The recent history (2000) of rehabilitation and resettlement around
Polavaram project; the Surampalem - Bhupathipalem-
Musurumilli reservoirs in East Godavari
Dist. and Kovvada reservoir in West Godavari Dist. and ongoing rehabilitation
of the displaced under Polavaram project.
In Surampalem reservoir one Sarapu
Potharaju and NGO Samata filed a case in High court. The District
administration agreed to rehabilitate 167 families and NGO agreed for this
package.
CESS enumerated that 234 families are
eligible for rehabilitation but the list of the families is not available with
their report.
Annexure
I - CESS Rehabilitation estimate
The report did not refer to Narmada judgment which defined the back water affected
also as displaced. NGO SAKTI noticed that one Chodiveedhi hamlet having 57
houses will be affected with back waters of reservoir, which were ignored by
the Dist. administration and NGO while preparing R & R plan.
SAKTI motivated the Chodiveedhi tribals
to approach the Collector and convince him that the Narmada
judgment of Supreme Court defined the back water affected people also as
displaced and made it clear that the RR package is applicable to them also. The
Collector agreed and instructed the Housing Corporation to take up 57 families
under housing scheme.
Annexure
II - Letter of the District Collector
The High Court came forward to monitor the
progress of rehabilitation but unfortunately the NGO did not pursue the case
and the Court has to close the case accepting the report of the Govt. that
housing is complete. (167+57).
Annexure
III - Court Order A & B
Though alternative land was given; the
tribes are unable to cultivate these undulating lands full of stones, that too
at a far place from their habitations.
Rajeev Institute of law (Law College)
in consultation with SAKTI conducted a study of the rehabilitation.
Annexure
IV - Report of Rajeev
Law College
The
precedent of Surampalem
The definition of PAP (to include back
water affected) was incorporated in G.O. 68 of AP. Govt. by defining that families
above 100 meters to FRL (back water affected) are eligible for R&R package.
Bhupathipalem
reservoir
In 1990 a reservoir was proposed on
Sitapalli vagu at Sitapalli village
of Rampachodavaram Mandal.
But tribes objected that since a reservoir site shall benefit more lands
outside the agency area, the site should be shifted to bring more tribal lands
under irrigation. So Bhupathipalem village, seven kms. above Sitapalli village
was identified as appropriate site. The reservoir submerges four villages.
SAKTI found that there are many
irrigation tanks in the command area, irrigated by Rampa water fall etc. Renovation
of these tanks and excavation of some more tanks shall be more appropriate.
At the request of SAKTI, APFRO
prepared feasibility report. SPWD (Society for
promotion of Waste Lands Development) supported renovation 10 tanks.
In 2000 the then Govt. wanted to harness
all the streams in tribal area for irrigation. The Bhupathipalem reservoir was
approved in 2004.
The Mandal Praja parishad of Rampachodavaram resolved
welcoming the construction of the reservoir. Since the villagers to be
displaced are strongly opposing the reservoir, an all party forum was formed
with Dist. Collector as chair person. Annexure V - Multi stake holders forum
Annexure
VI - News, Photo, Map
Sakti enabled the tribes of submergible
area in reading the contour maps.
The determined villagers threatened by
submergence forced to Govt. to reduce the land acquisition estimates above 210
FRL. As a result one village above FRL, Chinagaddada was excluded.
The Gandhinagaram village which was
initially treated as partially submerged, was later included in R&R package
as it is back water affected. Annexure
VII (Brief note on Bhupathipalem
project by P.O., I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram)
Sakti trained the villagers to prepare
family wise property estimates which became a bench mark to bargain the
compensation with the government. Annexure VIII in a separate file Gandhinagaram
The Collector entered in to an agreement
with the villagers of Gandhinagaram 1) to provide housing colony, 2) compensation
for the properties and 3) land to land along with 4) fishing rights.
Annexure
IX - MOU with Dist. Collector 06 -2005
The villagers of Gandhinagaram
constructed housing colony on their own next to the dam site with a view to
take up fishing in reservoir. They were allotted 5 cents of house site though
the 3 cents was the norm at that point of time. They were given compensation
for all their assets and one acre of land in Rampachodavaram which is in the command
area.
This
package became a trend setter for future to the R& R policy of AP. Govt.
through G.O. MS. No. 76 dated 13-4-2006 revised the house site from 3.5 cents
to 5 cents. Land to land rehabilitation is provided through Go, Ms No 119 dated
26-6-2006.GO Ms No 76 dated 13-4-2006 treats "Each major son residing with such
person will be treated as a separate family.
