The Request states that the Amravati Integrated Urban Development Program (AIUDP) which was approved by the Bank on December 19, 2024 to support the Government of Andhra Pradesh’s (GoAP) plan to build Amaravati as a new capital city, was linked to a previous World Bank Project for the same Amravati Capital City (ACC) development. The preparation for Amaravati Sustainable Infrastructure and Institutional Development Project (ASIIDP) started in 2017, but the Government of India withdrew its request for financing in July 2019 and the project was halted before it was approved.
The Request claims that the Panel’s March 2019 recommendation of an investigation of potential non-compliance of the previous ASIIDP, with regard to livelihood restoration requirements set out in OP/BP 4.12, is linked to the new AIUDP. The Panel updated its 2019 recommendation not to investigate after the Government of India withdrew its financing request. The Request questions the Bank’s use of the Program-for-Results (PforR) financing instrument for the new Program, because the previous ASIIDP had been classified as Category A for environmental and social impacts. The Request raises “serious concerns” in relation to the use of PforR as the financing instrument, stating that it may risk overlooking “serious legacy issues” such as: “human rights violations and involuntary resettlement and displacement of local communities”. The Request raises further concerns related to land assembly process and the “illegal” land pooling scheme (LPS), as well as intimidation and coercion of landowners. The Request also claims loss of livelihoods, food insecurity, and ongoing and future environmental and socio-economic harm. In addition, it alleges lack of meaningful consultation and disclosure of information, and poor labor standards and conditions for construction workers.
The Panel registered the Request on December 17, 2024, and Management submitted its response to the Request on February 10, 2025. The Panel received information that the Accountability Mechanism of the ADB had also received a complaint regarding the Program raising similar concerns as the Request received by the Panel on December 2, 2024, and that this complaint was forwarded to the ADB’s Compliance Review Panel (CRP) on January 14, 2025.
In its response Management stated that the AIUDP was “only very recently approved” and that it considered the Request to be “premature.” Management added that it was confident that the concerns and allegations in the Request are “sufficiently addressed through the Program design as well as the lessons learned from the earlier project that was prepared but dropped.” Management said it believed that the Bank has correctly applied the relevant policies and procedures applicable to the Program and that it applied to the matters raised by the Request. Management added that “the Requesters’ rights or interests have not been, nor will they be, directly or adversely affected” by the alleged failure of the Bank to implement its policies and procedures.
Coordinating with the ADB’s CRP, the Panel undertook a joint eligibility mission to India in March 2025 to conduct a field visit for reasons of efficiency. The Panel based its recommendation on whether an investigation into the matters alleged in the Request was warranted on its Resolution and the applicable World Bank Policy and Directive on Program -for-Results Financing. The Panel met with Government officials in New Delhi and Andra Pradesh, the implementing agencies’ officials, Bank Staff, and some 200 community members and Requesters in Andhra Pradesh.
In its Report and Recommendation, the Panel acknowledged the serious concerns the Requesters raised, and the harm that the affected people who it met have experienced as a result of the ACC development. These harms relate to land assembly process and associated negative impact on livelihood linked to the state government priority changes after the commencement of the ACC development. The Panel observed the serious concerns of the Requesters and community members have regarding the risk of floods and its management under the ACC development and AIUDP implementation. While the Panel was made aware of harms suffered by persons and communities affected by the development of ACC, the Panel was not able to establish a plausible link between these harms, as well as the potential harms raised in the Request, and the AIUDP. The Panel recognized that at the current, early stage of Program implementation, legacy issues and potential future risks are still being assessed, including whether mitigation in place is sufficient and should be further strengthened. Therefore, the Panel could not determine whether and to what extent any harm related to the allegations of the Requesters can be linked to the Program.
Based on these considerations, the Panel recommended to the Board not to investigate the Request. The recommendation was approved by the Board of Executive Directors on April 29, 2025.
