Residents of Chikhli village in Maharashtra’s Satara district forced 41 wind turbines, being operated by energy company Suzlon, to shut down on May 7, 2008. Villagers were protesting the acquisition of land through dubious and fraudulent means. They alleged that there were several irregularities in the purchase of land, largely done through mediators, and that they had been paid lower than the fair market value.

The Chikhli protest was not an isolated incident, but part of larger agitation brewing against wind energy companies across Satara and Sangli districts. According to a document prepared by the Shramik Mukti Dal and submitted during a meeting with the state revenue minister, as on January 2, 2009, villagers in four talukas in Sangli alone had submitted 699 complaints relating to fraudulent purchase of land and 242 complaints relating to encroachment by energy companies.

According to Bharat Patankar, co-founder and president of Shramik Mukti Dal, the land that had been acquired by wind energy companies was located on the hill slopes and drought-prone regions in the two districts. The high velocity of wind in these regions makes it ideal for energy companies. “Sometime around 2007-08, many agents started visiting the area and surveying the land for these companies. They took unofficial permission from the government to buy the land and took money from the companies. They made it seem like the villagers had no option but to sell their land.”

“We had already been involved with many farmers’ movements in the region so during this time, the farmers approached us and requested our help in raising the price for purchase of the land,” said Patankar. “But we disagreed with the sale of land in principle. We said that at the most, the land should be leased out to the companies and the farmers should continue to be owners of the land and receive rent.” He added, “Wind is a natural resource. It does not belong to the companies. So we said if they are gaining capital from it, they should pay some royalty to the villages in lieu of using the wind in their area.”

Around the same time, similar resistance against energy companies had taken root in the tribal regions of Nandurbar and Dhule districts in Maharashtra. It points to the extensive presence of energy companies across the state, in part fuelled by a deliberate push by the state government to incentivise these activities since the late 1990s. In 1996, the Maharashtra Energy Development Agency (MEDA) piloted a wind power project with Suzlon. The company acquired huge tracts of land in Satara and built up the wind energy infrastructure. It then sold both the power plants and land to other companies, leading to an influx of private companies in the region.

However, a rise in the number of wind farms did not result in an increase in wind energy generation. A report by Down to Earth found that wind farms in Maharashtra functioned at a Plant Load Factor of just 11.7% in 2007-08. Plant Load Factor refers to the ratio between the actual energy generated by the plant to the maximum energy that can be generated. As the report points out, “companies have merrily installed plants, not to generate power, but to gain from tax and depreciation benefits.”

According to Patankar, in Satara and Sangli, cultivators traditionally come from Kunbi-Maratha, Dhangar, and Mali castes, and these groups were most affected in this part of the state. Companies present in the region include Suzlon, Enercon, Vestas, Maruti Wind Park, and TS Wind Power, among several other national and global players.

Between 2007 to 2013, multiple representations were made to official representatives. Documents accessed by LCW reveal that Shramik Mukti Dal held several meetings with the state revenue and energy ministers, among others. Among their key demands was the leasing of land to power companies with farmers continuing to retain ownership of land and the levying of an annual tax payable to the panchayat. The organisation was insistent that the decision be taken at the state level so the decision would apply uniformly to all regions.

The organisation also raised several other concerns, including the erection of electric poles on farmland, damage to roads due to transport of heavy machinery, depletion of ground water, and negative impact on crop production due to windmill operations. “The farmers shut down a number of windmill farms being operated in the region during this time,” said Patankar.

The negotiations ultimately culminated into a pivotal meeting on June 3, 2010, presided by Ajit Pawar, at the time minister for energy and water resources in the state. According to documents accessed by LCW, it was decided that the land lease would be fixed based on ready reckoner rates for a period of 30 years and would be paid by the company to private farmers over this period. On June 22, 2010, The Times of India reported that the Maharashtra government was in the process of creating the land lease policy for windmill projects. On the issue of taxation, it was decided that companies would pay Rs 15,000 per megawatt of wind energy capacity to the panchayat. Confirming this, Patankar said, “For the last 8-9 years, companies have been paying this amount to villages, whether the production is going on or not.” The decision was applied uniformly across affected villages in Satara and Sangli districts, and represents an unusual victory against private corporations. Windmill protesters in Nandurbar and Dhule have also looked to this policy as a positive step, including in their demands a replication of what they call “the Sangli model.”

The June 3 meeting also directed the setting up of a district-level committee to resolve disputes of encroachment, with the provision to appeal to the Divisional Commissioner in case of non-resolution of dispute. In the cases where land had been sold voluntarily, status quo would be maintained. Cases with allegations of irregularities and fraud in land purchase would be decided on by the collector.

Despite the policy-level success, the region continues to remain tangled in a number of individual-level disputes. “In the funds that are coming to the panchayat, there have been instances of corruption and misuse of funds,” said Patankar. “Now, several cases are lying before the tehsildar, collector, and district court. In some cases, the companies have moved the court. There must be at least 100 such cases.”