Kerala
,
Thottappally
,
Alappuzha
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Residents Protest Against Sand Mining in Beach Alapuzzha
Reported by
Stella James
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
30000
People Affected
2003
Year started
1700
Land area affected
Households affected
30000
People Affected
2003
Year started
1700
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Sand Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

In 2003, the state government of Kerala decided to lease out a 17 km stretch of state owned land from Valiyazhikkal to Thottappally in Alappuzha district to Kerala Rare Earths and Minerals Limited (KREML), a joint sector company, to conduct mineral sand mining for 20 years. The coast line of Alappuzha is densely populated with fisherman community and is one of the most populated stretches in the country. They depend on small  small-scale fish distribution, fish curing, peeling etc. Sand mining in the area poses grave environmental as well as livelihood problems and may impact the fishing stock in the region.
The protests intensified in 2013 when the mining did not stop and residents began to realize the full implications of the mining on environment. Protests were conducted by local residents, especially fishermen, supported by other Kerala-based people's and environmental organizations.
In 2016, residents and local environmental organizations further intensified the protests and cordoned the area in an attempt to stop mining equipment and vehicles from entering. The mining stopped in June 2017, presumably due to the expiry of license, and protests were stopped, but locals are worried that operations may resume if their license is renewed.
In January 2019, it was reported that besides sand mining at Thottappally harbour the state government has now decided to remove sand from the Thottappally leading channel and estuary to ensure a smooth flow of river water from Kuttanad region through the Thottappally spillway. While they claim this move is taken to prevent floods, but the Green Roots Nature Conservation Forum allege that this move will increase sea erosion. Following this decision, the protests became stronger, as the state government gave permission for cutting down trees and removing mineral rich sand to widen the estuary. In May 2020, the local residents and CPI members conducted a protest march to Thottappally which was blocked by the police. Similarly in July, local residents with Janakeeya Samara Samithi organised a ‘people’s barricade’ against mineral sand-mining at Thottapally. The women took active part in the protests by jumping downstream the Thottappally spillway channel demanding the removal and transportation of sand from the area.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

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?

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):

400

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2003

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Author
Reported by
Stella James

Kerala

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

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Residents Protest Against Sand Mining in Beach Alapuzzha

Reported by

Stella James

Legal Review by

Edited by

Updated by

Updated by

Published on

July 12, 2017

May 20, 2022

Edited on

July 12, 2017

Sector

Mining

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Sand Mining

Starting Year

2003

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

1700

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

People Affected by Conflict

30000

State

Kerala

Sector

Mining

People Affected by Conflict

30000

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

1700

ha

Starting Year

2003

Location of Conflict

Thottappally

Alappuzha

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Sand Mining

Land Conflict Summary

In 2003, the state government of Kerala decided to lease out a 17 km stretch of state owned land from Valiyazhikkal to Thottappally in Alappuzha district to Kerala Rare Earths and Minerals Limited (KREML), a joint sector company, to conduct mineral sand mining for 20 years. The coast line of Alappuzha is densely populated with fisherman community and is one of the most populated stretches in the country. They depend on small  small-scale fish distribution, fish curing, peeling etc. Sand mining in the area poses grave environmental as well as livelihood problems and may impact the fishing stock in the region.
The protests intensified in 2013 when the mining did not stop and residents began to realize the full implications of the mining on environment. Protests were conducted by local residents, especially fishermen, supported by other Kerala-based people's and environmental organizations.
In 2016, residents and local environmental organizations further intensified the protests and cordoned the area in an attempt to stop mining equipment and vehicles from entering. The mining stopped in June 2017, presumably due to the expiry of license, and protests were stopped, but locals are worried that operations may resume if their license is renewed.
In January 2019, it was reported that besides sand mining at Thottappally harbour the state government has now decided to remove sand from the Thottappally leading channel and estuary to ensure a smooth flow of river water from Kuttanad region through the Thottappally spillway. While they claim this move is taken to prevent floods, but the Green Roots Nature Conservation Forum allege that this move will increase sea erosion. Following this decision, the protests became stronger, as the state government gave permission for cutting down trees and removing mineral rich sand to widen the estuary. In May 2020, the local residents and CPI members conducted a protest march to Thottappally which was blocked by the police. Similarly in July, local residents with Janakeeya Samara Samithi organised a ‘people’s barricade’ against mineral sand-mining at Thottapally. The women took active part in the protests by jumping downstream the Thottappally spillway channel demanding the removal and transportation of sand from the area.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common 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

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):

400

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2003

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Sustainable Sand Mining Management Guidelines dated 2016
Provision 4.1: Requires the preparation of District Survey Reports (DSR) which is supposed to include 'identifying measures for protection of environment and ecology'; Provision 4.1.1 (c): Creating 'mining' and 'no mining' zones keeping in mind things like ecology and habitation
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957
Section 4A: authorizes the government to terminate a lease where the government is of opinion that it is in the interest of "preservation of natural environment, control of floods" to terminate the same
Kerala Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2015
Section 3: Prohibition on mining except with a license under the The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957
  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

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Case Number

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

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:

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:

Kerala Rare Earths and Minerals Limited, Indian Rare Earths Limited

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

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

Other Land Conflicts in Kerala

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