In 2015, the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation (APMDC) was given a 30-year 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 two-year 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 non-compliance of applicable laws and failure to obtain environmental clearances as well as clearance from the Pollution Control Board. Revocation of these leases was also a key poll promise of the current Andhra Pradesh government.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
To not use common land for mining purposes
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common
Type of Common Land
Forest and Non-Forest
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.
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Forest Rights Act of 2006
Legislations/Policies Involved
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 the FRA
Legal Status:
Status of Case In Court
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Case Number
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Whether criminal law was used against protestors
Official name of the criminal law. Did the case reach trial?
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Nature of Protest
Armed protests
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:
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?
Name, Designation and Comment of Corporate Authorities Approached
Other Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Integrated Tribal Development Agency
Documented By
Surabhi BhandariReviewed By
Surabhi BhandariUpdated By
Surabhi BhandariEdited By
Surabhi BhandariLand Conflict Watch
