Skip to main content

JICA hands over crucial bullet train report to Gujarat farmers, denied by Govt of India

By Rajiv Shah
Chief representative of Japan International Co-operation Agency’s (JICA) India office Katsuo Matsumoto, who visited the office of senior Gujarat High Court advocate Anandvardhan Yagnik in Ahmedabad on August 30, has handed over a crucial report it had prepared on its December 8-9, 2018 meeting with Gujarat and Maharashtra farmers, affected by the high-profile Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train project, as also senior activists.
JICA, a Japanese government agency, is funding the proposed bullet train, considered a prestige project of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. It handed over the report to the Government of India’s special purpose vehicle, National High Speed Rail Corporation Ltd (NHSRCL), set up to implement the project. However, NHSRCL refused to make it public, saying it was a JICA “property” despite farmers’ repeated pleas.
The report, among other things, gives a detailed representation by Gujarat and Maharashtra farmers’ representatives, even as visiting sites in villages Amodpore in Navasari district, Ghildoi in Vaslad district and Kathor in Surat district, where about 500 farmers would be affected.
The common complaints of the farmers, according to the report, was that their lands were being “divided in two-three parts due to acquisition”, as a result of which the value of land of balance parcels “would go down”, creating “difficulties in irrigation and access for the farmer.”
Further, the report says, quoting farmers, that the “difference between jantri rate/circle rate (government rate of land for a particular area) and the market rate is 10 times”, and “compensation as per jantri rate at some spots is is Rs 22 lakh as against the market rate of Rs 2 crore.
As for Maharashtra, the report says, gram sabhas representatives of Palghat told that JICA team they had “denied permission and passed resolution stating that they are not in support of land acquisition and the project”, because it would “not benefit the people of the area, leading to land alienation, affects livelihood etc.”
The report also says, farmers apprehended they would not be able to utilize 30 metres plus row on both sides of the rail alignment, and though it would be utilized for future private development, “no compensation is offered for this portion.” Further, land is currently used for multiple crops and tree plantations, which yield after many years, yet “no compensation is offered” for this.
Then, the farmers complained that there would be “displacement of tribal agricultural workers”, as “no compensation” is being paid them, adding, before starting the land acquisition process, they were given just a couple of days for consultation instead of the “requirement of one month prior notice.” Further, notices and information shared in English, a language farmers could not comprehend.
Before handing over the report, JICA officials held a meeting, lasting for two hours, with Yagnik, Jayesh Patel, president, Gujarat Khedut Samaj (GKS), and two affected farmers, where the top JICA official is learnt to have accepted three fundamental  proposal of farmers:
  1. That by JICA's own guidelines and un-amended 2013 legislation, affected farmers and non-farmers must get compensation not at the rate of 2011 jantri but at the market rate of 2018-19 that must be revised.
  2. That social impact assessment under Indian laws must be undertaken so as to understand the impact of bullet train project, something the Gujarat government and the Government of India refused to do. 
  3. And that R&R of project affected people (PAPs) must take place as per JICA guidelines and the un-amended land acquisition Act, 2013 and provisions with regard to R&R entitlements should be adhered to
A note forwarded by Yagnik on the meeting said, JICA officials agreed that social impact assessment (SIA) under Indian laws must be undertaken so as to “understand the impact of bullet train project”, and a rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) of project affected people (PAPs) must be take place as per JICA guidelines and the un-amended land acquisition Act, 2013.
The JICA official was told that South Gujarat farmers affected by the project had “preferred” etitions before the Gujarat High Court challenging the land acquisition process initiated for the bullet train project.
JICA accepted a fundamental farmers' demand – that they be compensated in accordance with the “un-amended" land acquisition Act, 2013, based on 2018-19 market rate 
At the same time, the note said, “incidental and ancillary issues” were raised before the JICA official “concerning the dilution of beneficial provisions of the Central land acquisition law by the state to the disadvantage of the farmers/landowners in order to implement the vanity project of bullet train.”
The note said, a thousand farmers had filed affidavits before the Gujarat High Court opposing the project, which is currently “pending delivery of judgment” and is “sub judice”, regretting, despite this, land acquisition for the project is being carried by by the government and NHSRCL “continued unabated” so as to “frustrate the rights of the affected landowners and farmers.”
As no corrective steps were taken by NHSRCL, the note said, Yagnik wrote to JICA in August 2019 on behalf of farmers seeking a copy of the report submitted to NHSRCL and steps taken by NHSRCL on it.
The note said, Yagnik and the farmers’ representatives told the JICA official that farmers’ grievances revolved around failure to do proper SIA, lack of provision for R&R entitlements and determination of compensation as per the present market value, guaranteed under the Central land acquisition Act, 2013, all of which was being sought to be scuttled by the state government.
The meeting ended with the JICA official submitted a copy of the report it had prepared and submitted to N, the note said, adding, the official “assured” that farmers’ fundamental grievances should be redressed before implementing the bullet train project.
---
Click HERE for JICA report submitted to NHSRCL 