Annexure
X - G.O. table with comments
Bhupathipalem village of 15 families were
rehabilitated at a distance of 15 KMs with housing colony and 2 acres of land
for family, whereas Kothapakalu village of 30 houses, a housing colony was
constructed in RCV. The house owners are still in the old village and giving
the houses for Rs 400 rent. SO far land was not given to them.
Seven villagers were displaced by
Musurumilli reservoir. Since the Govt. is offering land in far off places, they
opted for cash compensation and housing colonies on road side around RampaChodavaram.
Training in preparing property estimates enabled them to get due compensation. Annexure XI (Property Estimates) in
a separate file
Meanwhile State Govt. agreed to the proposal of National
Commission of Scheduled Tribes to
provide land to land to the PAPs.
Indira
Sagar The Polavaram Project (map)
Responding to the petition of SAKTI, CEC,
(constituted by Supreme Court) recommended to the Govt. to prepare the
rehabilitation plan survey number wise, family wise, and constitute a committee
to involving two NGOs to monitor the process of rehabilitation. The NGOs, if
situation demands, can propose to stop the construction of the project, in case
the rehabilitation is not satisfactory.
Annexure
XII - CEC recommendations
In colobration with WWF Sakti brought out
a report "Perspectives on Polavaram A major irrigation project on Godavari" published by Academic Foundation (2006)
Thus Sakti supported the tribes in
opposing the construction of reservoirs and dams which displace them and helped
them in renovating the tanks as alternative. When the construction of the dam
started, Sakti enabled the displaced people to get better rehabilitation. Taken
up campaign with local, national and international agencies. The interventions
of Sakti for improvement in rehabilitation were at every stage have been
integrated into the rehabilitation policy of the government.
Annexure
XIII - Case study of a Rehabilitated family
Meetings with the Community (Photos)
Recommendations
1. The compensation
should be paid as soon as the land is acquired in a single installment.
2. Cultivable lands
to be given to be displaced subject to their satisfaction.
3. All the displaced
family members of all age groups should be covered under one or other social
security scheme. Pensions, PDS, Apadbandhu, NREGS Rajeswary Girl Child Scheme,
etc.
4. Exclusive ITI's
should be opened of the eligible youth among the displaced.
5. Updating of land
records in consultation with gram sabha should be a pre requisite for land
acquisition as many cultivators name are not regularly recorded.
6. All the displaced
members of a habitation should be paid compensation as single batch. They
should not be split in to batches which divide their unity.
7. 7 to 800 families
are rehabilitated in one place. Wage labour or employment for such large number
of people is difficult till the economy under irrigation absorbs them. Only 50,
60 families should be rehabilitated in one place.
8. Government should
be made responsible for ensuring employment, education, social security etc.,
for the displaced before they are displaced.
9. Needless to say
that there should not be gender discrimination. But it is reported that
unmarried male adults are getting compensation where as unmarried adult
daughters are getting the same.
10.
Women have to settle home stead in new places. A special
package should be offered to them to develop the home stead with stand stress
and loss during the rehabilitation and resettlement.
11.
Ousters should be rehabilitated close to the dam site
enabling them to take up fishing as a livelihood.
Annexure
I - CESS Rehabilitation estimate
CENTRE FOR ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL STUDIES
(CESS)
BUDGET
ESTIMATES for R & R Implementation in SURAMPALEM village
Sl.No.
|
PARTICULARS
|
Amount
(Rs.in lakhs)
|
1
|
Compensation for Agriculture land (Private
patta and Government land D form patta) 606 acres (406 private patta &
200 acres 'D' form patta & 250 acres canal land (@Rs.30,000 per acre)
|
256.800
|
2
|
Solatium at the rate of 30 percent of
total compensation
|
54.5400
|
3
|
Compensation payable to Productive trees
|
50.000
|
|
Sub Total
|
361.340
|
4
|
Compensation for 243 PAF hhds @ Rs. 300
per household
|
7.290
|
5
|
Housing assistance under WSHS @ Rs. 22,000
|
59.180
|
6
|
Transport to 243 PAF hhds @ Rs.300 per
household
|
7.290
|
7
|
Subsistence allowance for 269 hhds for 6
months @ Rs. 600
|
9.684
|
8
|
Cattle maintenance allowance for 6 months
@ Rs.300 pm
|
4.374
|
9
|
Provision of civic Amenities at their new
locations such as roads drainage
lighting water supply. School, temple etc
|
60.500
|
10
|
Implementation of Economic Rehabilitation
programs
|
17.040
|
11
|
Compensation to the wells and other
structures
|
3.000
|
|
Sub total
|
185.368
|
12
|
Cost for NGO services including their establishment and
travel
|
5.000
|
13
|
Engaging ouside agency to carry out
mid-term and impact evaluation
|
12.000
|
14
|
Cost of transportation for supervising the
implementation works
|
5.000
|
|
Sub total
|
22.000
|
|
Total
1-14
|
568.708
|
|
Contingency @ 10 percent of the total amount
|
56.871
|
|
Grand Total for R & R Plan Implementation
|
625.579
|
|
Proportion to the total project cost to
rehabilitation
|
14.33%
|
Annexure
II - Letter of the District Collector
Ref:
G1 2071/2001 dated 21-06-2003 Collectorate,
Kakinada
From To
Dr.
