With pressure mounting on farmers that the State government would go for land acquisition for Capital city, the farmers here have adopted a novel technique to keep the officials and politicians at bay.
In Gabbar Singh movie, hero Pawan Kalyan suggests Brahmanandam to use his cutout in collecting bad dues from Nagineedu. Probably taking a cue from the flick, the farmers have erected banners with the photographs of Jana Sena chief and cine actor Pawan Kalyan photographs in their fields opposing the land acquisition.
B. Venkat Reddy, a farmer, recalled that the Jana Sena chief had vehemently opposed the forcible land acquisition. “Mr. Pawan Kalyan assured us that he was prepared for dharnas and indefinite strike if the Government insists on land acquisition. We are pinning hopes on him.”
The farmers have erected about 150 flexis and banners in their village. There are more than 300 farmers who have not parted their land under the Land Pooling Scheme (LPS) announced by the Government for the capital city, Amaravati. The AP Capital Region Development Authority (CRDA) proposed to acquire 577 acres in Penumaka village. A majority of farmers are holding an acre to two acres.
Three crops a year
Farmers like Seshi Reddy and Venkat Reddy point out that the lands are very fertile. The farmers raise three crops a year. Groundwater is available at less than 20 feet. The farmers earn Rs. 2.5 lakh to Rs. 6 lakh per acre per annum. The compensation announced by the Government was peanuts and not sufficient to meet the requirements, they said. The farmers are expecting that the cine actor would tour their village in a week again. For the record, incidentally, Mr. Pawan Kalyan urged the Government to exempt three villages, including Penumaka, from the LPS. In a salvo, the actor, who toured the villages in the capital region a little over year ago, said the LPS was putting the farmers of Penumaka, Undavalli and Bethapudi at a great disadvantage. Citing the farmers’ arguments, he said the land rates in Undavalli were the highest and that the compensation was inadequate, while Penumaka farmers had no other occupation once they lost their farming livelihood.
