top of page

By:

Rajendra Joshi

3 December 2024 at 3:50:26 am

Controversy over shifting plot

Questions over corporation’s plan to abandon self-owned piece of land    Ruparani Nikam Kolhapur: A fresh controversy has surfaced over the proposed construction of the Kolhapur Municipal Corporation’s (KMC) new administrative building, with questions being raised over the apparent shift from a prime, self-owned plot at Nirmal Chowk to an alternative site at Shendapark.   The civic body, which has been functioning out of the historic Gandhi Market building since its days as a nagarpalika...

Controversy over shifting plot

Questions over corporation’s plan to abandon self-owned piece of land    Ruparani Nikam Kolhapur: A fresh controversy has surfaced over the proposed construction of the Kolhapur Municipal Corporation’s (KMC) new administrative building, with questions being raised over the apparent shift from a prime, self-owned plot at Nirmal Chowk to an alternative site at Shendapark.   The civic body, which has been functioning out of the historic Gandhi Market building since its days as a nagarpalika during the princely era, was upgraded to a municipal corporation in 1972. However, despite a significant expansion in its administrative scope over the decades, the KMC has yet to acquire a modern, purpose-built headquarters. At the centre of the present debate is a 9-acre-36-guntha plot at Nirmal Chowk considerably larger than the five-acre Shendapark site now being proposed.   The Nirmal Chowk land has long been in the corporation’s possession, and even a property card had been issued following the resolution of disputes by the district administration. Despite this, the civic body has now indicated that the new headquarters will be constructed at Shendapark, prompting questions over the rationale behind abandoning a larger, strategically located plot.   Complicating matters further is a prolonged legal dispute over the Nirmal Chowk land. While the preparation of a property card typically nullifies the relevance of the 7/12 extract under Maharashtra land records, claims based on the latter continued to surface, with some parties asserting ownership and keeping the dispute alive.   Critics allege that the civic administration failed to pursue the case with due diligence, at times remaining absent during key hearings. It was only after an intervention through a separate petition filed by Dilip Desai of a local civic group that the matter regained traction. The case is now slated for hearing before the Kolhapur circuit bench of the Bombay High Court in June.   Observers argue that instead of strengthening its legal position and securing the valuable land estimated to be worth around Rs 40 crore the KMC appears to have shifted focus to the Shendapark site. This, they say, raises concerns about the intent behind the change in location.   Notably, as far back as December 2003, the corporation had organised an architectural design competition for constructing a modern headquarters at Nirmal Chowk. A contemporary design was finalised, but the project has seen little progress in over two decades.   In contrast, several municipal corporations across Maharashtra have since developed modern administrative complexes, while Kolhapur continues to operate out of cramped premises in Gandhi Market, with even council proceedings often conducted under space constraints. Civic activists contend that had the KMC pursued the Nirmal Chowk project with consistency and resolved legal hurdles in time, the city would not have risked losing control over a high-value public asset.   With the shift to Shendapark now underway, concerns are also being voiced about the future of other public spaces in the city. Activists warn that if such decisions go unchallenged, it could set a precedent affecting open spaces in urban layouts.   The controversy has triggered demands for greater transparency and accountability in the civic body’s land-use decisions, with residents seeking clear answers on why the original site was sidelined and who stands to benefit from the change.

Indian Shipbuilding A Must Win Marathon

Shipbuilding

With a coastline of 7500 KM, it is hard to imagine, that for the first 20 years (1947-1967) India had no ‘shipping ministry’. In 1967 a Shipping ministry “coupled” with ROAD transport was established. Since then, this ministry has been on a name changing ride, not once, not twice but six times. In 2009 the “ROAD Transport and Highways” was de-coupled and ‘Shipping’ ministry was formed. Turning point came in 2015 with a clear maritime vision for 2030 and 2047. Ministry was re-christened, aptly to Ministry of “Ports, Shipping and Waterways” in 2020.


Why is Shipbuilding important for a country?

a. A Shipyard becomes an opportunity hub and like a queen bee requires the support of an industrial colony to manufacture machinery and equipment.

b. National Shipyards support fleet renewal needs of the Navy.

c. Contributes to national GDP, increases inflow of FOREX.