K.S. Jawahar Reddy, IAS. The
District Manager,
East
Godavari District, Housing
department,
Kakinada. Kakinada.
Sir,
Sub: Land acquisition -
Surampalem Project - Rampachodavaram Division - Gangavaram Mandal-Kothada
village - construction of houses to the likely to be displaced - proposals for
IAY scheme - reg.
Ref: R.c. No. T8/106/2002 date:
22-5-2003 of Project Officer, ITDA, Rampachodavaram.
I invite attention to the reference cited
(copy marked to you). In the reference
cited the Project Officer. I.T.D.A. Rampachodavaram has reported that 57
families residing at Chodiveedhi, Tekulaveedhi villages of Agency Gangavaram
Mandal have represented for providing Pucca houses including all other rehabilitation
measures as was done to the actual displaced families under Surampalem
Reservoir Project in Gangavaram Mandal.
The Project Officer, ITDA further reported that their residential houses
are likely to be effected under submersion of Surampalem Reservoir
Project. Since two villages are being
hamlets of Kothada village which is submergible village under Surampalem
Project, the Project Officer ITDA also reported that they are all belong to
"KOYA" S.T. community and they are also filed W.P.2527/03 before Hon'ble High
Court seeking grant of R&R package and their request is considerable in
nature and requested to sanction I.A.Y. housing scheme to the said 57 persons
of Chodiveedhi, Tekulaveedhi villages.
In the above circumstances reported by
the Project Officer ITDA, R.Chodavaram, I request you to take necessary steps
to construct house under I.A.Y. Scheme to the said 57 persons of Chodiveedhi
and Tekulaveedhi villages i.e. hamlets of Kothada village which are likely to
be effected under submersion of Surampalem Reservoir Project.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
For Collector
Copy to the Project Officer ITDA,
Rampachodavaram
Copy to the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Rampachodavaram
Copy to the Project administrator &
Superintending Engineering SACB Division, Dowleswaram.
Copy to the Mandal Revenue Officer
Gangavaram.
Annexure III - Court Order A &
B
Order
- A
2002 (2) ALD 218
A.P.Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 -
Section 242-F - The provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled areas)
Act, 1996 (Central Act), Section 4 (I) - G.O.Ms.No. 64, Social Welfare (T)
Department, dated 18-04-1990 - Acquisiton of lands in tribal areas for the
construction of dam - Neither the provisions of Section 242-F of Panchayat Raj
Act nor the instructions issued in G.O. Ms. No. 64 followed - Neither the
Mandal Parishad nor Gram Sabha consulted in this regard - However, the project
had already started and substantial amount invested - In the circumstances, it
is not just to quash the acquisition - Only certain directions issued.
44. Having regard to the totality
of the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of
directing the respondents herein to forthwith:
(a) Place the proposals of the land
acquisition for construction of the reservoir in question before each of the
Gram Sabhas for its consent, receive the objections, if any, and suitably deal
with the same in accordance with the instructions on the subject referred to
herein above. However, the consent or
otherwise of the Gram Sabha shall be in the form of resolution.
(b) Place the proposals before trhe
Mandal Parishad as is required under Section 242-F of Panchayat Raj Act.
(c) The scheme of resettlement and
rehabilitation of the persons affected shall be co-ordinated at the State level.
(d) Necessary steps shall be taken to
have a rehabilitation cell, which will work under the direct supervision of
ITDA. The task of identification of the
persons who are to be treated as dispossessed persons shall be entrusted to the
cell to be so created. The progress of
rehabilitation of dispossessed and displaced families will be monitored by the
ITDA concerned and the Tribal Welfare Department.
(e) The rehabilitation plan shall be
executed under the direct supervision of ITDA concerned. Necessary logistic support
to the ITDA for implementation of the rehabilitation plan shall be provided
before the actual dispossession and displacement of tribals.
