Zamin, Bijli, and Billion-Dollar Politics: The Bhagalpur Power Project Controversy

The 2,400 MW ultra-supercritical thermal power plant being developed by Adani Power in Pirpainti, Bhagalpur, has ignited a political firestorm in Bihar, with Congress leader Kanhaiya Kumar accusing the BJP-led government of orchestrating a “Zamin Chori” after “Vote Chori.” At the heart of the controversy lies a complex web of land allocation, tariff pricing, and electoral timing—raising questions not just about corporate favoritism but about the integrity of public resource management.

The project, awarded to Adani Power through a Letter of Award issued by the Bihar State Power Generation Company Ltd. (BSPGCL), is backed by a 25-year Power Supply Agreement. Adani emerged as the lowest bidder with a tariff of ₹6.075 per kilowatt-hour. However, this figure has become a lightning rod for criticism. Kanhaiya Kumar points out that in other states, Adani has secured contracts at ₹3 to ₹3.5 per unit. The discrepancy of nearly ₹2.5 per unit, when scaled to a 2,400 MW plant operating at 85% Plant Load Factor over 25 years, translates into a staggering differential of over ₹1 lakh crore—a figure he claims will enrich corporate coffers at the expense of Bihar’s consumers.

The land allocation has further fueled the debate. Kanhaiya alleges that land was handed to Adani at ₹1 per acre, a rate that defies market logic and raises concerns about transparency. If true, this would mean that thousands of acres of fertile or semi-urban land were transferred for a pittance, bypassing fair compensation norms and public consultation. The Congress, in response, has promised three to five decimal land parcels for landless families, with ownership vested in women—an attempt to counter the narrative of corporate land capture with grassroots redistribution.

The timing of the project’s award is also under scrutiny. Congress leaders, including Pawan Khera, have drawn parallels with similar pre-election allocations in Maharashtra, Jharkhand, and Chhattisgarh, suggesting a pattern of strategic gifting to Adani before crucial polls. In Bihar, where the BJP faces stiff resistance from the RJD-Congress alliance, the Bhagalpur project is being portrayed as a political transaction disguised as infrastructure development.

Adani Power, for its part, has defended the project as a competitive bid under the Design, Build, Finance, Own, and Operate (DBFOO) model. The company plans to invest USD 3 billion (approximately ₹25,000 crore) and claims the project will generate 10,000–12,000 jobs during construction and 3,000 permanent jobs thereafter. Coal linkage has been secured under the Government of India’s SHAKTI policy, which ensures transparent fuel allocation. These figures, while impressive, do not address the core concerns of pricing, land ethics, and public accountability.

The Nitish Kumar government, which facilitated the project, has remained largely silent on the allegations. Critics argue that the silence is indicative of pressure from the Centre, especially given the withdrawal of central support from what was originally envisioned as a joint venture. Kanhaiya claims the project was initiated during the UPA regime and was meant to be a state-central partnership. The Modi government’s exit and Adani’s entry, he alleges, were not coincidental but calculated.

From a governance perspective, the controversy exposes the fragility of institutional checks in large-scale infrastructure deals. The absence of public hearings, lack of clarity on land acquisition terms, and opaque tariff benchmarking point to a deeper malaise. If the tariff is indeed inflated, it will burden Bihar’s power consumers for decades. If the land was undervalued, it sets a dangerous precedent for future industrial projects.

The broader question is not whether Adani should build power plants—it is whether public interest is being safeguarded in the process. Bihar, with its chronic power shortages and economic vulnerabilities, needs investment. But investment must be anchored in fairness, transparency, and competitive parity. The Bhagalpur project, instead of being a beacon of development, risks becoming a symbol of crony capitalism if these concerns are not addressed.

In the run-up to elections, the issue is likely to dominate political discourse. Congress and RJD will use it to mobilize rural and urban voters, especially landowners and small entrepreneurs who feel excluded from the benefits of such mega-projects. The BJP, on the other hand, will emphasize job creation, energy security, and infrastructure growth. But unless the government clarifies the terms of land transfer and tariff justification, the controversy will continue to cast a long shadow over Bihar’s development narrative.

Ultimately, the Bhagalpur power project is more than a thermal plant—it is a test case for how India balances corporate ambition with democratic accountability. The numbers are big, the stakes are high, and the questions are urgent. Whether Bihar gains power or loses ground will depend not on megawatts, but on the integrity of the process that delivers them.