Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > The Indian Car Scene


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:07   #601
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: India
Posts: 4,346
Thanked: 16 Times
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
I didnt understand your post completely,
Well, that explains all the posts above. ie.. Most of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
but wasnt Nano a private enterprise and tatas a private company? Why should govt buy land for them? Will WB govt do this for every company that wants to setup factory in WB? if thats the case, then i want to setup a small 1000 sft factory and am ready to pay 18000 rs to WB govt.
Another great example that you don't understand this whole issue.

For a huge project like this, it's impossible to proceed without the state government's co operation in many issues like land acquisition, electricity, water, waste disposal etc.. It's not like a 1000sq ft company. Many states would consider these kind of projects and will welcome them with wide open hands and provide whatever is needed after the usual bargaining and negotiations. It's the duty of any state government to do so. A good government will always understand the benefits/losses due to this project and will act according to that in shaping the project to state's benefit.
In the Singur issue, it was clear there were some major mistakes from WB government in the initial stages and even in the final stages before the fallout. But when most of the issues were ironed out by the government, one woman stood up for some very selfish reasons and was very arrogant on the matter. Talks, negotiations, bargaining.. Nothing worked out due to the arrogance and unwillingness from her part. Cheap petty politics displayed it's worst face here. So, who else to put the blame upon?

And regarding the company comparison, the matter should be read into a bit more deep.
Why does a company employ somebody? For the company's benefit.
So, for WB to gain some good profits and benefits out of the Nano project, it was necessary that it provide them with some good infrastructure too.
Else, some other company (state, in this case) will gain the benefits.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
TATAS SHOULD HAVE NEGOTIATED WITH FARMERS DIRECTLY AND WOULD HAVE BEEN FAR MORE SUCCESSFULL.
Not at all. You're completely wrong, I think.
First of all, there're laws (in some states) which prohibit mass land acquisitions of this scale. It has to happen thru government bodies and land protection law bodies.
Now, MB intervened to stop Tatas. If it was Tatas directly involved, the government itself would've done the favours!
Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
ofcourse, WB had no business buying land for tatas but it got involved and screwed itself, tatas and entire district.
Sorry! WB had business involved here. Lots of it. And it would've made a huge profit and growth too.
Unfortunately, everything is shattered now.
speedzak is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:11   #602
Senior - BHPian
 
NetfreakBombay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bombay
Posts: 1,387
Thanked: 338 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RX135 View Post
Just recently, even after Singur drama, Maharashtra govt. offered land to Videocon. Reliance SEZ has taken land from Panvel, Pen etc.
At least MH govt has taken some lessons from this. No "forcible" land acquisitions here.

Proper voting process was carried out before acquiring any land.

And villages voted against acquisition.

IMO this is their property, if industry wants it it has to negotiate with them.
NetfreakBombay is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:16   #603
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: pune
Posts: 2,088
Thanked: 48 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NetfreakBombay View Post
At least MH govt has taken some lessons from this. No "forcible" land acquisitions here.
Proper voting process was carried out before acquiring any land.
And villages voted against acquisition.
IMO this is their property, if industry wants it it has to negotiate with them.
Off topic: That is for Reliance SEZ and there is not final decision on it yet even after referendum . You still don't know what will happen eventually :(

For Videocon deal, I suspect, there is lot of firework ahead in near future.

While I would hate forcing decision on land owners/farmers, there will always be few minority stubborn elements, who wants to squeeze more or create problems.
RX135 is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:18   #604
Distinguished - BHPian
 
jkdas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Thiruvananthapu
Posts: 9,661
Thanked: 1,389 Times
Default

I also read that the state would run into 20-25crore loss per month or so as they has okayed 200Cr loan at 1% for 30 years and another nice amount for 0.1%

Neat.
jkdas is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:29   #605
BHPian
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: World
Posts: 115
Thanked: Once
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
However, does any poster even know the details of the issue?
Do you ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post

1. Many landowners did not agree to sell their land to tatas.
2. The land was acquired without the owners consent.
3. The land was brought at rates not agreeable to land owners.
FYI,

1. More than 11000 farmers agreed and had accepted compensation. Only
825 did not consent (according to list given to the governor by MB herself).

2. Please do the math about % of consent or otherwise.

3. The land price offered in 2006 was 40% above the then market rate
(before the TATAs moved in). An overwhelming majority consented.
meerkat is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:35   #606
Senior - BHPian
 
Sudipto-S-Team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Kolkata
Posts: 1,294
Thanked: 258 Times
Default

I think mods should consider changing the thread title. Tatas have actually pulled out. It's official now.
Sudipto-S-Team is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:39   #607
Senior - BHPian
 
snaronikar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 2,845
Thanked: 23 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
Since you closely followed TKM acquisition, do you want to do a good analysis for us of why there been no protests when govt brought land for TKM? But there are protests against land acquisition for reliance SEZ and Nano?
Land acquisitions are done by Govt and not by the the individual enterpreneurs. There were also some protests during that time. But they were settled out eventually. Most of the farmers are given jobs in the plant itself and adequate compensation was paid by Govt. You have to note one thing that there were nobody like MB involved in instigating the people here. People accepted the prices fixed by Govt and were happy for that.
snaronikar is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:52   #608
BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 680
Thanked: 6 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
1. About compensation - i dont think it was good enuf.
Unfortunately this is the root cause of all problems now. Neither you nor MB has land in Singur, yet both think that the compensation is not good enough
Mayavi is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 21:57   #609
Senior - BHPian
 
snaronikar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 2,845
Thanked: 23 Times
Default

