He completed MBA after B.Com. and is ready to take up any job. He is one among many who has been trying for a job in any of the units that have come up at the Andhra Pradesh Special Economic Zone here since he completed graduation in 2013.
Pasupuleti Ramakrishna is not alone. There are many in Dibbapalem (Kota Kodduru) rehabilitation colony and other areas in Atchutapuram and Rambilli mandals in Visakhapatnam district, who belong to project affected/displaced families seething with anger for not being given jobs.
Like Ramakrishna, whose father Rambabu, a farmer-turned-agriculture labourer lost two acres of land due to acquisition of 9,288 acres for developing SEZ by the APIIC exactly 10 years ago many are having an uncertain future.
ADVERTISEMENT
His brother Pentayya, 26, who has studied up to Intermediate, is also in search of job.
As part of package, they were promised one job to each family and allotment of five cents for construction of houses and cash compensation of Rs. 2.95 lakh per acre for land acquired from them amid stiff resistance.
Aged 30, Siadri Ramu, a BA pass-out, ekes out a living as a khalasi.
ADVERTISEMENT
“I am running from pillar to post for a regular job in one of the companies in the SEZ.
“None has offered me a permanent job even as a gardener or attendant,” he says.
The family members, with whom this correspondent interacted, said the managements consider locals as ‘trouble-makers’ and treat them as ‘untouchables’ fearing their indulgence in trade union activity.
As per official figures, over 5,000 families belonging to 26 villages including Gurajapalem, Chippada, Marturupalem and Kotta Guduru are affected due to land acquisition.
As of now 15 industrial establishments have come up in the SEZ.
\Of 64,623 jobs generated by various units, 2,894 project affected/displaced persons have been provided jobs. APIIC sources said the number of locals who got jobs is 11,474.
Including non-locals, the total number of jobs given is 27,126.
Family members of oustees say the managements consider locals as ‘trouble-makers’ and treat them as ‘untouchables’ fearing their indulgence in trade union activity