BPCL refinery: Concern over development plans, attempt to acquire more land
27 Feb 2025 9:35 PM IST
The proposed Bharat Petroleum Corporation’s refinery project at Ramayapatnam in Nellore district has sparked protests from local communities and human rights groups. The main objection is about an attempt to acquire more land than was originally envisaged
The proposed Bharat Petroleum Corporation’s refinery project at Ramayapatnam in Nellore district has sparked protests from local communities and human rights groups. The main objection is about an attempt to acquire more land than was originally envisaged.(Image:DC)
Tirupati: The proposed Bharat Petroleum Corporation’s refinery project at Ramayapatnam in Nellore district has sparked protests from local communities and human rights groups. The main objection is about an attempt to acquire more land than was originally envisaged.
The state government envisions the project as a transformative industrial investment, but residents of Ulavapadu mandal fear it would affect their peaceful existence and livelihood.
The cabinet approved the BPCL plan last month to establish a petroleum refinery with an investment of `96,862 crore and allocated 6,000 acres for the facility. The project is to be developed near Ramayapatnam port, promising economic growth and infra development for Nellore. It is expected to generate over 5,000 direct jobs and can employ 1,00,000 hands for its construction phase.
However, tension arose following reports that BPCL might seek an additional 10,000 acres for future expansion. Local residents, farmers, fishermen and the Yanadi Scheduled Tribe community, who rely heavily on the region's natural resources, saw this as a challenge to their existence.
A fact-finding team from the Human Rights Forum, Rashtra Chenatha Jana Samakhya, and Matsyakara Sangam recently visited villages in Karedu, Chakicherla, and Peddapattapupalem panchayats. The team noted that these villages lie between the sea and NH 16, bordered by the River Manneru to the north and the Ramayapatnam Port to the south. This is a sensitive coastal strip where displacement could cause severe social and economic consequences, it noted.
Rights forum member VS Krishna stated that the area's primary occupations — farming and fishing — sustained thousands of families. “The Karedu tank alone irrigates over 1,300 acres and supports fishing activities for the Pallekaarulu and Yanadi communities. Other tanks like Seethamma Cheruvu and Gokula Cheruvu nourish 300-350 acres each, cultivating paddy, groundnut, cotton, pulses, and vegetables. In China Chakicherla, fishing is the mainstay, while Peddapattapupalem residents rely on both farming and coastal fishing.”
The forum emphasized that residents felt sidelined from the decision-making process. “Villagers expressed anger and fear over the government's surveys and drone assessments conducted without proper consultation,” Krishna said.
This discontent culminated in a meeting at Alagayapalem on February 14, where the fisherfolk from multiple villages passed a resolution opposing the project.
Furthermore, the rights panel questioned the scale of land acquisition, comparing the BPCL proposal to similar projects nationwide. “The CPCL Manali project in Tamil Nadu (10 mmtpa) operates on 800 acres, HPCL's Visakhapatnam unit (15 mmtpa) uses 900 acres, and IOC's Paradip refinery (15 mmtpa) spans 3,350 acres,” it pointed out.
It said, “The proposed 6,000 acres, with an additional 10,000 acres for expansion, seems disproportionately high.” It urged the government to engage with the affected communities, re-evaluate the project’s land requirements and address the growing fears.
A fact-finding team from the Human Rights Forum, Rashtra Chenatha Jana Samakhya, and Matsyakara Sangam recently visited villages in Karedu, Chakicherla, and Peddapattapupalem panchayats. The team noted that these villages lie between the sea and NH 16, bordered by the River Manneru to the north and the Ramayapatnam Port to the south. This is a sensitive coastal strip where displacement could cause severe social and economic consequences, it noted.
Rights forum member VS Krishna stated that the area's primary occupations — farming and fishing — sustained thousands of families. “The Karedu tank alone irrigates over 1,300 acres and supports fishing activities for the Pallekaarulu and Yanadi communities. Other tanks like Seethamma Cheruvu and Gokula Cheruvu nourish 300-350 acres each, cultivating paddy, groundnut, cotton, pulses, and vegetables. In China Chakicherla, fishing is the mainstay, while Peddapattapupalem residents rely on both farming and coastal fishing.”
The forum emphasized that residents felt sidelined from the decision-making process. “Villagers expressed anger and fear over the government's surveys and drone assessments conducted without proper consultation,” Krishna said.
This discontent culminated in a meeting at Alagayapalem on February 14, where the fisherfolk from multiple villages passed a resolution opposing the project.
Furthermore, the rights panel questioned the scale of land acquisition, comparing the BPCL proposal to similar projects nationwide. “The CPCL Manali project in Tamil Nadu (10 mmtpa) operates on 800 acres, HPCL's Visakhapatnam unit (15 mmtpa) uses 900 acres, and IOC's Paradip refinery (15 mmtpa) spans 3,350 acres,” it pointed out.
It said, “The proposed 6,000 acres, with an additional 10,000 acres for expansion, seems disproportionately high.” It urged the government to engage with the affected communities, re-evaluate the project’s land requirements and address the growing fears.
( Source : Deccan Chronicle )
Next Story