Karnataka
Chikkaballapur, Ramanagara, Kolar and Bengaluru Rural
,
Sakleshpur
,
Hassan
Published :
Sep 2018
|
Updated :
November 17, 2025
Contentious land acquisition and compensation disputes among coffee growers under the Yettinahole project in Karnataka
Reported by
Elizabeth Mani
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
3418
Households affected
337
People affected
2016
Year started
226
ha.
Land area affected
3418
Households affected
337
People Affected
2016
Year started
226
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Water Management
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Unclassifed
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Water Management
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

The Yettinahole Integrated Drinking Water Supply Project, initially called the Netravati Thiruvu Yojana, was approved by the Government of Karnataka to provide drinking water to drought-prone areas of Chikkaballapur, Kolar, Hassan, Chitradurga, Tumkur, Ramanagara, and Bangalore Rural districts. It plans to divert 24.01 TMC of water from west-flowing streams and fill 527 MI tanks to 50 percent capacity. The revised project report was sanctioned on 17 February 2014 at a cost of Rs 12,912.36 crore. The project is being implemented by the Visvesvaraya Jala Nigam Limited (VJNL) under the Karnataka government.

The Yettinahole project cost has escalated from Rs 8,323 crore in 2012 to Rs 12,912 crore in 2014, and now stands at Rs 23,252 crore due to delays and rising expenses. Now again revised to Rs 25,151 crore. By June 2025, about Rs 17,147 crore had already been spent, including Rs 2,669 crore on land acquisition. The latest hike is linked to the new Land Acquisition Act, higher GST, tender premiums, route changes, and the shift to pipelines, with a revised project report approved in January 2023.

The project entails the acquisition of 6,145 hectares of land, including 4,649 hectares of dry land, 522 hectares of wetland, 226 hectares of coffee plantations, and 746 hectares of bagayat land (irrigated fields dependent on sources other than rainfall).

When the state government began the land acquisition for the project, local people and environmentalists demanded a public notification and hearing of objections, as well as a social and environmental impact assessment. But these did not take place as work had already begun. On 22 September 2016, the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), headed by Justice Swatanter Kumar, directed the state to take prior mandatory forest clearance (FC) from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change as per Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The FC was allowed under the condition that the project proponent may do an ecological assessment after the completion of the project. The FC itself was challenged as being void for illegality and arbitrariness, and relief was asked for by the petitioner, K N Somashekhar, against the implementation of the project in two separate appeals before the Southern Bench of the NGT. These appeals were transferred to the Principal Bench on 5 July 2016, which dismissed them on October 5, 2017 without citing reasons.

The appeal was again taken up for hearing in 2018, but the judgement was not pronounced. It was listed before another bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice A K Goel, which finally gave its judgment on 24 May 2019. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, saying they lacked merit as the appellants could not furnish proof to validate the setting aside of the sanction given for the project. It also cited a 2015 draft notification issued on the basis of the Kasturirangan Report on Western Ghats, which did not prohibit drinking water projects. Therefore, it was not necessary under the law that a scientific environmental impact study be conducted, the Bench concluded.

The coffee plantation farmers, meanwhile, are unhappy with the land price fixed by the district committee and have refused to part with their land. The district committee announced the prices for 483 acres of land in 22 villages of Sakleshpur tehsil in Hasan district, fixing the land acquisition price at Rs 15-20 lakh per acre. The landowners were given a month to file objections, if any. Farmers claim that land under coffee cultivation costs high compared to dry land, which is why they had objected to the price fixed by the committee. After a few protests, the government agreed to directly purchase land from the coffee growers at Rs 25-30 lakh per acre, but more than 35 farmers were still waiting for their compensation.

The Hassan Planters' Association has been helping them find a job to make ends meet. P P Sunder, one of the farmers who did not receive compensation, told LCW that those who received the money had to bribe the government to get what was promised to them. Meanwhile, the state, in its state budgetary allocation for 2020-2021, allocated another Rs 1,500 crore for the Yettinahole project. This move has reignited opposition amongst activists against the project, who have questioned its usefulness, especially given their claim that there is no surplus water available in the region to divert it towards potable use. Additionally, they also suggest that the blasting activities in the catchment areas of the project - namely in Kadagarahalli, Hiradanahalli, Hebbasale, Heggade and Maranahalli - have already had a major impact on the eco-sensitive areas of the Western Ghats and have urged a rethinking of the project immediately.

In July 2024, heavy rains and landslides in Sakleshpur washed away the Kumbaradi - Harle Estate road, cutting off five villages. Residents blamed the nearby Yettinahole canal works, while officials, citing similar landslides along NH-75, advised relocation.

The project is being executed in 2 stages, with the first stage inaugurated in September 2024. In its first three months, it delivered only 2 tmcft of the planned 5 tmcft due to the breach of Belavadi Lake, only benefiting parts of Arasikere and Belur taluks. The remaining stage is in progress and is expected to be completed by 2027.

In February 2019, an FIR was filed against a VJNL executive engineer for illegally using forest land, constructing a canal without approval, and continuing work despite the case being registered, with reports indicating that of the 274.35 acres sought, 266.87 acres had already been used. Subsequently, in July 2025, the Forest Advisory Committee of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) ordered a halt to the Yettinahole project after a site inspection by its regional officers revealed multiple violations, including construction on 266.55 acres of forest land without the ministry’s clearance.

On 4 June 2025, the state government approached the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) for approval to divert 111.02 hectares of forest land, revised from the earlier 173.31 hectares, in Tumakuru and Hassan districts.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for more compensation than promised

Complaint against procedural violations

Refusal to give up land for the project

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Scrapping of the project

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

No arrest or detention. Accused filed a counter FIR and took anticipatory bail

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Out on bail

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

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Sections 342, 353, 504, r/w 34

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?

The accused got anticipatory bail with the help of their association: Buddakattu Krishikara Sanghatane

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)

JA Shiva (one of accused). Sophie Grig, Survival International JA Shiva: 08197620535

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

2022

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Yes

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Non-agri rural enterprise

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

25000

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2013

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Government of Karnataka

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Hassan Planters' Association; Sahyadri Samrakshana Sanchyana

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?

No arrest or detention. Accused filed a counter FIR and took anticipatory bail

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Out on bail

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

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Sections 342, 353, 504, r/w 34

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?

The accused got anticipatory bail with the help of their association: Buddakattu Krishikara Sanghatane

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
Elizabeth Mani
Show more work
Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for more compensation than promised

Complaint against procedural violations

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?

The accused got anticipatory bail with the help of their association: Buddakattu Krishikara Sanghatane

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

2022

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Yes

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Non-agri rural enterprise

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