While
shuffling for some serious topics to write on, an obituary to the Raigarh stint
seemed like a perfect choice; but then I felt apt to share my perspective on a
theme that has excited me even before I joined IAS.
The theme
wherein the richest are pitted against the poorest and the way the government
(or the officers concerned) orients itself makes the difference between a
violent conflict and a win win situation...It's the theme that Raigarh district
offered lots of insights into.. .The theme of Industrial Disputes*1…
Raigarh: an Industrial (Dispute?) district
When the
people, as a collective, have grudges and misgivings against an industry that’s
setup in their backyard they often resort to a confrontationist mode wherein
obstruction to the industry’s operations is the usual first step.
This is
also a pre-conceived methodology to involve the district administration, as any
such obstruction is bound to be illegal and is usually accompanied with acts of
violence against persons and properties.
In my one year's Raigarh stint, I handled 1 such long drawn dispute as
the concerned Tehsildar, 3
more as the concerned SDM and a few
others I witnessed as Assistant Collector. Two of them were against
public sector companies, the rest against large private firms. Almost every
dispute had land losers in the forefront and in all the disputes employment to
the locals was one of the key demands. The cries of "company
management" being irresponsive to justify the coercive step were also
common to all.
Every industrial dispute has a core of either a genuine grudge or a deep
reaching misconception; this usually forms the bulk of the demands that are
projected to the people (and most importantly, the media).
Outside the core, the bulk of a dispute is created and governed by commercial-political
interests. The triggering factor for a dispute is usually an astonishingly
small action by the company (eg. Firing a few local contractors for Non-performance
or not yielding to demands of villagers for a special bathing tank)
The usual way to deal with such situations is to first address the
triggering factors. Since these are the easiest for the company to commit to,
with little administrative pressure the protestors' genuine immediate demands
can be acceded to.
The second step is to focus on the other persistent set of demands and
separate the genuine grudges from the artificial ones; the leaders of such
protests are usually seeking to push in one of their personal agenda in the
garb of public demand, it becomes important to separate these threads.
The next step is to analyse what kind of commitment can be legally
extracted from the company regarding the genuine concerns and meeting common
ground on the same.
The final step is to tell the free riders and nuisance creators, who
have by now hijacked the negotiation and the protests, to back off and let the
company do its work as it won’t be able to share its profits till it makes it.
Needless to say, all these steps are to be kept completely transparent and at
no point should the fairness of the governmental authority be made
questionable.
This algorithm has stood the test of time (only a year, and still
evolving) for me and has created a win-win situation for the aggrieved
villagers/land losers and the company. Yet each such dispute throws its own idiosyncrasy
that makes for a nice story ... It is these unique experiences that compelled
me to write this post.
*1 – “Industrial Disputes”, for the purpose of this blog post, refers to
any law and order situation centring an industrial unit
Cartelisation using Government Mediation
A unique industrial dispute started in the supply chain of a prominent mining
public sector company in Raigarh. The transporters
of raw material went on protests against entry of "outsiders" in the
transporting business. Things took a nasty turn when they started
obstructing supplies (through voluntary and coerced support from fellow
transporters) and sought administrative intervention/ mediation to pressurise
the concerned company to not give business to those "outsiders".
Despite the precedents that mildly supported their demand for
administrative intervention, such issues were left up to the company to decide.
The administration has no mandate to decide who is "outsider",
given the fact that those protesting were all first generation Chhattisgarh
migrants. Notwithstanding the protestors ' efforts to involve some "Professional Agitators"*2,
common sense prevailed and it died its natural death. After all, commercial
vested interests alone cannot carry out an agitation if the administration and
police are fair and non- partisan.
*2 - “Professional Agitators” refers to people who earn their living out
of protests and demonstrations. Raigarh, being an industrial district, has dozens
of them. They can be found in every drama involving any industry, their noise
volumes being inversely proportional to how well they are "managed"
by the concerned entity)
The Land Scam and the Clean Up
Another idiosyncrasy was shown by a Maha-Ratna public
sector company wherein the hundreds of hectares of land that it acquired were
done in a way to cost the company a few hundred crore rupees extra. It was done
through what we later found out to be a major land scam that involved company
officials as well as lower levels of revenue administration.