Korea shipbuilding is 8% of GDP. Japan’s automobile industry is 2.9% of GDP. India’s shipbuilding a meagre 0.000578% of GDP. In context, India’s pharmaceutical industry, ranked third largest in the world is 1.72% of India’s GDP.


International Shipbuilding Market

The market is estimated to reach around USD 200 billion by 2029, growing at a CAGR of 4.84%. While India is at bottom with 0.07% of world share, behind Philippines 1.5% and Vietnam 1%, however on the positive side, India has done well in taking care of its defence needs, with 37 of 39 Naval ships being built in India yards. Rear Admiral S Shrikhande researching on maritime as a Fellow at Wollongong University, Australia, says “Shipbuilding in India needs both, serious incentivisation and dogged determination and not harping on being a big ship breaking country. That Garden Reach shipyard has a $54 million order for merchant ships from a German owner, is a good sign.”


Were Shipyards of 20th century in Flight mode?

Prominent shipyards in India were built in the colonial period. Mazagon Dock 1774, Garden reach 1884, Hindustan shipyard 1941 to cater to British navy and merchant fleet needs. Cochin shipyard 1972, Adani Katupalli 2013, Reliance Naval and Engineering, Rajula Gujarat 1997 and others have limited capacity, hence a lot more work to do. Capt. Subhangshu Dutt (Singapore) a mariner and now a shipowner, says “GOI should hold hands in any collaboration till the marriage with the foreign entity is reasonably stable. He also suggests that “new shipbuilding sites should be given to existing successful shipyards since they have decades of experience and talent. Consortium of 3 or more parties may also be good idea”.


Shipbuilding GOLD

As per SPLASH report the demand for LCO2 carriers could reach 2,500 ships by 2050. As per other estimates, 40% of global fleet of ships could have wind propulsion by 2050. A surge in such vessels is due to an unparallel waves of decarbonization in the shipping industry. Demand for ships with ‘carbon neutral’ badges, such as Dual fuel, Wind assisted, Nuclear fuel ships, Hydrogen powered ships, Liquified CO2 (LCO2) carrier, is outstripping supply. A must in the ‘bucket list’ of every Shipyard. Pinning down a standard ROI in shipbuilding is not easy, but experts suggest it could range from 4% to 15% for the high demand ‘carbon neutral’ ships. While an LNG new build vessel could cost US$ 250 million upwards.


International collaboration

On China’s shipbuilding success story, Manoj Pandalanghat (Singapore) a mariner and ship owner believes that “China has around 50 active Shipyards. Each have a few large dry docks. In each dock two or more large vessels are built simultaneously. Thus, a single yard is able to roll out 2/3 vessels/month, 36 vessels/year and 50 shipyards roll out 1800 vessels/year”.


China could be a jaldi-5, but India needs a sturdy Mount Fiji. Besides technology, Japanese bring the most important hand baggage of soft-skills and culture, essential for success from keel laying to delivery. Maruti’s is a standing example.


Food for thought for New Delhi

a. Expertise: Hire Naval Architects and shipbuilding experts with current international experience.

b. Government assistance: Land, Financial support, subsidies and timebound clearances.

c. Monitoring: PMO should monitor the first 5 to 10 years till Shipbuilding takes-off on this long-haul flight to destination 2047.


India’s Shipbuilding is expected to grow to $237 billion by year 2047. On a back of the envelope calculations this works out to about 4% of India’s 2047 projected GDP of $ 5 trillion. While cars are driven on roads, however the Ministry of roads and transport has little to do with “Automobile manufacturing”. On a similar note, ‘Shipbuilding’ as an industry has little to do with Ports, Shipping and Waterways, thus it may be worthwhile to consider a separate ‘Ship-building’ wing in the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways headed by a dynamic cabinet rank minister. Since 2047 targets are stiff and an uphill task, so in all probabilities, the officials in Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways are likely to push beneath the carpet, delays and failures of Shipbuilding with sweet success stories of “Ports, Shipping and Waterways” and if this does happen then India will not only miss the Shipbuilding bus of 21st century but a lot more from a national security and strategic perspective.


(The author is a Shipping and Marine consultant. Member Singapore Shipping Association and empaneled with IMO as a specialist consultant. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page