( September 04, 2012, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Narmada Valley Project, of which the Omkareshwar Dam is part of, is one of the most controversial development projects in the world. The project is plagued with proven claims of adverse environmental impacts to say the least. Allegations of - absence or partially executed and biased government or privately sponsored impact assessment studies - have rendered the actual human, environment and heritage damage caused by the entire project marred with lack of real information. The entire Narmada Valley Project cost with its projected development benefit assessed against the project's human impact cost is so widely disproportionate, that it does not make monitory or development sense to implement the project. (Narmada Valley project: Development or Destruction?; Ashish Kothari and Rajiv Bhartari, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 19, No. 22/23 (Jun. 2-9, 1984), pp. 907-909+911-920.) Yet the project is at the stage of advanced implementation, of which the Omkareshwar project, is completed.
The Omkareshwar Dam is one of the 30 large dams conceived in the Narmada Valley Project. The Omkareshwar Dam, an intra-state project for generating 520 mega watts of power, which is also projected to irrigate an estimated 147000 hectares of agricultural land, was approved by the Madhya Pradesh State Government, with an assessment that on completion of the project, 30 villages would be submerged at the full reservoir level that is, 196.60 meters.
The Government of Madhya Pradesh framed a rehabilitation and resettlement policy in 1985 (R & R policy) for the oustees of all the Narmada projects in the state. The government amended this policy from time to time vide amendments dated: 9 June 1987; 5 September 1989, 7 June 1991; and 27 August 1993. The policy provided for the allotment of a minimum of 2 hectares of agricultural land; irrigation facilities at government cost; grant-in-aid for small and marginal farmers and Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe families; and to meet the entire cost of the allotted land. The policy further provided that the allotment of agricultural land would be carried out much in advance before dam construction reached crest level. The land required for allotment would be procured in the common area from the farmers having holdings of more than 4 hectares of land.
The state government obtained environmental clearance for the Omkareshwar project from the Ministry of Environment and Forest on 13 October 1993. The Ministry of Welfare granted clearance on 8 October 1993. The Planning Commission of India also granted clearance on the condition of compliance with welfare and environmental clearances vide its order dated 25 May 2001. The Central Electricity Authority accorded techno-economic clearance under the provisions of Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 on 24 July 2001. The Government of India approved and granted financial concurrence from Public Investment Board of the Planning Commission for this project on 17 May 2002. Forest clearance was granted on 20 August 2004 under the provisions of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for the diversion of 5829 hectares of forestlands.
In the meanwhile, the R & R Policy further stood amended on 3 July 2003, to the effect that agricultural land would be offered to the oustees "as far as possible"; and not to those who would make application in writing to receive compensation for their acquired land. The construction of the Omkareshwar dam began in 2002 and was completed in October 2006. A large number of families have been uprooted on construction of the dam up to its 190 meters height. For the dam site, a huge area of land had been acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The displaced persons were not however offered the land under the R & R Policy, as amended on 3 July 2003; rather compensation for their land was allegedly deposited in their accounts.
Narmada Bachao Andolan had been espousing the grievances of displaced persons by filing Public Interest Litigations before the Madhya Pradesh High Court and to the Supreme Court of India from time to time and a large number of orders had been passed by the courts to redress the grievances of the oustees. When the decision was taken to increase the height of the dam, NBA filed writ petition number 4457 of 2007 before the High Court seeking a number of reliefs, inter-alia, to stop all eviction; directions for serving of life supplies such as drinking water and electricity; not to take any other coercive measures; to stop closure of the radial gates of the Omkareshwar dam above crest level of 179.60 meters; and to stop the blocking of the sluice gates below crest level, until all Project Affected Families were rehabilitated as per the R & R Policy. Further reliefs sought included the issuance of appropriate directions for an assessment by the Grievance Redressal Authority for the Omkareshwar Project of the status of relief and rehabilitation of the oustees affected at Full Reservoir Level and Back Water Level within a stipulated period.
During the pendency of the writ petition in pursuance of the orders passed by the High Court from time to time, the authorities concerned furnished a large number of reports/interim reports. The High Court after considering the said reports and submissions advanced on behalf of the parties passed the impugned judgment and order dated 21 February 2008. The High Court issued a large number of directions as interim measures, including the direction for allotment of land in lieu of land acquired and to treat the major sons of the family, as independent families for the purpose of allotment of agricultural land.
Just as it is the case of all other dams and hydro electrical projects conceived under the Narmada Valley Project, the Omkareshwar project also lacked proper assessment studies before it was conceived and during all stages of its implementation. Of an estimated 1.5 million people who would be evicted from the entire Narmada Valley Project, the Omkareshwar Dam contributes to the submergence of an estimated 30 villages that would adversely affect the livelihood of about 52,000 people. However these estimates are based on the perception that the Omkareshwar project and its implementation would stick to the permitted limits. Unfortunately, as it is in the case of many other projects in the Narmada Valley Project, the government has failed to undertake proper assessment of the villages that would be affected by the project and has repeatedly failed to compensate even those who have been identified as those who would loose their land and livelihood to the Omkareshwar project.
Until recently the water level in the Omkareshwar Dam was maintained at 189 meters. The state government however has declared that it will increase the water level to 193 meters. While it is true that the water level is within the approved limits (196.60 meters) the government has failed to adequately rehabilitate those villagers who have lost their land to submergence. The watershed litigation and the order by the Supreme Court of India in civil appeal 2082/2011 made on 11 May 2011, has in fact assisted the government to disregard the fundamentals of adequate rehabilitation of the victims. While deciding the civil appeal, the Supreme Court diluted the principle of absolute responsibility of the state to rehabilitate persons adversely affected by the development project to "rehabilitate as far as possible".
This inferior interpretation of the principle of absolute responsibility by the court, is as demonstrated today, put to maximum exploitation by the state government, by increasing the water level, which is opposed by the villagers. Similarly the concept of rehabilitation has been reduced to monetary compensation, a principle that negates the understanding of social fabric and sustainable living, particularly given the fact that a substantial number of persons affected by the Omkareshwar Dam are from the tribal or Dalit communities that depended upon not just the patch of land that they owned or occupied as their own, which is now lost to the project, but upon the ecosystem and living patters that the region without the dam sustained and a livelihood they depended upon. It is equally trite for the court to believe that in a country like India, where corruption is rife, all those affected by the project would in fact receive the compensation amount, as suggested and awarded by the Grievance Redressal Authority.
Source : Asian Human Rights Commission
 The Narmada Valley Project, of which the Omkareshwar Dam is part of, is one of the mos...){kind=link}
Post a Comment