Dalit families in Gitapur village sat on an indefinite fast outside the office of the Taluka Mamlatdar to demand their promised residential plots. Gitapur is located in Detroj Rampura taluka in the Ahmedabad district of Gujarat. The Dalit families claimed that the Gram Panchayat had denied granting them the residential plots, first promised to them in 2012. As per a news report, they demanded to file a case under the Atrocities Act against the upper-caste community members, who attacked the Dalits in the village. They also protested against forceful exclusion from access to basic amenities, and local markets. 
Subsequently, the Patidar residents of the village, the dominant caste, also launched a protest outside the Mamlatdar’s office to oppose the demand of the Dalit families. Allegedly, they did not want the Dalits to take over the land from the village panchayat. They claimed that the families are not residents of Gitapur and encroached upon the plot.  
Indeed, the Dalit families are listed residents of Bhagapura village, which is adjacent to Gitapur. 
According to a news report, on April 02, 2012, the gram panchayat of Bhagapura passed a resolution to give the Dalit families plot for constructing their houses. However, the geographical area was under the jurisdiction of Gitapur village. Before this, in 2011, the administration demarcated the two villages as separate. Regardless, the revenue survey numbers of the two villages remained together. As a consequence, the plot allocated to the families turned into a disputed site. Subsequently, the five Dalit families were forcefully made residents of Bhagapura, said local Dalits rights activist, Kanu Sumra, in a news report
The five families first protested against the failure to receive their plots in 2013. As reported, on August 25, they collected outside the taluka office to demand their land. While the administration made assurances, the plots were never physically handed over to the families. 
A local representation supporting the families’ also claimed that in the same year, on December 14, the members of the Patidar community physically attacked one of the Dalit residents, namely Narshibhai Maganbhai Parmar. They also claimed that Patidar set the huts on fire. 
In 2014, a news article reported that a representation of two NGOs, Navsarjan Trust and Manav Adhikar Samiti, met with the district collector. They presented the demands for the immediate handover of plots, addressing the social boycott, and providing access to basic amenities, amongst other concerns.
Since then, the families continued to live in make-shift shanties without access to any basic amenities. 
In January 2018, the indefinite fast ended after almost 12 days following the intervention from the taluka administration. The administration allowed the families to convert a portion (one bigha) of their farmlands into non-agricultural land to build their houses. In return, the administration also agreed to bear the cost of construction, stated Sumra in the same news report.
However, the conflict escalated as a political issue after both the protesting parties received opposing support from local political leaders. 

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand for promised land

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than 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?

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

Residential area

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?

February 2018

Why did the conflict end?

Community agreed to alternative offers

According to a 2018 news report, the district administration offered five Dalit families to convert a portion of their farmlands into non-agricultural land to build their houses. The report quotes an activist who clarifies that the administration agreed to bear the cost of construction while the families used one bigha of their farmlands. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/dalit-patidar-land-dispute-reveals-hardik-jignesh-rift/articleshow/62732273.cms

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Other, Land Reform Laws

Legislations/Policies Involved

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Section 3(1)(g) [Prescribes punishment for atrocities committed against SCs and STs including restricting access to water resources and interference with enjoyment of land rights.]  
Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993
Section 104 [Permission of the village panchayat is required for the construction of buildings.]
Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879
Section 60 [Written permission is required prior to occupation of unoccupied land]; Section 62 [Unoccupied land may be granted by the collector subject to rules and on conditions he deems fit]; Section 65 [Procedure for application of land for non-agricultural purposes.]
  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:

Lack of legal protection over land rights

Delay in allottment and possession of land/property

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

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:

Physical attack

Torching of houses

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Yes

Reported Details of the Violation:

On December 14, 2013, the members of Patidar community physically attacked one of the Dalits, namely Narshibhai Maganbhai Parmar. The Patidars also set the huts on fire.

Date of Violation

December 13, 2013

Location of Violation

Gitapur

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Protests/marches

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Office of Detroj Rampura Taluka Mamlatdar

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?

