Byramangala village, about 30 km from Bengaluru on the southwest side, is emerging as the epicentre of one of the most consequential political battles for the new Karnataka government.
A township development project – that was originally conceived in 2006 by the then JDS-BJP coalition government headed by HD Kumaraswamy and is now being pursued by the current administration headed by his political bête noire, DK Shivakumar – is the bone of contention between the government and opposition parties as well as farmers opposing the acquisition of their fertile lands.
Byramangala is one of the nine villages that would be part of the proposed Greater Bengaluru Integrated Township (GBIT) with a “work, live and play” concept across 7,481 acres near Bidadi in Bengaluru South district. The plan is to develop a parallel city to Bengaluru, ahead of the latter crossing a population of two crores over the next few years.
Per se, the idea seems good. Hardly anyone disputes that Bengaluru’s infrastructure is struggling to keep pace with its burgeoning growth. There is an urgent need for measures to decongest it. However, the latest developments over the project raise several pertinent questions: should development be at the cost of protecting farmers’ interests? Shouldn’t they be allowed to decide what’s in their best interest? If the project is in the best interest of the state, why can’t the State Government consider other places, away from Bengaluru?
For now, the farmers’ anger – officials who went with police security to survey the lands were chased away by women farmers wielding brooms – and the opposition parties’ stance have pushed the CM and the government on the back foot.
The government has decided to form a committee to examine all aspects of the project and submit a report in around two months, and the CM announced that lands would not be taken forcibly.
Yet, the issue is far from over. The government is unwilling to drop the project, the farmers are refusing to budge, and the opposition parties are attempting to brand the Congress government as anti-farmer.
The stand-off between the government and the farmers has landed the CM on a sticky wicket. It has handed over a potent issue to the opposition to take on Shivakumar in his home turf. They are going hammer-and-tongs with the farmers’ issue in the Vokkaliga heartland. The farmers have been protesting for around 500 days and have intensified it over the last few weeks. Opposition parties have thrown their weight behind their struggle. Former PM and JDS supremo HD Deve Gowda warned of staging a protest, while the BJP is planning a padayatra from Bengaluru to Bidadi.
Politically, it’s a risky proposition for the Chief Minister, who is looking at his short tenure of under two years in this term as a springboard to return to power after the 2028 elections. Congress leaders in the state and the party high command would be wary of a possible backlash. Except for some MLAs, senior Congress leaders in the state, too, haven’t shown much enthusiasm in backing the project.
A back-of-the-hand political cost-benefit analysis shows that the odds are heavily stacked against Congress and the State Government. It is unclear if the project would endear the Congress party to Bengalureans, but the risk of being branded as “anti-farmer” remains high. After the protest turned violent, attempt to murder cases were booked against the farmers.
Proceeding with action against them would further alienate farmers – that, too, at a time when the state is facing a drought-like situation. While the government needs to take drought relief measures, mismanagement of farmers’ issues in Bidadi could deliver a blow to its image.
The government, on its part, insists that the project is being implemented by protecting farmers’ interests in the ‘Public-Farmer Partnership Model.’ Farmers are being offered compensation of up to Rs 2.5 crore per acre or 50% of the developed residential sites or 45% of development commercial sites. Many consider it a fair package for those willing to give their lands voluntarily. Some farmers have already given their lands. But those refusing to part with their lands should not be forced. Those protesting against the project claim that a majority of the farmers are not in favour of the project.
For now, it appears that the government is taking a breather to re-evaluate the project’s political and developmental cost-benefit ratio. However, on the day the CM announced the formation of a committee to examine the project the government issued a final notification on the acquisition of 4,645 acres in four villages. That was the time when farmers in five other villages were protesting. It is not clear what purpose the committee will serve when the government has already made it clear that it is going ahead with the project with lands given voluntarily by farmers.
Farmers who do not wish to give their lands for the project can continue farming. The catch is that they will not be able to take up any development works as it falls under the area notified for the project. The CM has made it clear that he would not denotify the lands.
On the development front, the government should be open to considering other places where land can be acquired without resistance from farmers.
Mega-projects in locations like Tumakuru could help to develop it as an economic and industrial hub. It’s just around 70 km from Bengaluru and well connected by national highways and railways. Having high-speed dedicated trains between the two cities and even considering a second airport location closer to Tumakuru can transform the city, boost development of parts of central Karnataka and help decongest Bengaluru. Simultaneously, the government must also look beyond Bengaluru and its surrounding districts to attract investments to other regions to ensure equitable development across the state.
But for now, the focus remains on the Bidadi project. As the fight goes on, its ripples are being felt at different levels, much beyond Byramangala and Bengaluru.