TIRUCHY: The fear of losing Rs 220 as daily wage for 100 days a year through MGNREGA is giving sleepless night to 55-year-old Rasathi of Mutharasanallur, one of the 23 pastoral villages that may soon be merged with the Trichy Corporation and get an ‘urban’ status.
An idea by the Municipal Administration Department to expand the Corporation from its present 167 sq km to over 300 sq km, by taking in Manachanallur town panchayat and 23 village panchayats, has given the jitters to people that thousands of them thronged the Collector’s Office a couple of days ago to submit petitions urging the authorities drop the idea.
More than the villagers losing benefits from the rural welfare schemes of the State and Central governments, it is the general fear of hundreds of acres of lush agricultural fields in the Cauvery delta area giving way for concrete jungle that looms large over the rural population.
Since land prices will shoot through the roof due to urbanisation with investors rushing in to set up projects -- be it developing housing plots or setting up industries or starting educational institutions in Trichy ‘city limits’ -- agricultural land owners might sell their fields, leaving the farming community without jobs, people fear.
Their other concerns are losing jobs under MGNREGA, stoppage of certain schemes meant for rural local bodies, increasing burden of water and property taxes, threat to agriculture and difficulties in rearing livestock.
T Aadhisivan, president of Mutharasanallur village panchayat, said, “Our village is situated about 7 km from the city, on the banks of the Cauvery. Majority of our people are involved in agriculture as irrigation facilities are easily available. Women work in farmlands, grow vegetables and sell them in the city.
In addition to that, they depend on the money from the MGNREGA. If the Corporation eats into our village, our people will lose their livelihood.”
Rasathi of the village lamented, “My family lives in the house provided under the IAY scheme. My husband and I work as farm labourers. Apart from that, we run our house on the income from the MGNREGA. I have to take care of my widow daughter who is living with us with her children. If both the rural job scheme and agriculture are lost because of urbanization, we will be forced to beg for livelihood.”
If the idea to expand the city by increasing the number of wards to 100 from the present 65, an estimated population of 1,35,000 pastoral people will become urbanites, adding to the present population over 10 lakh in Tiruchy.
But even political parties have their reservations. CPM’s rural district secretary M Jayaseelan said, “Most of the villages in the list are doing agriculture using Cauvery water. MGNREGA is the backbone of the rural economy here. In the 23 villages, at least 35,000 people, mostly women, are beneficiaries of this scheme. Where will they go if this scheme is suddenly taken away? Empowerment of women is under question here.”
The CPM functionary clarified that the party was not opposed to including the already urbanised villages that share borders with the city limits. “We are opposed to the idea of bringing the distant villages into city limits in the name of urbanization. This shows their intention of targeting land availability in villages, which are required for flamboyant projects. If urbanization comes at the cost of rural economy and agriculture, we will oppose it,” he added.
U Vigneshwaran, president of Malliampathu village, said “People cultivate crops for three seasons in the lands in our village. About 400 acres of land in our village are currently cultivable. Urbanisation will easily convert the agricultural lands into real estate plots. At present, farmers can buy agricultural lands in our village. If land prices shoot up because of urbanisation, farmers cannot buy agricultural lands but only the outsiders who are well-off can buy lands. Obviously, they do not do agriculture and convert the lands into plots over a period of time.” Raising concern over potential unemployment the urbanisation could trigger, he said, “Land owners will benefit if prices increase. What will happen to the landless people at our village? They will not have jobs. If they cannot do farm work, what is their future?”
Panchayat presidents expressed concern about doubling or tripling of water and property taxes if they are to be included with the city.
In villages, water tax is Rs 720 a year, which is Rs 160 a month in the city. In villages, property tax varies based on the type of houses. For huts and tiled-roof houses, it is Rs 110 a year and for concrete houses, Rs 800 for a 1,000-sq ft house. However, in the city, a 1,000-sq ft house invites tax from Rs 1,500 to Rs 2,000 depending on its location, construction and usage.
Vigneshwaran said, “Economically weaker sections will be more affected. Besides losing the already existing benefits like MGNREGA and free milch cows and goats scheme, the poor people will have to shell out more as taxes to the corporation, if attached to the city.” S Sundaram, panchayat president of Kallikudi village, said the idea was a matter of concern because of its centralization nature.
“Every village panchayat gets funds from both the Central and State governments based on the population. Panchayat presidents can utilise the funds for the development works. If the people come up with demands with respect to basic amenities, panchayat presidents can use the funds and get the works done the very next day. But, with the Corporation, the people need to wait for the Mayor’s nod for everything. Currently, village panchayat presidents are the implementing authority. If joined with the Corporation and if we are elected as councillors, we cannot do anything on our own. It is an accumulation of power,” he explained.
When TNIE contacted officials in the Corporation, they said, “If the city expands, more development work will take place — more industries, educational institutions will be established. This will create more job opportunities for the unemployed youth. There are urban poverty alleviation programmes to provide jobs. City Corporations can do better as far as amenities of the people are concerned.”
Official sources pointed to a railway over bridge at an adjoining village of Trichy which is yet to get a lighting facility even after a decade because of lack of adequate funds with the panchayat and said that under a City Corporation such a thing could be avoided.
(With inputs from Aadhithya MS)