Kerala
,
Athirapilly
,
Thrissur
Published :
Aug 2016
|
Updated :
Kerala Government Gives Go-ahead to Athirapilly Hydroelectric Project Despite Protests
Reported by
Dr. K.H. Amitha Bachan
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
1123
People affected
1998
Year started
138
Land area affected
Households affected
1123
People Affected
1998
Year started
138
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Power
Reason/Cause of conflict
Hydroelectric Project
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Power
Reason/Cause of conflict
Hydroelectric Project
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

Tribal communities and activists have opposed the implementation of the Athirappilly Hydroelectric Project on Chellakudy river in Thrissur district. The project was proposed by the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) in 1982 and has been facing criticism since. The project received environmental and forest clearances by 1999, but the Kerala High Court ordered the Centre to reconsider the clearance in 2002 following opposition from various environmentalists and human rights activists. The first Environment Impact Assessment, conducted by the Tropical Botanical Garden and Research Institute, Kerala, was deemed faulty and quashed by the high court based on a complaint filed by NILANILPU (a people's organisation based in Kodungallur), Chalakkudy Puzha Samrakshana Samaithy and Geetha, a community leader of the Vazhachal tribal settlement. They declared the project an ecological disaster which would also result in the displacement of several villagers around the area. After the initial report was rejected, the KSEB roped in the Water and Power Consultancy Services, India, to carry out an environmental impact assessment, following which the project received another clearance from the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change in 2005. The Kadar tribals, who will be most impacted by the project, filed a PIL at the Kerala High Court, which quashed the clearance and directed the Pollution Control Board to conduct a public hearing. In 2011, the Western Ghats Ecological Expert Panel, headed by Madhav Gadgil, argued that clearances for the project had not been properly issued and that the project could not be carried out till the Forest Rights Act was implemented in letter and spirit. The project will displace 163 Kadar families at Vazhachal and 71 families in the Pokalappara settlements. In December 2015, tribal communities in the project area moved the High Court again, saying the project infringed upon their rights under the Forest Rights Act of 2006, and that the government could not proceed with the project disregarding their objections. In March 2018, due to continuing protests, the Minister of State for Electricity, M.M.Mani, announced that the project would be shelved until the parties arrive at a consensus. In June 2020, the Kerala government issued a fresh order to proceed with the project and to obtain a new environmental clearance for the same from the Centre. As per the order, the state government issued a "Noobjection Certificate for a period of seven years and a permit to proceed with the project". This has caused a furore among environmentalists and local people alike. A member of the Athirappilly village panchayat said in a news report that "the local body will discuss the latest developments. But the panchayat board is vehemently opposed to the project".

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Refusal to give up land for the project

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Both

Forest

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):

1500

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Kerala State Electricity Board, Kerala Forest Department, District Level Committee (DLC)

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:

TBGRI , WAPCOS

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Chalakkudy Puzha Samrakshana Samithy (CPSS), CPF, Geetha, Cheftain, Vazhachal Grama Sabaha

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
Dr. K.H. Amitha Bachan
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

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

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?

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