The rates were good enough around a couple of years back when Govt decided to hand over the land to Tatas. But the present rate after land was given to Tata has sky rocketed. MB cannot ask the current rates for farmers to be given now as it was decided long back.
snaronikar is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 22:14   #610
LLL
BHPian
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Delhi
Posts: 634
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by meerkat View Post
1. More than 11000 farmers agreed and had accepted compensation. Only
825 did not consent (according to list given to the governor by MB herself).

3. The land price offered in 2006 was 40% above the then market rate
(before the TATAs moved in). An overwhelming majority consented.
OK so approx 92% consented. Assuming everyone gave equal portions of their land, Tatas got 92% of the land they needed to setup the plant. Did tatas explore the option of reconfiguring the plant layout to use 90% of the original land estimate or to hive off and build an anciliary unit nearby?

Also, since 825 did not consent, did the wb govt try to find another 825 volunteers?

Also, increase in land price is part of the game. It happens everywhere. Once news comes in that a big project is happening in vicinity, land prices skyrocket. But i guess govt would have finalised the contracts with farmers before the prices skyrocketed?
LLL is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 22:21   #611
LLL
BHPian
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Delhi
Posts: 634
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snaronikar View Post
There were also some protests during that time. But they were settled out eventually.

You have to note one thing that there were nobody like MB involved in instigating the people here. People accepted the prices fixed by Govt and were happy for that.
So what were the reasons of protests and how did the govt handle them?

Did the opposition and local politicos not try to use the situation to increase their votebank?
LLL is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 22:41   #612
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,229
Thanked: 416 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
OK so approx 92% consented. Assuming everyone gave equal portions of their land, Tatas got 92% of the land they needed to setup the plant. Did tatas explore the option of reconfiguring the plant layout to use 90% of the original land estimate or to hive off and build an anciliary unit nearby?
This is actually a good idea. If more than 90% of the farmers had consented and assuming it means around 90% of land available then surely Tatas should have explored the option of reconfiguring their plant to fit in 90% of the land. They can always buy more land later from any willing farmers who see fruits of selling their land rather than tilling it at any later date. I dont understand why should there be a controversy then.

Its another matter if this percentage is much less then 90!
joslicx is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 22:56   #613
BHPian
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 680
Thanked: 6 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joslicx View Post
This is actually a good idea. If more than 90% of the farmers had consented and assuming it means around 90% of land available then surely Tatas should have explored the option of reconfiguring their plant to fit in 90% of the land. They can always buy more land later from any willing farmers who see fruits of selling their land rather than tilling it at any later date. I dont understand why should there be a controversy then.

Its another matter if this percentage is much less then 90!
First of all, 90% of farmers does not mean 90% of Land. Could be more, could be less.

Second, TATA cannot find 10% of land in some other area detached from project area. A plant is a plant and should all be at one place to manufacture a low cost vehicle.

Third, Tata was still willing to build the plant if not for the TMC goons attacking their work force.

Also LLL, from your posts it seems like you do not know anything about the current issue. Seems like you just woke up from sleep and asking all these questions. There are several pages in this thread and almost everything you want to know has been posted. Take time to go through the thread before you start repeating questions.
Mayavi is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 22:57   #614
Senior - BHPian
 
snaronikar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 2,845
Thanked: 23 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL View Post
So what were the reasons of protests and how did the govt handle them?

Did the opposition and local politicos not try to use the situation to increase their votebank?
Nope. During that time, Bangalore was starved of any big manufacturing industries. Toyota came forward to set up the plant. SM Krishna's Govt was ruling during that time and nobody opposed to this idea. The political parties weren't so strong enough to confront the Krishna Govt at that time. But now the sceneary has changed...in 12 years.
snaronikar is offline  
Old 3rd October 2008, 22:58   #615
Senior - BHPian
 
Sudipto-S-Team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Kolkata
Posts: 1,294
Thanked: 258 Times
Default

Has anyone tried to explore how the Jindals are putting up a larger plant without any opposition in the same West Bengal?
Will anyone explore the concept of future price of land? Will anyone tell me why my neighbour should get rich at my cost?
Sudipto-S-Team is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pics: The Abandoned Tata Nano Factory at Singur, West Bengal Rajeevraj The Indian Car Scene 58 7th September 2016 13:58
Ratan Tata praises rival Mahindra, rues Tata Motors' sales DukeNukem The Indian Car Scene 78 28th October 2013 22:50
M&M may pull out of their JV with Renault-Nissan: CNBC ashutoshb The Indian Car Scene 26 29th December 2008 18:52
M&M may pull out of their JV with Renault-Nissan tushky The Indian Car Scene 2 5th January 2008 05:40
4 bombs explode at tata plant at singur devarshi84 The Indian Car Scene 28 11th January 2007 21:42


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 02:45.

Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks