Gujarat
Jhanjhari, Masota
,
Kundol
,
Arvalli
Published :
|
Updated :
Demand for clean energy threatens land and livelihood of tribals in Gujarat
Reported by
Sukriti Vats
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
1032
Households affected
4954
People affected
2024
Year started
548
Land area affected
1032
Households affected
4954
People Affected
2024
Year started
548
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Other Kind of Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Other Kind of Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

In February 2024, Kundol villagers were faced with a few unknown drones mapping their land. On approaching the District Collector, they came to know about mineral exploration carried out by the Indian government, which stated that "they need not worry or fear it". The villagers through other internet sources found that land covering 547.80 hectares including their village and two neighbouring ones (Jhanjhari and Masota) were put up for auction by the Ministry of Mines on 29 November 2023.

The Government of India only three months before publishing the tender (in August) had amended the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act) to allow for private sector investment in the exploration of the newly identified “critical and deep-seated minerals” in the country. They also released a list of these 30 critical minerals to meet the growing demand for clean energy solutions, among other things. Nickel was on the list along with lithium, PGE, and other minerals that could help India shift towards a “sustainable and low-carbon future.” 

The Kundol Gram Sabha soon after coming to know about the tender of the Nickel and Chromium block, which encompassed their village, passed a resolution against the project. They appealed to the district administration and their MLA PC Baranda, who in turn wrote letters to the chief minister to listen to the villagers. They also gave assurance that the project would not take off.

The villagers, on the other hand, held massive protests and rallies and wrote a letter to President Droupadi Murmu in March stating that the decision to auction their land was ignored the constitutional mandate as the grant of mineral concessions in scheduled areas should have been guided by Article 244 (regarding the administration of 5th and 6th schedule areas), PESA Act 1996 (self-governance provisions), Forest Rights Act 2006 and LARR 2013, among others.

Kundol village is a Schedule V village and its administration is guided by Article 244. PESA Act applies to the village, which states that the Gram Sabha should be consulted before taking up any development projects in the area. There were also about 125 pending Forest Rights Act claims in the village, which would prevent the diversion of the forest in the future. The Land Acquisition Act would also have been applicable if the land were to be acquired for mining further against the consent of the tribals.

Meanwhile, the first tranche of the mineral auction ended without getting many bidders. The original deadline for awarding the mining lease was 20 February 2024. The ministry announced that they would put mineral blocks from the first tranche again in the fourth round of auction post-June, however, the auction of Gujarat’s Nickel and Chromium block was paused. Their press release said that the decision on it would be taken by the designated officer in due course of time.

The villagers still did not back down and feared that the government would release the tender once again after the election. So, they decided to boycott the polls. However, on the date of polling, SDM Devendra Prakash Meena, at the request of the Collector, approached the villagers and convinced them that if they didn't vote for any candidate then they would not be able to ask them for help in cancelling the auction once they come to power. So, the villagers finally voted with hopes of getting their demands heard.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Refusal to give up land for the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

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

2024

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Yes

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land, Residential area, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

No

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

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:

Ministry of Mines

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:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Samast Adivasi Samaj

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
Sukriti Vats
Show more work
Latest updates
Nagaon
Assam

Farmers in Assam resist land acquisition for solar plant, beaten by police

Surat
Gujarat

Surat farmers claim fertile land re-included in Gujarat's development plan without consent

Gadchiroli
Maharashtra

Villagers in Gadchiroli campaign to shut down Surjagarh iron ore mine

Biswanath
Assam

Encroachment, land dispute pose threat to newly designated Behali Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam

Krishnagiri
Tamil Nadu

Residents in Krishnagiri protest against takeover of land by SIPCOT

Lower Siang
Arunachal Pradesh

Tension in Arunachal's Lower Siang over Likabali-Durpai road project amid boundary disputes

Kanyakumari
Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu revives plan to construct Kanyakumari Port despite protests by fisherfolk

Koraput
Odisha

Bauxite mining at Mali Parbat in Koraput seeks to displace and disrupt local livelihoods

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Refusal to give up land for the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

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

2024

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Yes

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land, Residential area, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

No

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