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

Rajasthan villages protest windmill project near Desert National Park

Reported by

Sukriti Vats

Legal Review by

Anmol Gupta

Edited by

Anupa Sagar Kujur

Updated by

Published on

November 29, 2023

November 30, 2023

Edited on

November 29, 2023

State

Rajasthan

Sector

Power

People Affected by Conflict

4288

Households Affected by Conflict

893

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

478

ha

Starting Year

2011

Location of Conflict

Kanoi

Salkha, Chhatrel, Kuchhri

Jaisalmer

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Renewable Power

National Park

Land Conflict Summary

It was in 2011 when Vish Wind Infrastructure started setting up a 159-MW windmill close to the Desert National Park, covering Kanoi, Salkha, Chhatrel, Kuchhri, and many other villages. About 1890.01 bighas (478 hectares) of land was allotted for the project, which included mostly government land. The villagers, however, opposed the project alleging that some land parcels were also used as common land (water catchment/harvesting areas, grazing, sacred trees, approach roads).

Villagers said that they had been cultivating some of the government land and paying a trespassing (TP) fine for it. They touted that the government should have settled the land in their name because of the said practice. They also claimed that the electrical wiring of the windmills fell on Khatedari (agricultural land), restricting the tenants from accessing it.

However, the major contention for the villagers was that tourism would be affected due to the windmill. Kanoi village, especially, was close to the Sam sand dunes, part of the Thar desert. Most of the villagers' livelihood was dependent on tourists staying in their camps and going for camel safaris.

Kanoi villagers sat on a protest for three months in 2012 but they were threatened by the state police with jail. After this, a petition was filed in the Rajasthan High Court to stop the project but it was eventually dismissed.

Interestingly, these villages were the habitat of the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard that had also been exposed to the deadly wirings of the windmill. There were reports of the birds dying after colliding with the wind turbines.

Finally, a petition was filed in 2019 by M.K. Ranjitsinh Jhala, a former bureaucrat-turned-wildlife activist, in the Supreme Court clubbing several cases filed by the locals around Jaisalmer in the High Court and the National Green Tribunal against the power companies.

In 2021, the Supreme Court directed the companies to put the high transmission lines below the Earth. The court also called for action in potential habitats. Similar directions were given by the NGT in the same year on a 2016 petition by residents of Kanoi and 10 other villages.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for better access to common land/resources

Demand to cancel the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Grazing 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

Project completed

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other environmental services, Government or community-regulated urban commons

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?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Setting up of Power Plant based on Renewable Energy Sources) Rules, 2007
Rule 5 [Land which cannot be made available for allotment under these rules, include land falling within the limit of 2 km from the middle point of Jaisalmer to Sam Road]
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972
Section 2 (Definition of wildlife includes animals mentioned in Schedule I) Section 5C (Functions of the National Board for Wildlife include assessing the impact of any development activity on wildlife or its habitat) Schedule I (Great Indian Bustards are included in the list of animals to be protected under this Act)
M. K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (WP (C) No. 838 of 2019, Supreme Court)
  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:

Violation of environmental laws

Non-consultation with stakeholders

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Disposed

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Rajasthan High Court, National Green Tribunal

Case Number

S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5458/15

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

In October 2014, a PIL was filed by villagers where they questioned the legality of the land allotment for a 159.2 MW Wind Energy farm. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that there was no pollution caused by wind mills. A similar petition was filed in 2015 against a wind farm established by Vish Wind Infrastructure Limited. On November 24, 2015, the High Court disposed of the matter, reiterating that the “geographical status, historical and heritage monuments, rich culture and sand-dunes of Jaisalmer” would not be affected by the installation of wind mills. Another point of contention was how the Rajasthan Land Revenue Rules, 2007 had been amended to prohibit allotment of land to renewable energy sources falling within 2 kms from the middle point of Jaisalmer and Sam Road. However, the rules were amended after the allotment had already been made and could not be said to be operate retrospectively.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Advocacy (for inclusion in courts)

Blockades

Protests/marches

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

District administration, Rajasthan revenue department, Rajasthan Renewable Energy Corporation Ltd

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:

Vish Wind Infrastructure

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

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

Kanoi villagers protesting against wind turbines in 2012

Image Credit:  

Special Arrangement

Kanoi villagers from Rajasthan’s Sam district protesting against wind turbines, which they alleged affected tourism in the region, and thus their livelihood.

