Farmers Demand Employment, Higher Compensation in Exchange of Land for Hassan Airport in Karnataka

Reported by

Elizabeth ManiLand Conflict Watch

Last updated on

October 13, 2021

Location of Conflict

Bhuvanahalli, Sankenahalli, Lakshmisagara, Thendihalli, Davalapura and G Milanahalli

Hassan

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Airport

(

)

People Affected by Conflict

250

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

298

ha

Starting Year

2007

State

Karnataka

Sector

Infrastructure

Farmers and land owners in Bhuvanahalli and six other villages in Tumkur district have opposed the price quoted by the district administration as compensation for the Hassan airport project, which is a joint venture between the Government of Karnataka and Jupiter Aviation Private Limited on a Build Own Operate Transfer (BOOT) model. The project was first mooted by the Central Public Works Department in 1960, with a land notification being issued in 1969, but there was no progress. It was later revived in 20062007 by former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda in the interest of the region's farming sector. The district authorities had acquired 536 acres of land across the seven villages of Bhuvanahalli, Sankenahalli, Lakshmisagara, Thendihalli, Davalapura and G Milanahalli on the outskirts of the city in 2007 and handed it over to Jupiter Aviation.  The Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) needs additional 200 acres for the project. KIADB claims that 254 acres of land in four parcels have already been notified for the airport project over 12 years. At a meeting between the farmers and the district administration on July 17, 2018, the farmers said they would give up their land for the airport only if the airport authorities provide employment to the local people and pay INR 2 crore per acre as compensation. The district officials, however, offered them a maximum compensation of INR 32 lakh per acre. The farmers claimed that some qualified youths from the village wanted to apply for jobs at the airport but were denied entry by the airport authority. When LCW approached Special Land Acquisition Officer Arun Kumar for comments on the issue, he said he would not be able to share any information since he is not the concerned officer anymore. LCW then tried to contact another Special Land Acquisition Officer, Suresh Kumar, who said he had recently joined the post and was not aware of the issue. In March 2021, it was reported that the work on the airport could potentially begin within a year as the hurdles in the longstanding project were in the process of being cleared. Additional Chief Secretary Kapil Mohan visited the land in Boovanahalli village acquired for the airport and stated, "At present, we are concentrating on clearing the hurdles. At least 23 kilometres of the radius of the airport should be clear for flight operations. The power supply lines are being shifted. In June 2021, the Karnataka Cabinet formally approved the construction of the domestic airport at a revised investment of INR 194 crore.

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for more compensation than promised, Demand for employment

Region Classification

Urban and Rural

Type of Land

Private

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

Total investment involved (in Crores):

193.65

Type of investment:

Revised Investment

Year of Estimation

2021

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Land Acquisition Laws, Other, Case Laws

Legislations/Policies Involved

  1. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966

    Section 28 [The state government may acquire land for the purposes of the Act]; Section 29 [Compensation for the land acquired has to be paid in accordance with the Act]; Section 30 [Land Acquisition Act, 1894, applies mutatis mutandis for the purpose of payment of compensation under the Act]

  2. Land Acquisition Act, 1894

    Section 11 [Award made by District Collector includes the amount of compensation allowed for acquired land]; Section 15 [District Collector to be guided by Sections 23 and 24 for determining compensation]; Section 23 [Matters to be considered while determining compensation for land acquired]; Section 24 [Matters to be neglected while determining compensation]

  3. Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

    Section 24(2) [Where an award under the 1894 Act has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid, the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed]

  4. J Venkatesh Reddy v. The State Of Karnataka [WRIT PETITION Nos. 59461-59462 OF 2014]

    Section 24 of the LARR Act, which states that land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases, will be applicable to an acquisition under the KIAD Act.

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:

Incorrect estimation of compensation, Controversial land acquisition by the government , Delay in compensation

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

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

Protests/marches, Refusal of compensation

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Yes

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

When LCW approached Special Land Acquisition Officer Arun Kumar for comments on the issue, he said he would not be able to share any information since he is not the concerned officer anymore. LCW then tried to contact another Special Land Acquisition Officer, Suresh Kumar, who said he had recently joined the post and was not aware of the issue.

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of Corporate Authorities Approached

Other Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:
No Images Available

Documented By

Elizabeth Mani

Reviewed By

Elizabeth Mani

Updated By

Elizabeth Mani

Edited By

Elizabeth ManiLand Conflict Watch
X

Support our work

Your contribution ensures continuity of this crucial project.

As a member, you will get exclusive access to special reports, policy papers and research projects undertaken by Land Conflict Watch and behind-the-scenes interactions with the writers and researchers about their work.
Contribute Now