Closure of Vizianagaram Rythu Bazaar likely as court says land belongs to Pusapati family
According to sources, the family members of the Vizianagaram royal family have appealed to the government to remove the property from the 22-A prohibitory list, pointing out that they have won the case in the court and that relevant documents in have been submitted to get back the piece of land located near the MRO office.
Vizianagaram Collector B.R. Ambedkar told The Hindu that the Pusapati family approached the government five years ago over the property issue and that it has now submitted the details of the court order.
'Rythu Bazaar was unofficially set up as the revenue officials permitted the farmers to sell their produce after the hospital was shifted to the new premises. We will try to accommodate 30 farmers in the remaining three Rythu Bazaars in the city to protect their livelihood,' the Collector said.
A source in the Pusapati family said that the family of P.V.G. Raju, the last Maharaja of Vizianagaram, had donated land worth crores of rupees for the construction of schools, colleges and hospitals. 'It is unfair to question the royal family when the court has given a favourable order to take back the land. We could not take it back all these years since it was kept in the 22-A list,' he said.
Meanwhile, farmers and citizens staged a demonstration, demanding that the government allow the Rhythu Bazaar to continue in the same place.
Vizianagaram Pattana Powra Samskshema Sangham president Reddi Shankara Rao claimed that the land belonged to the government as per the 1968 revenue records. 'Each farmer has been paying a rent of around ₹3,800 per month to the Marketing Department since 1999. Around ₹15 lakh has been collected by the government from each farmer in the last 26 years. It is absolutely unfair to ask the farmers to vacate the land, without issuing individual notices. The decision will cause inconvenience to more than 1,000 consumers,' he said.
Kumili G. Lakshmi, a farmer, said that the government must come to their rescue. Echoing the same view, Kondamama, another farmer, said that the government should construct a new Rythu Bazaar before asking them to vacate the land. A. Venkateswara Rao, a citizen, urged the government officials and the Pusapati family to rethink the decision to resume the land, saying that the Rhythu Bazaar has been catering to the needs of thousands of citizens and hundreds of farmers.
'The closure of the Rythu Bazaar will affect the farmers and the people as well. Vizianagaram has a population of around 16 lakh, and more Rythu Bazaars are needed. Moreover, closure of the Rythu Bazaar would damage the reputation of the Pusapati family,' said S. Sankara Rao, a consumer.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
13 hours ago
- Economic Times
EAM Dr S Jaishankar, NSA Doval plan trips to Russia this month
Synopsis India is reinforcing its longstanding relationship with Russia, planning high-level visits to Moscow despite pressure from the US to reduce oil imports. National Security Advisor Ajit Doval and External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar will discuss defense collaboration, regional issues, Arctic cooperation, and increased trade. ANI External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar New Delhi: India is keeping its ties with Russia steady with high level visits planned to Moscow this month amid US President Donald Trump's demand asking to reduce oil imports from Russia and threatening penalties if New Delhi failed to do Security Adviser Ajit Doval and External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar are planning Moscow trips this month, ET has learnt. While Doval could visit Moscow in early part of this month, Jaishankar is planning a trip to Russia mid-August, it has been further defence industry collaboration besides regional situation will be big on the agenda when Doval meets his Russian counterpart, according to persons familiar with the are reports that India is looking to purchase additional S-400 defence systems which had contributed to India's success during Operation Sindoor. India also plans to have MRO facilities for S-400 here. There are also unconfirmed reports that India is exploring purchase of Su-57 fighter jets from in the resource rich Arctic region and increasing Indian exports to Russia will figure high on the agenda when Jaishankar meets his counterpart Sergey Lavrov besides First Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov. On Friday while defending ties with Russia MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said, "India and Russia have a steady and time-tested partnership." "Our bilateral relationships with various countries stand on their own merit and should not be seen from the prism of a third country."India will host the next edition of the annual India-Russia summit this year that will enable President Vladimir Putin to travel to New Delhi for the first time since industry ties, energy ties in the backdrop of recent EU sanctions, civil nuclear partnership, Arctic cooperation besides joint roadmap for cooperation in the high-tech sector will be on the agenda of the Summit, ET had reported last monthFood security could also be on the agenda of the Summit. Putin recently mentioned following Modi's direct request, Russia increased exports of fertilisers to other issues, Russia wants India to increase its presence in a big way in the resource rich Arctic region and earmark a second site for the nuclear power plant even as it has established its presence in the Small Modular Reactor workforce is increasing in the Russian construction and textile sector and a formal agreement on manpower could be inked during the summit.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- The Hindu
