September 6, 2008

A new roadblock




West Bengal: The Tata Small Car project again runs into trouble as the Trinamool Congress-backed KJRC resorts to violence.


TROUBLE has resurfaced at the Tata Small Car Project site in Singur in West Bengal’s Hooghly district. Supporters of the Trinamool Congress-backed Krishi Jami Rakshya (protection of farmland) Committee (KJRC) beat up a civil engineer working at the site and threatened the workers there with dire consequences if they did not quit their jobs and leave Singur.


Trinamool Congress supremo Mamata Banerjee stoked the fire, emboldened by the success of her party in Singur in the recent panchayat elections. She announced an indefinite gherao of the plant site from August 24 until 400 acres (160 hectares) of the 997.11 acres (399 ha) acquired for the project were returned to the reluctant landlosers.


That was enough cause for concern for the Communist Party of India (Marxist)-led Left Front government, which sees the project as one that involves the most important investment in the manufacturing sector in recent times. And Tata Motors managing director Ravi Kant’s recent statement only added to its anxiety. Asked about the problems faced by the company in Singur, Kant said, “We are continuing as long as our patience lasts” – a statement with obvious ominous connotations.


Right from the beginning of this project in 2006, the Trinamool Congress, along with the Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI), has been attempting to put a spanner in the works, be it over the acquisition of land or over compensation for the landlosers. In the most recent incident, on July 29, Manish Khatua, an engineer in the employ of Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Ltd, entrusted with the civil construction of the small car plant, was beaten with iron rods by a group of villagers, allegedly KJRC members.


According to reports, the incident took place when Khatua tried to prevent the group from stealing iron rods from the plant site. The incident occurred less than 48 hours after the KJRC threatened employees at the plant site. It even launched a midnight attack with handmade bombs on a nearby lodge where some of the workers were staying.


Volatile as the situation has been at the troubled plant site for the past two years, the latest incidents left workers shaken. According to sources, a sizeable section of workers was too scared to report for work for a few days even though police protection and the number of Tatas’ own security guards were increased around the plant site.


“With almost 80 per cent of the construction work over, at present on any given day, there are between 2,500 to 3,000 people working at the site, and there has been an exodus of quite a few because of the KJRC’s intimidation tactics,” a source close to Tata Motors told Frontline. This has to some extent affected the progress of the work, but the company’s top brass are apparently confident that Nano, the Rs.1 lakh car, will roll out of the factory “between October and December this year”.



At present there are around 600 policemen deployed in Singur along with 500 private security personnel employed by Tata Motors. In fact, State Home Secretary Ashok Mohan Chakraborty himself went to Singur to take stock of the situation and even held a meeting at the factory site on August 5 to discuss the law-and-order situation.


Mamata Banerjee, on the other hand, has stuck to her guns, refusing repeated invitations from the State government to sit for talks on the issue. She has ruled out any possibility of talks unless the 400 acres acquired without the consent of farmers are returned.


Out of around 12,000 landowners who were affected, 1,500 refused to accept compensation, demanding the return of their land. “Nowhere else in this country has any opposition party of a State hindered the development and growth of the State for a short-term political gain; in all other States, the opposition has the greater interest of the State in mind,” a government source told Frontline.


Mamata Banerjee’s stand on Singur has not found the kind of support she may have been hoping for. Perhaps realising this, she adopted a more conciliatory tone at a press conference on August 5, where she said, “I am not opposed to industrialisation and I do not want the Tatas to leave Singur, but I want the 400 acres forcibly acquired from unwilling farmers to be returned to them.”


She has apparently already identified land opposite the plant site where, according to her, ancillary units could be accommodated. This was done without consulting either the State government or Tata Motors.


The government, however, has ruled out the possibility of any part of the land being returned. West Bengal Commerce and Industries Minister and CPI(M) Polit Bureau member Nirupam Sen said the 400 acres in question were scattered over the project site: “How can the government return this land without jeopardising the whole project?”


Moreover, a Supreme Court ruling also states that land acquired for a public purpose cannot be resold to the erstwhile owners but can either be used for another public purpose or, failing that, be put to public auction and the sale proceeds used for a public purpose (State of Kerala vs. N. Bhaskaran Pillai, 1997 vide SCC, 432).


On January 18, the Calcutta High Court upheld, while disposing of a number of public interest litigation cases, the State government’s land acquisition proceeding in Singur, making it clear in a 217-page judgment that land acquisition in the region was “made for the public purpose of employment generation and socio-economic development of the region” and ruled out any mala fide intention of the State government in acquiring land in Singur.


The Tata project is of singular importance to West Bengal. The Rs.1,000-crore project involves one of the biggest investments in the manufacturing industry in the State and is expected to kick-start its reindustrialisation process. Once it is operational, the project is expected to employ 2,000 people directly and 10,000 indirectly. Besides, it is expected to generate spin-offs in different manufacturing spheres and also attract other kinds of industrial investments.


In the Left government’s perception, the industrial future of West Bengal hinges on this prestigious project – a future that envisions industrial growth and employment that will reduce the burden on land and the “disguised unemployment” in the rural economy of the State. According to industrial experts, if the Tatas back out of West Bengal, it will create a “ripple effect” in the industry, severely hampering future investment in the State and crushing hopes of an industrial resurgence.


The State government found support in Nobel Laureate economist Amartya Sen, who during a recent visit to Kolkata told reporters, “Industrialisation is a must for development. I do not know of any country in the world where development has taken place focussing solely on agriculture. If the Tatas back out of Singur, it may imperil the industrial future of West Bengal. Concerned parties should try to resolve this matter through talks.”


