Bhushan Steel and Power Limited signed a MoU with the Jharkhand government on 7 September, 2006 for establishing an integrated steel plant of 3 Mt. This project includes a 900 MW captive power plant. The estimated cost of the project was 10,500 crore. The plant was inaugurated on May 16, 2010 [1, 2]. |
Description:
Basic Data
| Name of conflict: | Bhushan Power and Steel Limited, Jharkhand, India |
| Country: | India |
| State or province: | Jharkhand |
| Location of conflict: | Village- Potka, District- East Singhbhum |
| Accuracy of location | HIGH (Local level) |
Source of Conflict
Project Details and Actors
| Project details | Bhushan Power and Steel Limited planned a steel and power plant project in village - Potka District - East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. The estimated initial investment of the project was Rs 10,500 crore. For the project and also for other purpose, like housing and other infrastructure, the company requires about 3,200 acres of land, of which 2,792 acres would be provided by the state government and rest other will acquire by the company directly from the land owners. The plant will get water from Subernarekha and Kharkai and power from NTPC’s Ramchandrapur-grid at Gamharia located at Seraikela-Kharsawan district. Once completed, the plant will produce about three million tonne per annum (MTPA) steel and a 900MW power for its own plant. According to the company source, the plant will generate direct employment to over 10,000 people. Beside this the company will also train about 150 local youths for work in the company. The company claimed that once it start the steel plant will follow all pollution control standards and norms [5]. |
| Project area: | 1295 |
| Level of Investment for the conflictive project | 1,784,051,174 (Rs 10,500 crore) |
| Type of population | Rural |
| Start of the conflict: | 07/09/2006 |
| Company names or state enterprises: | Bhushan Power and Steel Limited from India - Owner |
| Relevant government actors: | Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board (JSPCB), Government of Jharkhand |
| Environmental justice organizations (and other supporters) and their websites, if available: | Visthapan Virodhi Ekta Manch (Unity Forum Against Displacement), ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Bhumi Raksha Vahini Kisan Morcha, Various Gram Sabha (Village Committees) |
Conflict & Mobilization
| Intensity | HIGH (widespread, mass mobilization, violence, arrests, etc...) |
| Reaction stage | In REACTION to the implementation (during construction or operation) |
| Groups mobilizing: | Farmers Indigenous groups or traditional communities Local ejos Landless peasants Local government/political parties |
| Forms of mobilization: | Blockades Land occupation Objections to the EIA Official complaint letters and petitions Public campaigns Referendum other local consultations Street protest/marches Strikes |
Impacts
| Environmental Impacts | Potential: Air pollution, Food insecurity (crop damage), Loss of landscape/aesthetic degradation, Noise pollution, Deforestation and loss of vegetation cover, Surface water pollution / Decreasing water (physico-chemical, biological) quality, Large-scale disturbance of hydro and geological systems, Reduced ecological / hydrological connectivity |
| Socio-economical Impacts | Visible: Displacement, Land dispossession Potential: Violations of human rights, Loss of livelihood, Loss of landscape/sense of place |
Outcome
| Project Status | Planned (decision to go ahead eg EIA undertaken, etc) |
| Conflict outcome / response: | Compensation Corruption Negotiated alternative solution Under negotiation Application of existing regulations New Environmental Impact Assessment/Study |
| Proposal and development of alternatives: | The protestors demanded the cancellation of public hearing and also the scrapping of the project. The proposed project area is a tribal area and fall under the 5th Schedule of Indian Constitution. The area also falls under the provision of CNT Act (Chotanagpur Tenancy Act). So any land transfer to nontribal is illegal. Hence the project is a clear violation of rules [2]. |
| Do you consider this an environmental justice success? Was environmental justice served?: | No |
| Briefly explain: | Local tribal population (adivasis) and others are now struggling to save their land, water and culture. The protesting masses have found that government officials have become corrupt and are in favor of the establishment of the plant by the company. Government officials are not listening their grievances. Some of the village heads are also in favor of plant because they are bribed. This left villager to deal with the situation in their own [4]. |
Sources & Materials
| Juridical relevant texts related to the conflict (laws, legislations, EIAs, etc) |
| ||||||
| |||||||
| Related media links to videos, campaigns, social network |
|
Meta information
| Contributor: | Swapan Kumar Patra |
| Last update | 18/08/2019 |
| Conflict ID: | 1312 |
Related conflicts
Comments