Image Credit:  

Special Arrangement

Video

It was in 2011 when Vish Wind Infrastructure started setting up a 159-MW windmill close to the Desert National Park, covering Kanoi, Salkha, Chhatrel, Kuchhri, and many other villages. About 1890.01 bighas (478 hectares) of land was allotted for the project, which included mostly government land. The villagers, however, opposed the project alleging that some land parcels were also used as common land (water catchment/harvesting areas, grazing, sacred trees, approach roads).

Villagers said that they had been cultivating some of the government land and paying a trespassing (TP) fine for it. They touted that the government should have settled the land in their name because of the said practice. They also claimed that the electrical wiring of the windmills fell on Khatedari (agricultural land), restricting the tenants from accessing it.

However, the major contention for the villagers was that tourism would be affected due to the windmill. Kanoi village, especially, was close to the Sam sand dunes, part of the Thar desert. Most of the villagers' livelihood was dependent on tourists staying in their camps and going for camel safaris.

Kanoi villagers sat on a protest for three months in 2012 but they were threatened by the state police with jail. After this, a petition was filed in the Rajasthan High Court to stop the project but it was eventually dismissed.

Interestingly, these villages were the habitat of the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard that had also been exposed to the deadly wirings of the windmill. There were reports of the birds dying after colliding with the wind turbines.

Finally, a petition was filed in 2019 by M.K. Ranjitsinh Jhala, a former bureaucrat-turned-wildlife activist, in the Supreme Court clubbing several cases filed by the locals around Jaisalmer in the High Court and the National Green Tribunal against the power companies.

In 2021, the Supreme Court directed the companies to put the high transmission lines below the Earth. The court also called for action in potential habitats. Similar directions were given by the NGT in the same year on a 2016 petition by residents of Kanoi and 10 other villages.

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for better access to common land/resources

Demand to cancel the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Grazing 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?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land for Setting up of Power Plant based on Renewable Energy Sources) Rules, 2007
Rule 5 [Land which cannot be made available for allotment under these rules, include land falling within the limit of 2 km from the middle point of Jaisalmer to Sam Road]
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972
Section 2 (Definition of wildlife includes animals mentioned in Schedule I) Section 5C (Functions of the National Board for Wildlife include assessing the impact of any development activity on wildlife or its habitat) Schedule I (Great Indian Bustards are included in the list of animals to be protected under this Act)
M. K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (WP (C) No. 838 of 2019, Supreme Court)
  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:

Violation of environmental laws

Non-consultation with stakeholders

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Disposed

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Rajasthan High Court, National Green Tribunal

Case Number

S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5458/15

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

In October 2014, a PIL was filed by villagers where they questioned the legality of the land allotment for a 159.2 MW Wind Energy farm. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that there was no pollution caused by wind mills. A similar petition was filed in 2015 against a wind farm established by Vish Wind Infrastructure Limited. On November 24, 2015, the High Court disposed of the matter, reiterating that the “geographical status, historical and heritage monuments, rich culture and sand-dunes of Jaisalmer” would not be affected by the installation of wind mills. Another point of contention was how the Rajasthan Land Revenue Rules, 2007 had been amended to prohibit allotment of land to renewable energy sources falling within 2 kms from the middle point of Jaisalmer and Sam Road. However, the rules were amended after the allotment had already been made and could not be said to be operate retrospectively.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Nature of Protest

Advocacy (for inclusion in courts)

Blockades

Protests/marches

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

District administration, Rajasthan revenue department, Rajasthan Renewable Energy Corporation Ltd

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Sam tehsildar didn't know about the issue. Both him and district collector believed that everything was done in accordance to the law. List of questions were sent to both the Rajasthan Revenue Department, Rajasthan Renewable Energy Corporation Ltd. Responses are awaited.

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Vish Wind Infrastructure

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:
Kanoi villagers protesting against wind turbines in 2012

Kanoi villagers protesting against wind turbines in 2012

Image Credit:  

Special Arrangement

Kanoi villagers protesting against wind turbines in 2012

Kanoi villagers from Rajasthan’s Sam district protesting against wind turbines, which they alleged affected tourism in the region, and thus their livelihood.

Image Credit:  

Special Arrangement

Documented By

Text Link

Reviewed By

Text Link

Updated By

Text Link

Edited By

Text LinkLand Conflict Watch

Other Land Conflicts in Rajasthan

cross
Not a member yet?
Sign up now