Protests staged seeking implementation of internal reservation
Seeking immediate implementation of internal reservation for scheduled castes various organisations took out protest marches and demonstration in Dharwad on Friday and few even tonsured their heads in protest. Members of Madiga Internal Reservation Struggle Committee staged the protest before the statue of B.R. Ambedkar and accused the State government of neglecting social justice and following anti-Madiga policy. As part of the protest few among the protesters tonsured their heads and intended to send the hair to the Chief Minister as mark of protest. However, police intervened and stopped more joining the protest, which consequently led to heated argument between the protesters and the police. When the tension escalated, the police took several of them into preventive custody, who were released later in the day. The protesters alleged that while internal reservation in the States like Haryana, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh had been implemented as per the direction of the apex court, the Karnataka government had failed to do so, resulting in members of Madiga community and its 29 sub-castes being left out from the sphere of employment. They also alleged that the State government was not cooperating with the Nagamohan Das Commission by not providing the requisite data sought by the Commission from various departments. They said that the Socio-economic and Educational Survey Report by the Kantharaj Commission had been discarded by the Chief Minister and now confusion was being created around Justice Nagamohan Das' report also. The protesters led by Chandrashekhar Naduvinemani, Manju Hosamani, S. Hegde, Manju Kondapalli, Ningappa Hanchinal, Pundalik Madar, Rakesh Dodmani, Parashuram Dodmani, and others urged the government to announce its decision before the start of legislature session on August 11. In another protest led by Dharwad Dsitrict SC/ST Pourakarmika and Employees Association and Jai Bhim Yuva Shakti Sena, a motorcycle rally was held from Ambedkar's statue in Hubballi to Kalabhavan in Dharwad. Subsequently a semi-naked protest was taken out, a mock funeral of the State government was held and few also tonsured their heads. On reaching the Deputy Commissioner's office, they submitted memorandum to Deputy Commissioner Divya Prabhu G.R.J. who assured them of forwarding their appeal to the government. Office bearers of the associations Vijay Guntral, Basavaraj Alapur, Harish Guntral, Vijay Mulimani, Basavaraj Chalageri and others led the protest.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- The Hindu
Nudges from the Court, silence from the commission
The Supreme Court of India speaks in questions. Sometimes softly, sometimes sharply. In its hearings on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) conducted by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in Bihar, the Court has asked what many in the country were thinking: Why was there a sudden need for fresh documentation? Why now? And what happens to the millions who cannot comply? Yet, the Court got a response from the ECI that did not address the underlying concern. The ECI insists that this is a technical revision. But the reality on the ground, and the implications of its policy, tell a very different story. The SIR in Bihar requires every voter to submit new proof of citizenship — within one month — or face removal from the voter list. The stated intent is accuracy. But the effect is exclusion. This is not administrative housekeeping. It is an ideological shift in the treatment of citizens: from presumed inclusion to presumptive exclusion. This shift marks a deep departure from the constitutional vision of universal adult franchise. Also Read | Mass inclusion, and not exclusion, should be the goal of the Bihar SIR, says Supreme Court Turning away from constitutional promises When India became a republic, it did something radical: it gave the vote to all adults, regardless of literacy, income, caste or gender. The Constituent Assembly debated this extensively. Many Members doubted whether the country was ready. But Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, among others, insisted that political equality must come first as a prelude to achieving social and economic equality. That principle was translated into practice by the first Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), Sukumar Sen (March 21, 1950-December 18, 1958). Faced with 173 million potential voters, most of them illiterate, he innovated. He introduced voting symbols and designed processes that made participation easy, not difficult. India's first elections were not perfect, but they were inclusive. In contrast, the revision in Bihar by India's 26th CEC, Gyanesh Kumar, is the opposite. By demanding