TODAY there are two almost-ready four-lane roads - the upgraded National Highway (NH) 209, which runs via Kanakapura, and the modernised State Highway (SH) 17 - connecting Bangalore and Mysore, besides a railway line. So is a toll expressway as part of the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Project (BMICP) really necessary? And does it have to be built on the land of poor farmers, killing lakes and curtailing country roads?
"This talk of poor farmers is untrue, these are people who are engineers, doctors, bureaucrats, speculators," says Ashok Kheny, managing director, Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises (NICE), which is executing the BMICP. According to him, "only landholders holding 193 acres of land had [so far] challenged the acquisition of their lands, and that too unsuccessfully, before the Supreme Court". Says Kheny: "Most of these so-called farmers have already alienated their lands in favour of speculators who have bought the lands in the face of acquisition proceedings. We had even given details of this to the Supreme Court. But government officials are still sub-serving the private interests of these people."
With Chief Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy threatening to unravel his company's plans, Kheny sent him a 27-page letter on June 12, asking the State to comply with the judgments of the Karnataka High Court and the Supreme Court to implement the project in "letter and spirit". If this was not done within a week, the letter said, "it would be construed that the State has wilfully failed to follow the directions passed by the two courts. Failure to do so would also force NICE to have recourse to legal action, it added.
Kheny raised nine points in his letter, each of which, according to government sources and critics of the project, is debatable if not dismissed outright.
Kheny seeks a meeting of the Empowered Committee (EPC) constituted under the Framework Agreement (FWA) between the company and the government. But critics say that it was the EPC's poor track record that forced the N. Dharam Singh-led Congress government to appoint the K.C. Reddy Committee. Though the decision to appoint the Reddy Committee was struck down by the High Court, they say, it clearly indicated the State's lack of faith in the EPC.
Kheny wanted the State to act on the decision taken at the EPC's 10th meeting that NICE should be handed over 2,568 acres of land for which Section 28(4) - final notification - of the Karnataka Industrial Development (KIAD) Act had been issued. This demand, say the sources, is misplaced since the EPC's decision itself beyond the purview of the FWA.
Similarly, NICE's demand that the State issue further notification for the acquisition of the balance land required for the project under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act would only be possible after the company deposited the entire compensation amount with the KIAD Board. Informed sources said the EPC's decision to waive the need to deposit the money was a violation of the FWA.
NICE demanded that the State take physical possession of all lands notified under Section 28(4) of the KIAD Act and hand over the same to it. This, said the sources, would have to wait since the company already held excess land.
Kheny also demanded that the State disburse compensation to landholders in respect of notified land out of the Rs.100,48,23,000 that NICE had remitted so far, and follow the agreed procedure (of October 1998) that entailed NICE to deposit only the compensation amount in tranches of Rs.8 crores from time to time. Critics say the October 1998 agreement and its subsequent approval by the Minister concerned and the EPC, constituted a violation of the KIAD Act and of the FWA.
Kheny also wants "all unauthorised stretches of lands notified under Section 28(1) or 28(4) by private holders". But government sources said that with over 29,000 acres having been notified, this would be difficult until the excess land notified was first decided.
RAVI SHARMA
