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.
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?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
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
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Land Acquisition Laws, Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Central/State Government Policy, Environmental Law
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:
Incorrect estimation of compensation
Non-implementation/violation of LARR Act
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)
National Green Tribunal (Southern Zone & Principal Bench), Supreme Court of India
Case Number
Original Application No. 303 of 2014, Original Application No. 393 & 394 of 2016, Appeal No. 54 (NGT) and Civil Appeal No. 6702 of 2019 (SC)
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Displacement
Other harassment
Physical attack
Blackmail/threats/intimidation
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Yes
Reported Details of the Violation:
Jenu Kuruba tribal community members have been protesting against the government's bid to push eco-tourism in the ecologically sensitive Nagarhole National Park and Tiger Reserve since 2021. They have also been demanding community and individual forest rights. On May 5th, 2021, JK Thimma, a community leader and member of the Budakattu Krishikara Sanghatane, was repairing and rebuilding his home, in the Geddahaadi village inside the Nagarhole Tiger Reserve. According to JA Shiva, another community member from the same village, forest officials tried to break down the house, a hut built with bamboo. Thimma and fellow residents from the Geddahaadi protested this move and asserted that they had a right to repair their houses. They gathered around Thimma’s house in a spontaneous protest and prevented forest officials from breaking the house down, “We questioned them [forest officials] lawfully. We pointed out that we had filed our claims. We asked why they were refusing to process those and were instead hindering our everyday life,” said JA Shiva. According to him, this angered the officials who abused the tribal members present at the scene. A circle inspector from Kutta police station also said he would retaliate. The DRFO and a forest guard filed an FIR accusing the community members of assault, preventing a government officer from doing his duty and unlawful detention on the same day. The forest officials in their FIR have claimed that JK Thimma, JA Shiva and eight other community members had gheraoed the officials and threatened them with violence for discharging their duty. Shiva said that the Jenu Kuruba members learnt of the FIR the next day and applied for anticipatory bail. Bojamma, one of the ten accused in the Forest Department’s FIR and wife of JK Thimma also filed an FIR on March 11, 2021 under the SC/ST Atrocity Act. In her complaint, she stated that the forest officials tried to break down the house stating they had no right to repair or rebuild their homes. According to her complaint, forest officials also verbally abused the Jenu Kuruba members while specifically alluding to their ethnicity and referring to them as "diseased". The FIR states that one of the forest officials also threatened to “have a grave dug” for JK Thimma. The FIR filed by the forest officials against the Jenu Kuruba community has proceeded to court and is now under trial. The Kutta police however closed the FIR filed by Bojamma and filed a ‘B’ report according to JA Shiva. “They [police] did not visit or talk to any of us from the village before closing our FIR,” said Shiva.
Date of Violation
May 4, 2021
Location of Violation
Nagarhole Gedda Haddi, Kutta Circle
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
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?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?