The land losers who actively participated in the scam were rewarded many
folds and so were the brokers. When the district administration took
cognizance of the misdeeds and worked overtime to reverse the damage done by
conducting a thorough investigation, the commercial interests of many were
hit.
The resulting protests were started in
the garb of developmental issues yet the root cause (which they were foolish
enough to mention in writing) was the investigation into the land scam. They wanted
immediate call back of the same. Normally protests like these, with no moral
authority whatsoever, don’t deter companies.
However the fact that arguably every employee of the concerned company itself
took active/passive part in the scam, made the company management's own moral
position dicey.
Political Hijacking Eventual Fizzling
The dispute that touched me the most was built around the most genuine
concern of all- employment of one family
member of a land loser to be given by the company which acquired its land
within 2 years of taking possession.
As discussed before, its triggering factor was alleged firing of 25 land
loser employees by the company management without giving due reason.
However the company had nearly 190 such land losers and it had given employment
to only 45. I found the dispute to be a meaningful opportunity for the
administration to make the company commit to employing all the 190 odd
people.
To cut a long story short, the issue soon saw involvement of the "professional agitators",
active honourable political post holders and even wannabe youth leaders. With
the effect that genuine and artificial issues got mixed up to an extent that
was irreparable (who would teach the difference between legal mandate and a
moral mandate to an emotive crowd of 300 odd people stuffed in a meeting
hall?).
I felt let down because just when the company was made to came forward
to give everything that it could, the "public mood" shifted to the
more short term and impossible demands, leading to an entire change of focus
and an amorphous end of the agitations.
Dramas and Disputes
Agreed, a lot of it is drama.
Agreed, the front actors are usually crooks.
Agreed, the commercial vested interest dominates the negotiations.
Yet, when I visited the villages that were affected by the concerned
companies, there was a genuine grievance that I could sense in the quietest
individuals. Who would usually be standing on the side lines with a perplexed
look while the "leaders" demanded and approach me at the
end with folded hands and a withered piece of paper, asking for a perfectly
legal claim which should have been theirs months ago.
It always made one ask, yes we can solve these dramatic problems but why
give a chance for the genuine grudge to arise?
In today's date, land matters the most. Hence our policies pertaining to its acquisition and rehabilitation matter.
What matters more is their implementation - land scams during acquisition and
percolation of land brokers that rob the real owners off their
rehabilitation rights needs to be stopped.
District administration in Raigarh has taken suo motu cognizance of illegal land transfers and passed orders of
revenue recovery in the tune of tens of crores. All the SDMs are being
instructed to conduct gram sabhas in areas where land is going to be acquired
in near future so as to make people aware of the rehabilitation benefits and in
turn deter the land mafia that acts on the information asymmetry. I hope this
trend continues here and elsewhere.
I have learnt from my mentor over the last year that a rich man in India
will get its work done through the government through one way or another, it's
the poor that we (in the IAS) need to proactively work for. In these Industrial
disputes where the rich were pitted against the poorest, the side the Government
(or I) was on was never in question. Instead
of treating the protestors as criminal breachers of peace, we treated them like
aware citizenry whose lawful demands we will ensure to meet.
These disputes provided an opportunity for me to negotiate on the behalf
of those who would otherwise just hope to be heard and let go. I, like all the
other anonymous bureaucrats, will soon be forgotten forever, yet the
warmth/appreciation I felt from the genuine protestors and the memory of
their contentment on being heard and addressed to, are going to stay with me..
PS: A Demi- Official obituary to Raigarh stint might still follow
;-)
PPS: All views expressed here are purely
personal and have no connection with those of the Government. This post has
been carefully modified to fit into the ambit of freedom of speech permitted to
officers under the Rule 6 and Rule 7 of All India
Service (Conduct) Rules, 1968.
