Andhra Pradesh
Buddhavaram village, Gannamavaram mandal, near Vijaywada
,
Chintapalli
,
Visakhapatnam
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Bauxite Mining Leases in AP's Chintapalli Forest Cancelled after Protests from Tribespeople
Reported by
Surabhi Bhandari
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
8000
People Affected
2015
Year started
1212
Land area affected
Households affected
8000
People Affected
2015
Year started
1212
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Bauxite Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

In 2015, the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation (APMDC) was given a 30year lease for mining bauxite in Jarrela and Chintapalli Reserved Forests in Visakhapatnam, aggregating to 1212 hectares. The APMDC had signed a Memorandum of Understanding with private parties Jindal South West Holdings Limited and Anrak Aluminum Limited to undertake operations. Around 8,000 tribespeople, who will be directly affected by the proposed mining, have protested against the project. The twoyear period for starting the work ended in January 2017. Work could not commence due to opposition from the forest dwellers. Former Union Tribal Welfare Minister V. Kishore Chandra Deo said, "As per the Panchayat (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act and the Forest Rights Act, tribal people are the natural owners of minerals available in reserved forests. The APMDC has no right to either take up mining on its own or through other agencies. It is registered under the Companies Act and the majority stake in the corporation might go to private hands anytime. The lease deeds were cancelled in September 2019 on the grounds of noncompliance of applicable laws and failure to obtain environmental clearances as well as clearance from the Pollution Control Board.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

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

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):

20000

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

September 27, 2019

Why did the conflict end?

The lease deeds were cancelled in September 2019 on the grounds of non-compliance of applicable laws and failure to obtain environmental clearances as well as clearance from the Pollution Control Board.

Author
Reported by
Surabhi Bhandari

Andhra Pradesh

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

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Opposition against environmental degradation

Bauxite Mining Leases in AP's Chintapalli Forest Cancelled after Protests from Tribespeople

Reported by

Surabhi Bhandari

Legal Review by

Edited by

Updated by

Updated by

Published on

June 5, 2020

May 17, 2022

Edited on

June 5, 2020

Sector

Mining

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Bauxite Mining

Starting Year

2015

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

1212

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

People Affected by Conflict

8000

State

Andhra Pradesh

Sector

Mining

People Affected by Conflict

8000

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

1212

ha

Starting Year

2015

Location of Conflict

Chintapalli

Buddhavaram village, Gannamavaram mandal, near Vijaywada

Visakhapatnam

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Bauxite Mining

Land Conflict Summary

In 2015, the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation (APMDC) was given a 30year lease for mining bauxite in Jarrela and Chintapalli Reserved Forests in Visakhapatnam, aggregating to 1212 hectares. The APMDC had signed a Memorandum of Understanding with private parties Jindal South West Holdings Limited and Anrak Aluminum Limited to undertake operations. Around 8,000 tribespeople, who will be directly affected by the proposed mining, have protested against the project. The twoyear period for starting the work ended in January 2017. Work could not commence due to opposition from the forest dwellers. Former Union Tribal Welfare Minister V. Kishore Chandra Deo said, "As per the Panchayat (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act and the Forest Rights Act, tribal people are the natural owners of minerals available in reserved forests. The APMDC has no right to either take up mining on its own or through other agencies. It is registered under the Companies Act and the majority stake in the corporation might go to private hands anytime. The lease deeds were cancelled in September 2019 on the grounds of noncompliance of applicable laws and failure to obtain environmental clearances as well as clearance from the Pollution Control Board.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

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?

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):

20000

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

September 27, 2019

Why did the conflict end?

The lease deeds were cancelled in September 2019 on the grounds of non-compliance of applicable laws and failure to obtain environmental clearances as well as clearance from the Pollution Control Board.

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Environmental Laws

Legislations/Policies Involved

Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996
4(k) (the recommendations of the Gram Sabha or the Panchayats at the appropriate level shall be made mandatory prior to grant of prospecting licence or mining lease for minor minerals in the Scheduled Areas)
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
3(i) (right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community forest resource which they have been traditionally protecting and conserving for sustainable use); 5(d) (ensure that the decisions taken in the Gram Sabha to regulate access to community forest resources and stop any activity which adversely affects the wild animals, forest and the biodiversity are complied with)
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
Section 2 [Restrictions on use of forest land for non forest purposes]
Forest (Conservation) Rules, 2003
Rule 6 [Submission of proposals for using forest land for non-forest purposes]
Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006
Paragraph 2 and Schedule [Requirement of prior environmental clearance for mining projects]
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957
Section 11 [competitive bidding process required for purposes of composite license for mining]
  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:

Non-implementation/violation of FRA

Lack of legal protection over land rights

Non-implementation/violation of PESA

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)

High Court of Andhra Pradesh

Case Number

Writ Petition No. 1571/2006

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

The High Court held that the agreement for mining could not be implemented until the environmental clearances had been granted by the Government, hence the petition was premature and disposed off. Liberty was granted to file afresh once the clearance was granted.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & Head of Forest Force; Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Jindal South West Aluminium Ltd, Anrak Aluminium Ltd

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Tribal communities of Khond, Nooka Dora, Bagata and Manne Dora

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 Andhra Pradesh

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