The Union Education Minister, while replying to a letter written by Sanguem locals, stated that the Cotarli land is not being considered for the permanent campus for IIT in Goa. Residents from the area had sought the Centre's intervention citing violence, intimidation and misuse of powers to displace tribal communities and usurp their land. Locals broke out into celebrations and burst firecrackers, reflecting a significant relief for the community.
Interestingly, although local MLA Subhash Phal Dessai accepted that the Cotarli land was insufficient for the IIT project, he remained defiant and announced that he would not allow the project to be moved out of the taluka. "The IIT will come up in Sanguem itself. There are three options already shortlisted," he thundered.
That brings us to an important question: Why did the government shortlist the Cotarli land in the first place if it was not meeting the project requirements? Secondly, how was it taken for granted that private owners would part with their land to cover the shortfall of two lakh square metres? This is against the background that the Mopa land settlement had set a horrible precedent where landowners struggled to get compensation, and many are still caught up with the paperwork.
A permanent IIT campus in Goa is eluding the State government because of public opposition, and that's very clear. If the Bhagwati plateau site at Loliem found resistance, it was because of the eco-sensitive nature of the land. The Shel-Melauli site was rejected because people's livelihoods were affected, and the Cotarli site also faced similar opposition, although in a relatively smaller measure. The common thread that runs through these rejections is that people in the area opposed the campus. Either the legislator underestimated the impact on the local populace or failed to negotiate. The tone, however, has mainly been defiant, which throws open a question: Should a project be a priority over people?
Phaldessai's insistence on getting the project to Sanguem is another clear example of a hardened political ambition, and we saw that in Shel Melauli too.
While there is opposition to the IIT campus, it cannot be concluded as "just another opposition", and no MLA should consider himself another 'Shah Jahan' because this is a public project. There has to be a people-centric approach. Phaldessai speaks of Plan B and C for the project in Sanguem, but there is no hard and fast rule that the prestigious educational institute should come up only in that part of the State. Rejection of a site should not be seen as an individual failure. Several other legislators, including Subhash Shirodkar, have expressed willingness to take the IIT campus to his constituency. So, why can't the State government explore more options?
The point here is that projects should be seen from the State's perspective, where the interest of the locals is factored in. The brash, high-handedness and care-a-damn attitude of ministers is increasingly becoming a common phenomenon and has to stop. Bulldozing such massive projects against the wishes of people will have consequences.
