Chhattisgarh
Khodri, Khairbhawna, Amgaon and Churail villages
,
Gevra
,
Korba
Published :
Sep 2016
|
Updated :
MoEFCC Grants Multiple Extensions to Kusmunda Mine in Chhattisgarh despite Public Opposition
Reported by
Riddhi Pandey
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
13000
People affected
2013
Year started
5166
Land area affected
Households affected
13000
People Affected
2013
Year started
5166
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Coal Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Coal Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

The plans for expansion of the Kusmunda Opencast Coal Mine has been facing stiff opposition from the tribespeople in Kobra district. One of the largest coal mines in the country, the Kusmunda mine is operated by South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL), a subsidiary of Coal India Limited. The project is classified under the Emergency Coal Production Plan.  In 2015, the mining plan was improvised to expand the capacity of the mine from 18.75 MTPA to 62.5 MTPA.  As per the EIA report, the expansion plan would impact five villages Amgaon, Churail, Khodri, Khairbawna and Gevra in addition to the 12 villages already affected. It is estimated to displace almost 9,200 families across the 17 villages.  On February 11, 2015, the residents opposed the project at a public hearing organised by the district administration. They alleged that they were not informed about the hearing in advance. According to the 2016 Amnesty International report, the residents of the villages are concerned about the impact of the mining on their lands, forests, water sources and livelihood practices, especially agriculture.  According to a 2015 newspaper report, the tribespeople claimed that SECL had also not fulfilled the resettlement and rehabilitation promises for the land acquired earlier. There were also accusations of procedural irregularities in the proposal for mine expansion. A local political leader told the newspaper that the administration organised the public hearing in a different location instead of the villages affected. Another social activist reported discrepancies in the EIA report.  In September 2015, SECL floated tenders to expand the mine's capacity without appropriate environmental clearance (EC) even as the mine was already operating at a capacity more than approved. Earlier in February 2014, SECL was granted EC to expand the capacity of the mine from 15 MTPA to 18 MTPA.  Reportedly, the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) had first deferred the expansion proposal and demanded additional information based on the concerns voiced by activists and local people. Regardless, in February 2016, the project was granted EC to expand capacity from 18.75 MPTA to 26 MTPA. In the same month, local activist Lakshmi Chauhan stated that the people had already organised a Gram Sabha in accordance with the guidelines of the Act for individual and community forest rights claims, but they were yet to hear back from the administration on the settlement of their claims. Meanwhile, the district administration oragnised a meeting on February 16 to acquire the NoObjection Certificate from the Gram Sabha after the expansion plan got EC.  In 2016 again, over 600 villagers came together to collectively protest against the Gevra, Dipka and Kusmunda mines. The police reportedly arrested protesters. Subsequently, in July, Chauhan filed an appeal in the National Green Tribunal (NGT) to challenge the EC granted.  Meanwhile, in December 2017, SECL again applied for an expansion to approximately double the production. The government granted permission in July 2018 amidst protests. In January 2020, the environment ministry approved the proposal of mine expansion for another 30 years. However, the forest clearance for approximately 44 hectares is still pending.  On July 15, 2020, the NGT disposed of the appeal citing a delay in applying. It stated that the decision to weigh the environmental considerations at the cost of industrial requirements was at the discretion of the national government. 

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Both

Forest and Non-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):

7612.32

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

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 Coal, Government of India

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:

Coal India Limited, South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Amnesty International

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
Riddhi Pandey


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

Opposition against environmental degradation

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

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

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