A. Venkata Rama Rao, a farmer from Krishnayapalem village in Mangalagiri Mandal of Guntur district, feels like a pawn in a game played in the corridors of power. In 2015, Rama Rao surrendered to the Andhra Pradesh State government about 6 acres of fertile land on the banks of the Krishna river for the development of Amaravati, slated to be the State capital.
After the bifurcation of AP and Telangana (TS), he, like thousands of farmers across 29 villages, gladly gave up his land for the promise of ‘developed’ land in the future, annuity for a decade, and a vision of a new Capital that would contribute to Telugu pride.
“That was the time when our State was going through a turbulent period due to bifurcation (in 2014). Chandrababu Naidu (then the Chief Minister) was looking for a place to get the capital city built, after having had to move out of Hyderabad (the capital would be shared for the next 10 years),” he says, of the emotion he felt at the perceived injustice. “He asked us to give our lands for the capital, and we had no second thoughts. It was for a cause, and I had little thought about my family’s future,” he said.
Also read: Explained | The stalemate between Telangana and AP
Instead of an outright lump sum monetary compensation, the State government introduced a system of land pooling, where the currency was land itself. The agricultural area would be taken, and landowners would be given “a smaller (25%) but developed plot of land. These reconstituted plots would come with infrastructure such as citywide WiFi access, paved roads, sewage pipes and electricity lines,” says a document on the Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority (AP-CRDA) website. The AP-CRDA — Amaravati’s urban planning agency — was formed in 2014. In all, more than 25,000 farmers gave 33,000 acres for the construction of the capital.
At the time, Mr. Naidu (of the Telugu Desam Party) was supported by the current Chief Minister, Jagan Mohan Reddy of the Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP), in the choice of Capital.
But five years later, in 2019, when the State government changed and Mr. Reddy’s party came to power, they passed a legislation to have separate Capital cities for executive, legislative, and judicial functions.
In this scheme of decentralisation, Amaravati would only have a legislative complex, while Visakhapatnam and Kurnool would be the executive and judicial capitals, respectively. The idea was to have the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO), secretariat, and offices of heads of departments in the port city and the High Court in Kurnool. The thought was that this way, the three regions—Uttarandhra (north coastal districts), Rayalaseema and the remaining coastal districts)—would see development.
On the floor of the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Reddy said, “We can consider the multiple capital cities model on the lines of South Africa, to ensure the development of all parts of the State. We will take a final call on the issue after consulting the experts’ committee”. His government went on to approve the proposal to have three capitals in January 2020.
The backlash
The farmers who had given up their lands were not happy. Rajadhani Rythu Parirakshana Samithi, a vast majority of whose members are small and marginal farmers owning less than 2 acres each, challenged the AP Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Act, 2020 and the AP Capital Region Development Authority (CRDA) Repeal Act, 2020. About 60 to 70 other farmers’ associations and individuals joined in challenging the laws.
Puvvada Sudhakar, a leader of the Amaravati Farmers’ Joint Action Committee, set up to fight for the cause of the farmers, said the capital city was to be constructed as per the masterplan in an area of 217 square kilometres. “Now, its intention is to sell away our lands that were given for capital,” he said.
The implication of shifting capitals is that farmers who have lost their livelihoods with their lands, have no source of income, he says. He adds that annuity payments (₹50,000 for jareebu or fertile lands; ₹30,000 for less fertile semi-urban land, both per year, per acre) plus a 10% yearly increase promised for this purpose, have seen inordinate delays.
In March 2022, the AP High Court (HC) ruled that the farmers have a vested right in the masterplan. It also said the State has no power to decide on the Capital, and gave the government six months from the date of its order to complete infrastructure development in Amaravati.
The government insisted that deciding on the capital was its prerogative, which could not be questioned by a court of law, by citing among other things, the doctrine of separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary. The capital cases are scheduled to come up for hearing on July 11 this year.
Meanwhile, the fate of thousands of farmers who gave their lands for the development of Amaravati as a greenfield capital city has been hanging in the balance. The value of the plots given to them in exchange for their lands has plummeted, due to the prevailing uncertainty.
Their original plan had been to sell the plots for decent returns to meet their needs, when the capital took shape as envisaged in the masterplan. Now, the farmers say, there are no takers for these partially developed plots that have been handed over to them.
Many farmers have begun growing crops on the lands that are still fit for cultivation, but the spaces on which infrastructure, including high-rise buildings have been constructed, are of no use to them.
“We gave our lands for the capital. Now, what can we do other than farming, if the government itself violates our mutual agreement and does nothing on the lands that were pooled”A farmer from Lingayapalem
“We gave our lands for the capital. Now, what can we do other than farming, if the government itself violates our mutual agreement and does nothing on the lands that were pooled,” wondered a farmer belonging to Lingayapalem, one of the villages from where land was acquired.
A movement for rights
In November 2021, the farmers, in a padayatra (journey on foot), walked from Amaravati to Tirupati over a period of two months to garner support for their demand to retain the capital in Amaravati.
Again, in September 2022, they set out on a padayatra to Arasavalli, a temple town in the Srikakulam district, but they could not complete it, as the government had imposed restrictions. The YSR Congress Party leaders also staged counter-protests.
M. Rama Rao, a farmer from Penumaka village, gave away 2.5 acres of land for the capital. He and several others say that certain smaller plots of land (1 cent, measuring approximately 40.50 metres) that come under the R-5 zone, have been given to the economically weaker sections (EWS) from places outside of the 29 villages. “About 50,800 plots on nearly 1,000 acres of land have been given with the intention to garner votes during the 2024 elections,” he said. The R-5 area is also under litigation.
On their part, the current A.P. government filed a case against several individuals including Mr. Chandrababu Naidu and P. Narayana, who was Minister for Municipal Administration and Urban Development in the TDP Government, on the charge of “insider trading of lands in Amaravati”, alleging corruption.
This came to nought as the HC quashed the case, and its judgment was later upheld by the Supreme Court. It observed that private sale transactions cannot be criminalized and that insider trading, which is an offence in the stock market, cannot be covered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) nor read into Section 420 of the IPC (cheating and dishonesty with regards property delivery) or any provisions in the scheme of the IPC.
However, in his book Whose Capital Amaravathi? former Chief Secretary under Mr. Naidu and a retired IAS officer, author I.Y.R Krishna Rao, says in the conclusion, “There seems to be a hidden agenda behind the selection of the capital city location in terms of real estate and commercial interests.”
“We wanted to be sure that Mr. Jagan Mohan Reddy supported Mr. Naidu’s proposal to have Amaravati as the capital, to be sure that there was no political disagreement that would put the farmers in trouble”M. Sudha Rani from Krishnayapalem
M. Sudha Rani from Krishnayapalem, says her family reluctantly gave 16 cents of land in 2018, towards the end of TDP rule. The family had been cautious. “We wanted to be sure that Mr. Jagan Mohan Reddy supported Mr. Naidu’s proposal to have Amaravati as the capital, to be sure that there was no political disagreement that would put the farmers in trouble,” she said. “Unfortunately, what the farmers feared has happened.” She wonders if the government will give them their lands back. “It’s up to the courts now to do justice.”
Meanwhile, as the race for the 2024 Assembly elections hots up, she and fellow farmers wonder who will form the government and what the powers-that-be, far away in mind and body from the farmers, will decide on their behalf.
