The ABC Of Land

Records of survey number 137 show the Margare family as part-owners. This was purchased in the name of Singhania's wife, Yashoda, among others and then sold to Bachchan and his son Abhishek. Today, landless and without a regular income, Barku Margare, the family's sole survivor, says he was paid Rs 7,500 and asked to put his thumb impression on "some papers that I could not read." Since then he has been living at the foothills of the Lohagad Fort waiting for the promised four acres of land from the government. "Is it fair to people like Margare?" asks Adhav. "Not only did they fail to get land as promised, they also lost the piece of land which was originally their own."

When contacted Amitabh Bachchan confirmed having bought the land. "I am aware of the fact that this is agricultural land and was part of the surplus land from the Pavana dam project. However, I consulted two law firms to ensure that the sale was above board," he told Outlook. He said he was not aware of any ongoing inquiry. But Amitabh should have known that there was a farmers' agitation on since 1998. And that vast tracts of surplus land in the area were acquired by allegedly duping farmers into signing documents.

Farmers who refused to sell their land, which they got back from the state, find themselves in a strange situation. In the village of Apti, neighbouring Pol, Dnyandeo Rajivde is the owner of survey number 184. The land belonged to Dnyandeo's father Sahadhu and their neighbour Barku Ganu Bhore. But when the government released the land, it was only in the name of Dnyandeo's father. Later, much to his horror, Dnyandeo realised that the land had been sold by Bhore to Singhania's Fortune Tree Plantation. Rajivde has now joined the ranks of the farmers to try and get back his land.

While real-estate developers are exploiting the farmers, there is no relief from the state government. Following a Supreme Court order of 2002, the government cancelled its 1973 resolution that would release the unused land to its original owners. While the Supreme Court judgement in the case of Government of Kerala vs Bhaskaran Pillai clearly states that land once acquired cannot be given back to its original owner, it also states that the land should be used for public use, or auctioned off and the money used for public good. "Isn't rehabilitation of the existing project-affected farmers a step towards public good?" asks Adhav.

Former Pune divisional commissioner Arun Bhatia blames this largely on the lack of transparency that curiously arises wherever the farmer is clearly ill-informed. The state government connives in the scam, leaving the field open for builders promising swanky bungalows in the countryside. The hapless farmer is reduced to a statistic in the growing list of landless people in rural Maharashtra.