(f)
The
rehabilitation measures shall be completed on or before 30th June,
2002 as undertaken by the respondents in their counter-affidavit. No tribal shall be displace from his house
till he is provided with and alternative house in the rehabilitation colony.
45. The respondents shall submit detailed
periodical reports about the resettlement and rehabilitation measures taken by
them to this Court, at every two months.
Order
- B
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
THE
HONOURABLE JUSTICE
SRI B.SUDERSHAN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No. 8476 of 2001
Order: 2nd April, 2004
This Court vide its order dated 12-02-2002 directed the
respondents herein to execute the Rehabilitation plan for dispossessed,
displaced families in Surampalem Reservoir Project under the direct supervision
of ITDA and the progress of rehabilitation of dispossessed and displaced
families should be monitored by the ITDA.
That pursuant; to the directions of this Court, the
respondents have identified 166 + 57 families as displaced under the submersion
of the Reservoir from Kothada and Donelapalli villages respectively for which
two Rehabilitation Colonies have been constructed at Chinagarlapadu and
Donelapalli villages tinder the personal participation of the displaced. That
each house was constructed at the cost of Rs.47,000/- while the actual Housing
Scheme sponsored by the Government was for only Rs.22,000/-, the remaining
funds were provided as stated in the affidavit.
That apart
from the amounts already released for construction of houses, further amounts
are released to the displaced for fixing doors, windows to their houses on
27-01-2004. The said amount was given from ITDA Funds on request made by the
displaced for arranging the fixtures to each of the houses and the said work is
required to be attended by the concerned displaced beneficiary only in
accordance with I AY scheme.
Thus the
respondents have complied with the directions issued by this Court. The whole
of the project undertaken by them itself has come to an end. The requisite
amounts have already been released for the purpose of fixing the doors and
windows etc in favour of the displaced persons.
In such view of the matter, no
further directions are required to be issued. No further monitoring of the case
is necessary.
The proceedings are accordingly closed.
Annexure IV - Report of Rajeev Law
College
Surampalem reservoir displaced
peoples Rehabilitation
R&R package implementation
A report by Rajiv Gandhi Institute
of Law, Kakinada
The study team of Rajiv Gandhi Law
College Kakinada on implementation of Surampalem Rehabilitation felt that the R& R package was not implemented
fully. The law college students with the
cooperation of Sakti voluntary organization conducted detailed survey in
project affected villages of Kothada,
Donelapalli, Surampalem; ChinaGarlapadu villages the under the guidance of
principal Sri P.V.Trinath.
The finding of the Survey:
In Donelapalli, Kothada,
Surampalem, ChinaGarlapadu villages from 163 farmers about 461.08 acres of
agriculture land houses belonging to 129 families was acquired by government for
this project.
The people who lost everything in
the project are tribals.
The Compensation for the people
who got D'patta per acre Rs.10, 000/- and settlement patta Rs.35000 was decided
by govt.
Revenue Divisional Officer has
powers to raise the compensation amount up 20%, compensation for D'pattas up to
Rs.12, 000/- and for the settlement pattas Rs.42,000 can be paid by
government. But in the study it was
revealed that it did not take place.
Compensation for the trees was not
paid. Moreover the tribals who lost
lands in canal excavation were not paid compensation.
Though the government in its
counter in High Court committed to pay land-to-land compensation, but only in
Donelapalli village for 21 farmers were issued D'Pattas for 43.47 acres of land
but the land was not shown to them and
rest of the people were not given land-to-land compensation
In villages of Pothamdorapalem,
China Garlapadu, Surampalem, Kottada, Gangavaram, Neladonelapadu, 352.44 acres
of land is under the control of government (government land). Government could have given this land to
displaced people.
For the displaced tribals of
Kottada village 99 houses were constructed in Kothada, Purnavarasacolony, out
of this only 15 houses are completed. In
second phase 67 houses proposed for Chodiveedhi and Tekulaveedhi villagers but
these houses construction is not completed.
In this village (Kothada) house
construction was given to Pragathi voluntary organisation and allotted Rs.50,000/-
towards construction cost and in addition to this the displaced people also
contributed from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- toward cost of houses construction
and contributed their labour. The road
formation is not complete. The colony is
not suitable for living.
The sustenance allowance for all
displaced tribals was not paid.
Rs.600/-per month x 6 months total Rs.3600 should be paid to every
displaced. People say they did not receive it.
For cattle feed allowance
Rs.300/per month x 6 months - Total Rs.1800/- to be paid but in our survey we
came to know, this is not paid.
Transport charge Rs.300/- this was
not paid, this was revealed in on survey.
Donelapalli village is fully
submerged under Surampalem reservoir.
