*Quid pro quo in Juvvaladinne Harbour privatization*

Visakhapatnam, April 19: Former MLA and YSRCP Visakhapatnam South Coordinator Vasupalli Ganesh Kumar stated that the privatization of Juvvaladinne Fishing Harbour is a clear case of quid pro quo, questioning how a company with less than Rs. 10 crore net worth was allotted assets worth hundreds of crores. Addressing the media at the party city office, he said the government’s claims that the firm would generate Rs. 2,500 crore business are absurd and demanded immediate rollback of the privatization decision. He accused the coalition government of treating fishermen merely as a vote bank, recalling repeated but unfulfilled promises such as ST status and pensions at 50 years, and alleged that fishermen were even threatened when they demanded implementation.
Ganesh Kumar contrasted this with Y.S. Jagan’s tenure, stating that fishermen welfare saw real progress only then, with 10 fishing harbours, 6 fish landing centres, and major infrastructure like the Juvvaladinne harbour built at a cost of around Rs. 300 crore on 79 acres, designed to accommodate 1,250 mechanised boats and benefit nearly 20,000 families. He stated that after coming to power, the coalition government shut access to the harbour and allocated nearly half the land, including critical dock and repair infrastructure, to a private defence-linked entity, undermining fishermen’s livelihoods. He questioned why alternative locations like Krishnapatnam or Ramayapatnam ports were not considered for such allocations.
He further alleged large-scale corruption, stating that assets worth around Rs. 200 crore were handed over for a fraction of investment, and accused the government of diverting funds meant for fishermen and halting works at Visakhapatnam Fishing Harbour. He recalled that under the previous regime, compensation, insurance payouts, and infrastructure support were extended promptly, while earlier governments neglected even basic relief like insurance for damaged boats. Supporting his claims, former university board member Janakiram termed the beneficiary firm a “suitcase company” and criticised the government for misleading claims about its capacity. The leaders warned that fishermen will not accept the privatization of assets created for their welfare and demanded that all such decisions be reversed, failing which they would intensify protests to protect fishermen’s rights and livelihoods.