Andhra Pradesh
,
Pattiseema
,
West Godavari
Published :
Sep 2016
|
Updated :
Farmers Allege Forceful Consent for Pattiseema Irrigation Project in Andhra Pradesh
Reported by
Surabhi Bhandari
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
19
Households affected
91
People affected
2015
Year started
728
Land area affected
19
Households affected
91
People Affected
2015
Year started
728
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Power
Reason/Cause of conflict
Irrigation Dam
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Power
Reason/Cause of conflict
Irrigation Dam
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

The Pattiseema lift irrigation project was commissioned in July 2014 and was built by 2016, sidestepping the concerns of farmers whose lands were acquired and of experts who questioned the necessity, viability and feasibility of the project. The project was completed in a record time of two years by interlinking the Krishna and Godavari rivers by diverting surplus Godavari waters into the Krishna through the Polavaram right canal, reaching Krishna at the barrage near Vijayawada.
Local residents and activists question the necessity of the project when water availability to Rayalaseema depends on other irrigation projects -- Handri Neeva Sujala Sravanti and Galeru Nagari Sujala Sravanti, both of which are under construction. Further, there is no assured allocation of water to Rayalaseema. The Pattiseema project is said to be relevant only till the completion of the Polavaram project, after which the equipment used for Pattiseema would be dismantled and used for other projects.
The farmers allege that they were not consulted before the start of the project but were forced to give their consent for the same. Eventually, INR 701.41 crore were spent for acquiring 1,798 acres. of land
In 2017, the CAG report stated that construction patterns for the dam kept on changing frequently, which resulted in an additional burden of INR 106 crore. Activists and farmers claim that the project is a colossal waste of public money and state that the cost outweighs its benefits. They also accuse the government of spending large sums of money to advertise and promote the project in various events.
Experts have also pointed out that proper environmental impact studies were not carried out on mixing river waters, loss of habitat and effect on wetlands and floodplains.
In June 2019, RTI queries by environmental activists revealed that the state government did not even obtain an environmental clearance for the Pattiseema project on the ground that it was covered under the environmental clearance granted to the Polavaram project, though there were substantial differences in design, cost and physical specifications.
However, on February 20, 2020, a National Green Tribunal-appointed committee did not consider the same when it was directed to look into the clearances obtained by Pattiseema and other irrigation projects in Andhra Pradesh. The NGT had sought a report on the same from the government within four weeks.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Private

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):

1300

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2014

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:

Water Resources Department

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

M/s Megha Engineering & Infrastructures Ltd

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Local farmers

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?

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?

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
Surabhi Bhandari
Show more work
Latest updates
East Jaintia Hills
Meghalaya

Violent protest during public hearing for cement plant expansion in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills

Narela
Delhi

Residents of Narela's Bajitpur Thakran oppose demolition of temples for defence institute, demand sports complex

Surguja
Chhattisgarh

Adivasis in Chhattisgarh's Hasdeo protest relentlessly against mining project in forest

Kamrup Metropolitan
Assam

Lawyer bodies protest against Assam government’s decision to relocate Gauhati High Court

Faizabad
Uttar Pradesh

Demands for Ram Temple, Babri Mosque at same site divides Ayodhya

Mumbai
Maharashtra

Supreme Court Allows Land Reclamation for Mumbai Coastal Road Project

Pune
Maharashtra

Farmers Refuse Land for Pune Outer Ring Road Project in Maharashtra

Surat
Gujarat

Slum Dwellers in Gujarat's Surat Stage Protest against Demolition, Forced Eviction

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Refusal to give up land for the project

Complaint against procedural violations

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?

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

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

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