The Gujarat (Bhal) Chemical Industrial Estate (GCIE), has so far procured some 900 acres, paying Rs 30,000 per acre for agricultural land and Rs 15,000 per acre for non-agricultural land. Most of the land it has procured is agricultural, and it proposes to acquire another 1,600 acres. Opposing the project are farmers who do not want to sell: they say the estate will cause pollution that will render their land arid.

The farmers also allege that GPCB has bulldozed through the public hearing for the project, not attending to the objections raised by villagers, not even giving them details of the impact the estate could have on the region.

Ratibhai Kohir, sarpanch of Motiboru village, said his panchayat was yet to adopt a resolution clearing the project, as required in the Panchayat Act, but the estate was already a fait accompli.

The panchayats of Naniboru, Bholad, Samani, Varna, Buranpura, Gholanan and Mibli villages have also opposed the estate, and set up a Bhal Vistar Vikas Samiti, a protest group.

Its secretary Khumansinh Jhala said,``GPCB is flouting its own rules, which clearly state that a chemical estate should at least be 5 km away from habitation. Motiboru and Naniboru fall well within that distance''.

Jhala said, ``GPCB and GCIE even organised a public hearing, but it was a drama to clear legal formalities. GPCB even manipulated the minutes''.

What the villagers are afraid of is a repeat of what has happened in Ahmedabad and Ankleshwar. ``If the level of pollution at this estate will be like in Ahmedabad or Ankleshwar, all our agricultural land will turn infertile,'' said Raysangh Chavda, sarpanch of Naniboru.

Even those who have sold their land have worries. Some of them, like Mulu B Vala, who sold over 4 acres, has not been paid in full.

But GPCB officials deny any irregularity on their part. While GPCB member-secretary G.B. Soni refused comment, another senior official, requesting anonymity, said all the information sought by the villagers had been given to them. He said after the first public hearing, another one had been announced, but none of sarpanches came to protest against the setting up of the estate.

The official also said that a copy of the environment impact assessment (EIA) translated into Gujarati had been provided to the Samiti, and dismissed those opposed to the project as ``vested interests''. About the 5 km rule, he said it applied only to habitations of more than 5,000 people, not smaller villages like Motiboru or Naniboru.

Jhala, however, denies that the EIA and details of the units coming up in the estate had been provided to the Samiti. And the fears of the farmers do not seem completely unfounded, given what has happened near industrial estates in Ahmedabad -- where units have effluent treatment plants, but run them only when the inspectors call.

But Naresh G. Bhojwani, a partner in GCIE and son of former BJP MLA Gopladas Bhjwani, has a different story to tell. He said that the project would get on way in about two months, and when GPCB had cleared it, where was the question of people objecting.

About full payment, he said some land owners did not have all papers, or might have taken loans, mortgaging their land, so they had not been paid in full.

Another question raised by people opposed to the project is that there isn't enough water for use at the estate. About this, Bhojwani said the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd had promised water from the Narmada canal, and if that did not happen, the water would be drawn from bore wells.

Asked if this would not play havoc with ground water levels and encourage units to also pump back effluent into the ground, Bhojwani said, ``The water here is brackish, and hardly any good for drinking or agriculture, so it does not matter.'' He also said the estate would discharge effluent, after treatment, into the sea.

Rajesh Bhatt of Ahmedabad Study Action Group (ASAG), which is helping the farmers, however, says: `` ASAG had written a letter to SSNL and it replied on September 19, 1997 saying it had given no such assurance. And when the farmers are cultivating, how can we call the land arid''.

He is also wary of promises made by the estate authorities, for experience has shown most estates flouting existent rules, leave alone going out of the way to protect the environment.

But for some of the villagers, joblessness is a bigger enemy. ``It is better to bear the brunt of pollution than starve,'' says Madhubhai Mujibhai. He says industry in the region would help people there find jobs.

So does the local MLA, who says the villagers should look at the estate as a source of employment.