N/A

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Navsarjan Trust, Manav Adhikar Samiti, Rashtriya Dalit Adhikar Manch

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

On January 16, 2018, five Dalit families in Gitapur village sat on an indefinite fast outside the office of the Taluka Mamlatdar to demand their promised residential plots. Gitapur is located in Detroj Rampura taluka in the Ahmedabad district of Gujarat. The Dalit families claimed that the Gram Panchayat had denied granting them the residential plots, first promised to them in 2012. As per a news report, they demanded to file a case under the Atrocities Act against the upper-caste community members, who attacked the Dalits in the village. They also protested against forceful exclusion from access to basic amenities, and local markets. 
Subsequently, the Patidar residents of the village, the dominant caste, also launched a protest outside the Mamlatdar’s office to oppose the demand of the Dalit families. Allegedly, they did not want the Dalits to take over the land from the village panchayat. They claimed that the families are not residents of Gitapur and encroached upon the plot.  
Indeed, the Dalit families are listed residents of Bhagapura village, which is adjacent to Gitapur. 
According to a news report, on April 02, 2012, the gram panchayat of Bhagapura passed a resolution to give the Dalit families plot for constructing their houses. However, the geographical area was under the jurisdiction of Gitapur village. Before this, in 2011, the administration demarcated the two villages as separate. Regardless, the revenue survey numbers of the two villages remained together. As a consequence, the plot allocated to the families turned into a disputed site. Subsequently, the five Dalit families were forcefully made residents of Bhagapura, said local Dalits rights activist, Kanu Sumra, in a news report
The five families first protested against the failure to receive their plots in 2013. As reported, on August 25, they collected outside the taluka office to demand their land. While the administration made assurances, the plots were never physically handed over to the families. 
A local representation supporting the families’ also claimed that in the same year, on December 14, the members of the Patidar community physically attacked one of the Dalit residents, namely Narshibhai Maganbhai Parmar. They also claimed that Patidar set the huts on fire. 
In 2014, a news article reported that a representation of two NGOs, Navsarjan Trust and Manav Adhikar Samiti, met with the district collector. They presented the demands for the immediate handover of plots, addressing the social boycott, and providing access to basic amenities, amongst other concerns.
Since then, the families continued to live in make-shift shanties without access to any basic amenities. 
In January 2018, the indefinite fast ended after almost 12 days following the intervention from the taluka administration. The administration allowed the families to convert a portion (one bigha) of their farmlands into non-agricultural land to build their houses. In return, the administration also agreed to bear the cost of construction, stated Sumra in the same news report.
However, the conflict escalated as a political issue after both the protesting parties received opposing support from local political leaders. 

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand for promised land

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

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?

February 2018

Why did the conflict end?

Community agreed to alternative offers

According to a 2018 news report, the district administration offered five Dalit families to convert a portion of their farmlands into non-agricultural land to build their houses. The report quotes an activist who clarifies that the administration agreed to bear the cost of construction while the families used one bigha of their farmlands. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/dalit-patidar-land-dispute-reveals-hardik-jignesh-rift/articleshow/62732273.cms

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Other, Land Reform Laws

Legislations/Policies Involved

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Section 3(1)(g) [Prescribes punishment for atrocities committed against SCs and STs including restricting access to water resources and interference with enjoyment of land rights.]  
Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993
Section 104 [Permission of the village panchayat is required for the construction of buildings.]
Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879
Section 60 [Written permission is required prior to occupation of unoccupied land]; Section 62 [Unoccupied land may be granted by the collector subject to rules and on conditions he deems fit]; Section 65 [Procedure for application of land for non-agricultural purposes.]
  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:

Lack of legal protection over land rights

Delay in allottment and possession of land/property

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

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:

Physical attack

Torching of houses

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Yes

Reported Details of the Violation:

On December 14, 2013, the members of Patidar community physically attacked one of the Dalits, namely Narshibhai Maganbhai Parmar. The Patidars also set the huts on fire.

Date of Violation

December 13, 2013

Location of Violation

Gitapur

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Protests/marches

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Office of Detroj Rampura Taluka Mamlatdar

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:

Navsarjan Trust, Manav Adhikar Samiti, Rashtriya Dalit Adhikar Manch

Resources Related to Conflict

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

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Documented By

Text Link

Reviewed By

Text Link

Updated By

Text Link

Edited By

Text LinkLand Conflict Watch

Other Land Conflicts in Gujarat

cross
Not a member yet?
Sign up now