Jaitapur project compensation divides families

Villagers, who were at the centre of the resistance movement, now busy fighting kin

Updated - November 16, 2021 08:19 pm IST

Published - March 20, 2015 02:27 am IST - RATNAGIRI:

The proposed 9900 MW Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project (JNPP), which will be the largest power generating station in the world on completion, has spawned an unprecedented number of court battles, pitting family members against one another for a larger share of the compensation.

The project, a joint venture by French State-controlled nuclear engineering firm Areva and Nuclear Power Corporation of India, the largest in terms of net electrical power rating, has created a wedge between villagers in Madban, ground zero of the project. Villagers, who were at the centre of the anti-JNPP movement, are offering little resistance to the project now. Instead, they are now fighting with their own kin.

The project has been mired in controversy right from its inception in 2005 following protests by the Project Affected People (PAP). A decade later, despite acquiring around 938 hectares, it has not moved forward. NPCIL maintains that the techno-commercial discussion with Areva to install six European Pressurised Reactors (EPRs), is still in progress.

Of the 2,336 PAP, 1,744 have accepted compensation cheques from the government. But around 950 (close to 60 per cent) of these cases have run into disputes and are now before the District Magistrate.

Many allege that their names were either deleted or not included in the land records to deprive them of the compensation package. Others have claimed that their names were deleted from land records by their kin in connivance with the local tehsil office.

The district administration is busy receiving complaints and court notices. The office of the Deputy Collector in Rajapur on an average receives six notices every day and the numbers are likely to increase in the coming days.

Santosh Katkar of Niveli village is set to drag his uncle’s family to court. “My uncle is the eldest in the family and so his name was on the land record (also known as 7/12 record). But the land belonged to my grandfather, which means my father too should get compensation. My aunt is not ready to share the Rs. 60 lakh she received from the government,” he told The Hindu .

At Madban, 1,851 PAP are listed and a majority of the 950 family disputes are from this village. Among them is the family of late Pravin Gavankar, who spearheaded the anti-JNPP protests from 2006 to 2014. “His cousins are not acknowledging that the land belonged to our ancestors. They want all the money. But everyone must get equally compensated. A court battle is unavoidable,” said his son Samrat Gavankar.

Activists claim that the anti-JNPP movement was never for additional compensation, but against nuclear power. In any case, an ex-gratia payment of Rs. 22.50 lakh per hectare in addition to the land price was announced. Till February 28, 2015, the government has distributed Rs. 187.71 crore in ex-gratia payment to 1,744 PAP and Rs. 13.10 crore as land price to 1,764 PAP.

Activists allege that the money was distributed before land records were updated. Also a number of cheques were cleared to specific members of the family, keeping others in the dark. This, despite knowing they were ancestral lands. “Local talathi officers [revenue officials] earned huge money in this scam,” alleges Satyajit Chavan of Mumbai, who is associated with anti-JNPP protests since 2006.

“Above all, the government was in a hurry to claim that all PAP have accepted the money and the project has no local opposition,” he added.

Government officials blame the PAP alleging that they should have ensured their names were on land records when the government issued the notification. “We conduct hearings with both the parties,” said Sushant Khandekar, Sub-Divisional Commissioner, Rajapur. “One of the two parties will naturally be unhappy after our verdict and they approach the court. It is a dispute within families and the government is not at fault here,” he added.

Advocate Chandrashekhar Abhyankar said the petitioner must prove in the court that he/she and those who accepted money had common ancestors. “I just hope family members do not disown their own cousins for this money,” he said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.