Comments

Uma said…
Say what you want, Modi is not going to give up on this project
Anonymous said…
I want Market rate value
Otherwise we will not give this land
Anonymous said…
We want Market value otherwise we will not give our land

TRENDING

Gram sabha as reformer: Mandla’s quiet challenge to the liquor economy

By Raj Kumar Sinha*  This year, the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj is organising a two-day PESA Mahotsav in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, on 23–24 December 2025. The event marks the passage of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA), enacted by Parliament on 24 December 1996 to establish self-governance in Fifth Schedule areas. Scheduled Areas are those notified by the President of India under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for a distinct framework of governance recognising the autonomy of tribal regions. At present, Fifth Schedule areas exist in ten states: Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Telangana. The PESA Act, 1996 empowers Gram Sabhas—the village assemblies—as the foundation of self-rule in these areas. Among the many powers devolved to them is the authority to take decisions on local matters, including the regulation...

MG-NREGA: A global model still waiting to be fully implemented

By Bharat Dogra  When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MG-NREGA) was introduced in India nearly two decades ago, it drew worldwide attention. The reason was evident. At a time when states across much of the world were retreating from responsibility for livelihoods and welfare, the world’s second most populous country—with nearly two-thirds of its people living in rural or semi-rural areas—committed itself to guaranteeing 100 days of employment a year to its rural population.

A comrade in culture and controversy: Yao Wenyuan’s revolutionary legacy

By Harsh Thakor*  This year marks two important anniversaries in Chinese revolutionary history—the 20th death anniversary of Yao Wenyuan, and the 50th anniversary of his seminal essay "On the Social Basis of the Lin Biao Anti-Party Clique". These milestones invite reflection on the man whose pen ignited the first sparks of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and whose sharp ideological interventions left an indelible imprint on the political and cultural landscape of socialist China.

Concerns raised over move to rename MGNREGA, critics call it politically motivated

By A Representative   Concerns have been raised over the Union government’s reported move to rename the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), with critics describing it as a politically motivated step rather than an administrative reform. They argue that the proposed change undermines the legacy of Mahatma Gandhi and seeks to appropriate credit for a programme whose relevance has been repeatedly demonstrated, particularly during times of crisis.

Rollback of right to work? VB–GRAM G Bill 'dilutes' statutory employment guarantee

By A Representative   The Right to Food Campaign has strongly condemned the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–GRAM G) Bill, 2025, describing it as a major rollback of workers’ rights and a fundamental dilution of the statutory Right to Work guaranteed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). In a statement, the Campaign termed the repeal of MGNREGA a “dark day for workers’ rights” and accused the government of converting a legally enforceable, demand-based employment guarantee into a centralised, discretionary welfare scheme.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Making rigid distinctions between Indian and foreign 'historically untenable'

By A Representative   Oral historian, filmmaker and cultural conservationist Sohail Hashmi has said that everyday practices related to attire, food and architecture in India reflect long histories of interaction and adaptation rather than rigid or exclusionary ideas of identity. He was speaking at a webinar organised by the Indian History Forum (IHF).

India’s Halal economy 'faces an uncertain future' under the new food Bill

By Syed Ali Mujtaba*  The proposed Food Safety and Standards (Amendment) Bill, 2025 marks a decisive shift in India’s food regulation landscape by seeking to place Halal certification exclusively under government control while criminalising all private Halal certification bodies. Although the Bill claims to promote “transparency” and “standardisation,” its structure and implications raise serious concerns about religious freedom, economic marginalisation, and the systematic dismantling of a long-established, Muslim-led Halal ecosystem in India.

From jobless to ‘job-loss’ growth: Experts critique gig economy and fintech risks

By A Representative   Leading economists and social activists gathered in the capital on Friday to launch the third edition of the State of Finance in India Report 2024-25 , issuing a stark warning that the rapid digitalization of the Indian economy is eroding welfare systems and entrenching "digital dystopia."