On March 11, 2022, farmers of Pissurlem, a village in the mining belt of North East Goa, protested to save their land and livelihoods, which have been affected due to declining water quality and quantity due to years of mining in the area. They have been raising these concerns with various government departments since 2013. Hanumant Chandrakant Parab, President of Pissurlem Shetkari Sanghatna, recently approached the Goa bench of Bombay High Court seeking relief for the villagers, for the second time in two years. The application's demands are centred around compliance with the order issued by the High court in 2020 on the matter. The applicants' major demands include improvement in water provisioning in the area by diverting water from abandoned mining pits to their agricultural fields, removal of silt from their fields and regular supply of potable water to their homes.
Water supply in the area was affected due to iron ore mining in the region. In 2020, the High Court passed a verdict in favour of Pissurlem's farmers and directed the state to divert water from abandoned mining pits to the affected fields. Once known as the rice bowl of Sattari taluka for its paddy fields, Pissurlem has seen declining crop yields with many families moving out of traditional farm-based occupations. Mechanised mining in the region began in the 1990s, which has impacted Pissurlem's ecology. This occurred because the iron ore in the region is also an important aquifer for the area. Simply put, the mineral source for mining and groundwater are the same. The extraction of iron ore in the area was carried out through open cast mining. This requires the digging of a deep pit that extends much beyond groundwater levels, causing the water from the aquifers to flow into the mining pits instead of nearby streams and rivers. Thus effectively depleting the water table and disrupting irrigation channels. This along with the accumulation of mining silt in the fields has led to a decline in the yield, Hanumant Parab told LCW.
Since the mining ban in 2012, villagers tried to restart cultivation in the fields but found conditions for agriculture had severely deteriorated. According to Parab, they raised the issue with the Deputy Collector in 2013, Chief Minister and the Directorate of Mines in 2014. In July 2019, farmers also wrote to the State's Chief Minister, Pramod Sawant demanding a solution for their water problems.
In 2020, Parab approached the High Court on behalf of the farmers, contending that the District Mineral Foundation (DMF) had failed to act on their plea for ensuring welfare of areas and people affected by mining activities. On November 2, 2020, the High Court disposed Parab's application and directed the DMF to act on the farmer’s demands like diverting water from the pits to the village, and setting up a water treatment plant. According to Parab, the village now receives water through tankers but the supply is irregular and sporadic. "No other action has been taken in the last two years", added Parab.
In March 2022, villagers alleged that Sesa Goa, a subsidiary of Vedanta, had received a tender to transport iron ore through the village. The ensuing transportation damaged surviving plantations and fences in the village, residents complained. This renewed activity has further angered landowners, especially in the absence of any action on the concerns they have been raising since 2013.
On March 4, 2022, Pissurlem residents submitted a memorandum to the Deputy Collector and Mamletdar, demanding immediate compliance with the 2020 High Court order and halting iron ore transportation. They have also demanded that mining companies release the compensation due to them for crop loss, which has been pending since 2018. On March 11, 2022, around 52 protesters gathered at the mining site, where they were detained by the police and Hanumanth Parab was allegedly assaulted.
On March 28, 2022, Parab filed a fresh PIL in the High Court seeking relief from the water shortage caused due to mining activities in the area. The petitioners sough expeditious grant of NOC to the PWD to set up a water treatment plant in the area. They also asked for directions to immediately supply adequate potable water to each household in Pissurlem village.
The High Court disposed of the petition on April 17, 2023. It noted that over the course of the hearing, the interim orders passed by the court had ben complied with. It also noted that the Director of Mines and Geology, on the basis of a high court order, had been issued a notice on March 31, 2023, directing three mining companies to contribute Rs 18.22 lakh towards desilting 5,000 square metres of land. The direction was made on the basis of a report by the Directorate of Agriculture.
Advocate Norma Alvares, representing the petitioner, said the compensation should cover 50,000-60,000 square metres of land in order for agricultural operations to begin. The court granted petitioners the liberty to make the claim to the Director of Mines and Geology within 15 days of the order.
“We have made the representation to consider the additional area for desilitation and we are yet to hear back,” said Om D’Costa, a litigator from Goa Foundation, which is representing the Pissurlem Shetkari Sanghatana.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Opposition against environmental degradation
Complaint against procedural violations
Demand for compensation
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand for facilities such as immediate potable water
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Private
What was the action taken by the police?
Arrest
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
7
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Undergoing trial
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
Yes
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
No, they were not produced before a magistrate at all
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 143, 147, 341, 149
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
Neither were they informed, nor did they have access
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Yes
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
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):
₹
Type of investment:
Year of Estimation
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
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:
Non-consultation with stakeholders
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Disposed
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
No
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court
Case Number
PILWP/22/2022
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Arrest/detention/imprisonment
Physical attack
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Yes
Reported Details of the Violation:
On March 11, villagers had gathered at the mining areas to protest against ongoing iron ore transportation and non-compliance with the 2020 HC order. Hanumant Parab, who was leading the protest, had asked the Director of Mines to visit the area for inspection. Around 52 protestors had gathered at the site, where they offered prayers to the rakhandar (local spirit guardian) for the improvement of their fields. Eventually, the Valpoi police arrived and allegedly detained several villagers gathered there. Parab has alleged that he was taken to a separate lock up where he was beaten up. The other detainees said they were asked to “sign a document” and released later in the day. The police were led by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sagar Ekoskar, who has earlier been involved in violence against villagers protesting the upcoming IIT campus in Melauli. Subsequently Director General of Police Indra Dev Shukla ordered an inquiry into the brutalities.
Date of Violation
March 10, 2022
Location of Violation
Pissurlem
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
The Directorate of Mines and Geology, Government of Goa; Office of District Collector (North), Office Of the Deputy Collector, Public Works Department, Water Resources Department, Directorate of Agriculture, Directorate General of Mines Safety, District Mineral Foundation Committee, (North Goa)
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:
Village Panchayat of Pissurlem, Pissurlem Shetkari Sanghatana
What was the action taken by the police?
Arrest
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
7
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Undergoing trial
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
Yes
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
No, they were not produced before a magistrate at all
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 143, 147, 341, 149
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
Neither were they informed, nor did they have access
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Yes
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?