Andhra Pradesh
Manginapudi, Gopuvanipalem, Tavisipudi, Karagraharam and Mekavanipalem villages
,
Machilipatnam
,
Krishna
Published :
Sep 2016
|
Updated :
Amidst Protests from Farmers, Fisherfolk, Andhra Pradesh Government Cancels Machilipatnam Port Project
Reported by
Surabhi Bhandari
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
2702
People affected
2007
Year started
4994
Land area affected
Households affected
2702
People Affected
2007
Year started
4994
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Port
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban and Rural
Ended
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Port
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban and Rural
Ended
1
Summary

In August 2019, the state government cancelled the concession agreement for the Machilipatnam Port project with Navayuga Engineering Company Limited (NECL). The cancellation comes just five months after former Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu laid the foundation stone for the deep sea port in February 2019.
Since its announcement, residents of Machilipatnam mandal in Krishna district had opposed acquisition of their land for the Machilipatnam Industrial Corridor that will support the Machilipatnam Port.
The port was part of the government’s plan to focus on port-led development. After the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, the state government pushed to revive port development plans by leveraging its long coastline. The plan was to construct a deep sea port and an industrial corridor for port-based industries. In 2009, the NECL was awarded the concession agreement to develop the port on a 50-year basis.
For the industrial corridor, the government decided to acquire land under the state's land pooling scheme by issuing a notification in August 2015 for over 12,000 acres. A Machilipatnam Urban Development Authority (MUDA) was constituted in 2016 to implement the industrial corridor project.
This was followed by protests by farmers and fisherfolk. They demanded immediate withdrawal of the land acquisition notification. The protesting farmers said they were not against port development using the land that had already been acquired but was opposed to the government's bid to acquire more land in the name of developing ancillary industries. The government withdrew the notification in June 2018.
In February 2020, the Machilipatnam Urban Development Authority, whose main task is to acquire land for the port and industrial corridor, was give jurisdiction over 12 mandals.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Refusal to give up land for the project

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban and Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Forest and Non-Forest, Non-Forest (Grazing Land), Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

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):

11900

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

2013

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:

Machilipatnam Area Development Authority (MADA)

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Machilipatnam Urban Development Authority

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Navayuga Construction Company

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Local Farmers (mostly Kapus), fisherfolk (Pallekarulu), agricultural labourers (mostly Dalits and Other Backward Castes), tenant farmers, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Workers' Union, Citizens Rights Organisation, All India Kisan Sabha

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
Surabhi Bhandari
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

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