The government has swung into action to allay the fears created in the industry and among the people of West Bengal by Kant’s statement and the Trinamool’s subsequent threat of staging an indefinite siege in Singur.


At a function on August 5 celebrating the birth anniversary of the legendary Marxist leader Muzzafar Ahmed, Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee said: “Whatever the obstructions, neither the Tatas nor the State government is going to back out. There is no reason to worry. There will be more projects like the one in Singur, providing more opportunity for employment for the new generation.” He said land was acquired in Singur strictly according to the Central government’s guidelines and “not an inch in excess of the requirement was taken”.


Like his Industries Minister, he made it clear that there could be no returning of land to disgruntled farmers. “That would mean the end of the project. Then what excuse would I give the 6,000 youths of the State waiting to get employment there?” he said.


At the same time, the State government is exploring the possibility of rehabilitating these farmers on land in the vicinity by providing them opportunities to learn new skills.

SUHRID SANKAR CHATTOPADHYAY
FRONTLINE,
Volume 25 - Issue 17 :: Aug. 16-29, 2008
GRAPHIX: THE TELEGRAPH

SC widens scope of ‘public purpose'


NEW DELHI: This Supreme Court judgment is sure to take the wind out of political agitations — including the one by Mamata Banerjee at Singur — opposing largescale acquisition of land for setting up of projects, particularly those by private players in different states. The court ruled on Friday that any project giving largescale employment has to be treated as one serving public purpose, thus legitimising the role of state in facilitating land acquisition.
Earlier, narrow interpretation of ‘public purpose’ entitled the state to acquire large tracts of land only if every component of the project to be set up on the acquired land passed the test of public benefit. Departing from this, the apex court gave a very wide meaning to the words ‘‘public purpose’’ and said: ‘‘If the project taken as a whole is an attempt in the direction of bringing foreign exchange, generating employment opportunities and securing economic benefits to the state and the public at large, it will serve public purpose.’’ Accepting in toto arguments advanced by solicitor general G E Vahanvati, who appeared for Andhra Pradesh, a bench comprising Justices C K Thakker and D K Jain cleared the state’s acquisition of vast tracts of land to set up an integrated project, meant to make Hyderabad a major business-cum-leisure tourism centre. The bench held that the project, to be implemented by Andhra Pradesh Infrastructure Investment Corporation (APIIC), would make Hyderabad a world-class business destination.
The fallout of this judgment is significant as the court upheld ‘‘development of infrastructure’’ as legal and legitimate ‘‘public purpose’’ for exercising power of eminent domain. ‘‘Simply because a company has been chosen for fulfilment of such public purpose does not mean that the larger public interest has been sacrificed, ignored or disregarded,’’ said the bench. This is sure to come in handy for the embattled Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government to counter the arguments of Mamata Banerjee against Tata’s Nano project at Singur. To determine ‘public purpose’, the project has to be taken as a whole and judged whether it was in the larger public interest, and then its various components also put to the same test, the bench said. The judgment is in keeping with the requirements of the time with the public sector having long ago ceased to occupy the ‘‘commanding heights’’ of economy, ceding ground to the private sector.
However, while the domination of public sector has diminished, there is resistance to state playing the enabler for the private sector. The SC on Friday applied it more to the joint venture, given the nature of the case being discussed. The joint venture mechanism for implementing the policy, executing the project and achieving lawful public purpose for realising the goal of larger public good would neither destroy the object not vitiate the exercise of power of public purpose for development of infrastructure, the bench said.

6 Sep 2008, 0120 hrs IST,
Dhananjay Mahapatra,
TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Brand Bengal stands to lose Rs 80,000 cr


KOLKATA: If the Tatas go, they will take with them almost everything that matters to Brand Bengal: image and the big bucks. The first entity doesn’t carry a price tag but the second one does: a whopping Rs 80,000 crore in investments. The immediate loss will be over Rs 5,000 crore, including the investments on the ancillary units in Singur. The list would also include tier-II vendors, who will have no reason to be here once Ratan Tata moves out.
What’s more, the Tata brands like Tata Realty Infrastructure, Tata Metaliks and Maithon Power Limited might also take flight, amounting to a loss of at least Rs 10,000 crore. Besides, there are other big-time investors who are already jittery. Bharat Forge, which had decided to invest big time in Bengal largely because of the Nano plant in Singur, is now in two minds. The company would have brought in Rs 6,500 crore. This top-of-the-line forging company had signed an MoU with the government earlier this year. Ever since trouble erupted in Singur, their response to the state industries department is: We’ll get back.
Brand Bengal had attracted investment announcements of Rs 1,27,302 crore since the third quarter of the last financial year. But this target is now a distant dream. In case of a Tata pullout, there will be a question mark on the investment from nonferrous metal major Vedanta Group. That will be another Rs 16,000 crore gone. Then, there are steel majors who would have implemented their projects this year, but are apprehensive now. All these steel majors, including Adhunik (Rs 5,000 crore), Shyam Steel (Rs 8,000 crore), Jay Balaji (Rs 16,500 crore), Bhushan Steel (Rs 4,000 crore), Abhijit Group (Rs 8,000 crore) may not be all that keen to invest. ‘‘None of these steel majors will stay on, once the Tatas go,’’ an industries department official said. ‘‘These investments had come after sheer hard work. We had also roped in other automobile majors. Two months ago, they were ready to start work. Now, they are saying they would rather wait and watch,’’ he said.
4 Sep 2008, 1010 hrs IST,
TIMES NEWS NETWORK.