Maharashtra
Rajewadi, Amble, Waghapur, Pargaon Memane, Khanawadi, Munjawadi and Ikhatpur villages
,
Purandar
,
Pune
Published :
Feb 2017
|
Updated :
May 20, 2025
After Rajgurunagar, farmers in Maharashtra's Purandar oppose Pune International Airport
Reported by
Rimki Patgiri
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
1660
Households affected
7968
People affected
2016
Year started
2400
ha.
Land area affected
1660
Households affected
7968
People Affected
2016
Year started
2400
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Airport
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Airport
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

In October 2016, then Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis declared Purandar tehsil in Pune as the site for a new international airport. The government gave permission to the Airports Authority of India (AAI) for a detailed project report (DPR) for the proposed airport. The AAI has approved the site.

The airport reportedly requires at least 2,400 hectares of land, which will affect 1,660 families. The residents of seven affected villages - Rajewadi, Amble, Waghapur, Pargaon Memane, Khanawadi, Munjawadi and Ikhatpur - have passed resolutions that they would not give away their land for the project. In November 2016, soon after the airport site was shifted to Purandar, the village residents attempted to block the survey for land in the area. A month later, they came together to form the Vimantar Virodhi Sangharsh Samarthak Sanghatan to officially oppose the project.

On 26 December 2016, thousands of affected people in Purandar blocked the Pune-Pandharpur Road for nearly two hours. They claimed that farming was their main source of livelihood and that no amount of compensation could make up for that loss. The womenfolk also [threatened ](https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/purandar-farmers-firm-on-stand-wont-give-up-irrigated-land-pune-airport-rehabilitation-3081398/#:~:text=Dipali Hole%2C another member%2C also,due to the upcoming airport.)to go on a fast, stating that the airport would affect their livelihood and the future of their children.

Asha Nimbalkar, sarpanch (head of panchayat) of one village, [said](https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/purandar-farmers-firm-on-stand-wont-give-up-irrigated-land-pune-airport-rehabilitation-3081398/#:~:text=Dipali Hole%2C another member%2C also,due to the upcoming airport.) that it was only recently that women in the villages have started farming and their land has seen any vegetation, so they do not want it to be taken away.

Initially, Rajgurunagar in Chakan town was finalised as the site for the international airport. But due to opposition from farmers and the mountainous terrain, the government decided to set up the new airport in Purandar as it was a flatter region. Although Lohegaon air force station serves as an international airport in Pune city, only two to four international flights can operate from the airport. Moreover, it is an Air Force base and has a single civilian terminal, which operates both international as well as domestic traffic.

In 2018, Maharashtra Airport Development Company Limited was declared the special planning authority to take the project forward.

In August 2019, 1,555 affected people from the seven villages submitted their objection against the land acquisition to the Pune district administration. However, in December that year, the administration appointed seven deputy collectors to oversee the land acquisition process in each of the seven villages. The officers were tasked with talking to the affected people and resolving their issues so that the process could be completed within a year. The district administration had suggested to the Maharashtra government to make the villagers stakeholders in the project through a land pooling scheme, on which the state is yet to respond.

In September 2020, Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar asked the Pune district administration to check the feasibility of developing the project at an alternate site. The decision came after MLA Sanjay Jagtap from the Purandar constituency proposed to shift the project due to mass opposition to the land acquisition.

On 2 May 2025, the survey team came to the proposed site in Purandhar to conduct a drone survey. However, the villagers blocked the survey team, broke the drones and locked the team in their cars. The police subsequently filed an FIR against some villagers for blocking the survey.

On 3 May 2025, a large police team accompanied the survey team which led to violent clashes with the police. The protestors had blocked the pathway to the site with a bullock cart. After forceful attempt of police to proceed, the protestors turned aggressive. Due to the increased commotion, the bullock started attacking people around injuring some women protestors. This further escalated to tensions leading to stone pelting by protestors on police personnel injuring 25 police officers. The police subsequently filed two more FIRs against 150 persons on criminal attempts to attack police and government personnel (BNS 132) and another FIR on the driver of bullock cart of attempt to murder (BNS 109). Later the police arrested five people in the same matter.

Due to the escalation of protests, the revenue minister of Maharashtra, Chandrashekhar Bawankule halted the survey and offered the farmers to talks regarding a better package in compensation. In response, many farmers denied talking about any package and demanded the project site to be shifted.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Refusal to give up land for the project

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Private

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

2024

Whether the Project has been Delayed

No

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

12000

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

2016

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Pune district administration, Maharashtra Airport Development Company Limited

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

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?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Residents of affected villages

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
Author
Reported by
Rimki Patgiri
Show more work
Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Refusal to give up land for the project

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

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?

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

2024

Whether the Project has been Delayed

No

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

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