rare documents such as birth certificates and passports — held by only a small fraction of the population, the ECI is setting a bar that millions cannot meet. Aadhaar cards and ration cards, widely held by the poor, are not accepted. In Bihar, over 65 lakh people may now be at risk of disenfranchisement. This is not an isolated event. We saw a similar exercise in Assam. The classification of lungi-wearing, Bengali-speaking Muslim inhabitants as 'D-voters' (doubtful voters) by the officers of the Election Commission, turned thousands into stateless persons. Many found themselves pleading before foreigners' tribunals, facing hostile bureaucracies and with no real opportunity to prove citizenship. With tribunals declaring them as foreigners and with no country ready to accept them, many have been just forcibly thrown away across India's borders, as unwanted human detritus. Bihar is at risk of repeating that mistake. The State is poor, flood-prone, and infrastructurally weak. A rigid document deadline during the monsoon season is not just poor planning. It is a barrier, intentionally or otherwise, for the poor and the marginalised to access the ballot box . The burden of proof has now shifted. Citizens must prove that they belong, rather than the state proving they do not. This reversal may seem technical, but its moral and democratic cost is immense. Also Read | In Bihar SIR challenge, Supreme Court refers to 1977 verdict on Election Commission's powers Historical lessons and warnings There are disturbing echoes here of the Jim Crow era in the United States (late 19th century to the mid-20th century), where African-American voters were disenfranchised through literacy tests, poll taxes and administrative obstructions. The veneer was legal; the purpose was political. It took federal intervention and landmark rulings such as Reynolds vs Sims (1964) and the Voting Rights Act 1965 to restore the right to vote as a true universal right. India has similar legal protections. Supreme Court rulings such as Md. Rahim Ali vs State of Assam (2024) and Lal Babu Hussein vs Electoral Registration Officer (1995) have made it clear: disenfranchisement without due process is unconstitutional. Citizenship cannot be revoked or denied arbitrarily. Yet, here we are again — requiring the most vulnerable to navigate a process stacked against them. The Court, during its hearing, asked pointed questions about the humanitarian consequences of the ECI's actions. But the ECI's response has been administrative, not empathetic. It continues to insist on timelines and technicalities, without addressing the social reality. The ECI's constitutional mandate is not merely to maintain clean lists. It is to ensure free and fair elections. This means enabling the right to vote — not erecting barriers to it. In this, the ECI is failing. And the Court, while alert, must decide whether it will continue nudging it or start directing it. A soft caution is not enough when millions face disenfranchisement. If this continues unchecked, we are entering dangerous territory. Voting could become a privilege of the documented middle class — urban, salaried, tech-savvy — while the poor, the displaced, and the undocumented are left behind. We risk creating two Indias: one with voting rights and one without. Political parties will then cater only to those who count — literally. Those without votes will be ignored in policymaking, welfare and justice. We are not just talking about voter lists here. We are talking about power — Who gets it. Who keeps it. And who is kept out of it. Also Read | The need to safeguard the right to vote A quiet Emergency There is no need for tanks on the street to declare an emergency. A quiet one is already here. It arrives through missing names, unmet deadlines and unanswered questions. It arrives when state machinery treats citizenship as a favour, not a right. This moment calls for resistance — not just from the Court, but from citizens, civil society and Parliament. We must reclaim the principle that the right to vote belongs to the people, not the paperwork. Sadak, samaj and Supreme Court must loudly proclaim that Mother India belongs to all her children and that she does not discriminate on a religious or economic basis when her protection is sought. As historian Ornit Shani reminds us in the book, How India Became Democratic, universal franchise was not an administrative accident, it was an imaginative leap. Bureaucrats and citizens together transformed a colonial mindset into a democratic one. That achievement must not be undone in the name of vigilance. The ECI must remember that elections are not entrance examinations. They are acts of belonging. And in a democracy, you do not have to prove you belong. You vote because you are a citizen. And you are a citizen because the Constitution says so, not because you can find your birth certificate. The vote is not a mere document. It is a declaration: that we are all equal. That one man has one vote and one vote has one value. That even if I have one vote out of 1.4 billion votes, it is an equal share in the republic, in which I and every Indian are equal participants. That right of ownership and participation is what is now at stake. Sanjay Hegde is a Senior Advocate designated by the Supreme Court of India
