A solar power project in Jaisalmer’s Nedan village, proposed over 3,821 acres (6,115 bighas) of land, had been a bone of contention between the village residents and Adani Renewable Energy Park Rajasthan Limited (AREPRL). The residents claimed to be ‘khatedari tenants’ of the land (any tenant who, according to the Rajasthan Tenancy Act of 1955, has certain special rights in different regions of the state). The disputed area is one of the two land parcels allotted to the company, and it is close to the conservation area of the endangered Great Indian Bustard.
The project was started by AREPRL in 2018 when the state allotted land for building a solar park with a maximum capacity of 1,500 megawatt. The government had initially allotted 1,452 bighas of land to Adani but had later shifted the project to AREPRL on February 9, 2015. It was scheduled to be completed on May 31, 2021. The parcel of land was reportedly earlier marked as agricultural land, the status of which was changed to ‘barren land’ through an executive order on May 30, 2017.
The farmers had registered a case in the Rajasthan high court in 2018 and also submitted their complaints to the district collector. They claimed that they had been using the land for agricultural purposes for the past 40-50 years. Protests against the allotment took place across Jaisalmer. The farmers demanded the return of the entire allotted land and that the status of the same be changed to agricultural land again.
On November 27, 2019, a single-judge bench of the high court dismissed the claim made by the petitioners. Later, a division bench of the court cancelled the allotment of the land to Adani. The court, based on evidences and affidavits submitted by both the parties, said that the disputed area of land is being used for public utilities and hence cannot be used to build a solar park. It also directed the state to survey the entire land and cancel the allotment of any land that is being used for public purposes.
Since then, there has been no update or media reports on the status of the land or on the surveys undertaken by the government. Meanwhile, Barkat Khan, one of the petitioners in the case, informed LCW that he did not wish to pursue the case further.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Complaint against procedural violations
Demand for legal recognition of land rights
Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand to change the status of the disputed land back to 'agricultural land'
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common
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?
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?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Project scrapped
Original Project Deadline
Whether the Project has been Delayed
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):
₹
401
Type of investment:
Cost of Project
Year of Estimation
2021
Has the Conflict Ended?
Yes
When did it end?
June, 2021
Why did the conflict end?
Project/scheme was cancelled or modified
On November 27, 2019, a single-judge bench of the Rajasthan high court dismissed the claim made by the petitioners. Later, a division bench of the court cancelled the allotment of the land to Adani. The court, based on evidences and affidavits submitted by both the parties, said that the disputed area of land was being used for public utilities and, hence, could not be used to build a solar park. It also directed the state to survey the entire land and cancel the allotment of any land that was being used for public purposes.
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Legislations/Policies Involved
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
Land record discrepancies
Lack of legal protection over land rights
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Disposed
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
High Court of Rajasthan
Case Number
SB CWP No. 5707 of 2018; DB Spl. Appl. Writ No. 51/2020
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Reported Details of the Violation:
Date of Violation
Location of Violation