Villagers were rehabilitated near Kondalapalem for 59 families 59 houses
were built, community hall, dispensary, Ramalayam, School building etc was also
built .The displaced people themselves have taken up the work made the colony
suitable for their stay.
Village health worker runs
dispensary. The villagers who were
shifted from Donelapalli to Kondalapalem were not able to adjust to the new
atmosphere.
14 tribals died after coming to
Kondalamplem unable to adjust to the area.
Roads are not laid out in this
village connecting to other villages.
People are requesting government to construct road to Rajavaram village,
which is 8 kms distance.
The transport charges, sustenance
allowance cattle feed allowance, which are due to the displaced, are not paid
to tribals of this village.
In Surampalem village though their
houses are not submerged 17 tribals lost their lands in this project. Villagers Chodi Bapannadora, Chodi
Nagannadora lost 5.00 acres of lands in the main canal formation but they got
compensation for only 1.26 acres land.
Pucca houses also were promised, but not implemented.
Tekulaveedhi village 4 tribals
lands are taken for reservoir but they did not get full package amount, due to
them.
Chodiveedhi tribals with the
support of Sakti got housing. Though
government agreed to construct 67 houses.
The tribals are constricting houses but the government officials are
delaying the payments.
The Project Officer ITDA in
Gramasabha stated that govt is taking steps to provide land-to-land
compensation to the displaced tribals under Surampalem project and he also promised
to construct houses in Kothada Punaravasa (rehabilitation) colony with all
facilities.
Before Chief Minister Visit for
opening of Surampalem project, the PO ITDA conducted meeting and promised
tribals that for land to land compensation and 104 acres of land is identified
in villages of Gangavaram, Loakkonda, Chinagarlapadu, pedagarlapadu, Goragommi
and this will be distributed to the tribals within 3 days. So far this is not
materialized.
THE RECOMMANDATIOINS
Based on the facts identified in
the survey conducted by of Rajiv Gandhi Law College students, the legal
research cell made the following recommendations to the government.
For the implementation of the
R&R plan for displaced people, special officer should be appointed and
package should be made public and this should be implemented under guidance of
that officer.
The Compensation to the displaced
people should be credited in their bank account only.
The government should review the
implementation of R&R package periodically with help of voluntary
organization, law colleges etc, which are working in the area and work towards
implementation with commitment.
The tribals who lost their lands
under Surampalem reservoir should be allotted the government land in Gangavaram
mandal.
In case govt. acquired lands in
tribal areas for irrigation or any other projects the ITDA should provide
funding for the college teams to study the implementation R & R plan.
The R & R package implemented
for the displaced people under Surampalem project should be made public.
The nominal compensation given to
the tribals in Schedule areas to the displaced people should be raised up to
minimum of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre.
The discrimination between D'Pattas
& settlement pattas for paying compensation should be removed.
Annexure
V - Multi stake holders forum
Multi Stake
Holders Forum Meeting on Bhupathipalem
Held on 27-08-2004.
At Revenue Divisional Office,
Rampachodavaram 2-30 p.m.
The Collector & District Magistrate,
East Godavari, Joint Collector, East Godavari and Project Officer;
I.T.D.A.Rampachodavaram had a meeting with the Representatives of Political
parties, Sarpanches of submerging villages, Mandal Presidents of
Rampachodavaram & Gangavaram Mandal Parishads, displaced families, NGOs
working in the area and Press on 27-8-2004 at Revenue Divisional Office,
Rampachodavaram. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Rampachodavaram, the Executive
Engineer, Musururmilli Project Division, Rajahmundry, attended the meeting. The
List of Officers, Representatives of political parties, Mandal Presidents,
Sarpanchas & Press etc., attended the meeting is appended.
Annexure
VI - News, Photo, Map
News
TRIBALS
TO BOYCOTT POLLS
Rampachodavaram: Tribals of
Bhupathipalem, Gandhinagaram, Kothapakalu and Chinna Geddada had decided to
boycott elections to be held on Saturday in protest against the move to
construct a reservoir across Sitapalli drain at Bhupatipalem, stating that
their farmland would get submerged under it.
About 1100 acres of farmland is here in the four villages. In a statement the affected farmers alleged
that the Government had taken unilateral decision in regard to construction of
the reservoir at Bhupathipalem without taking their opinion into
consideration. Cashewnut. Orchards, palm
grounds and tamarind trees would be submerged with the execution of the
project. A proposal for the reservoir was made eight years ago. But, it has not materialised so far. However, the District administration had
showed little attention for the development of the villages on the pretext that
they would be submerged, the tribals alleged.
They were reluctant to leave the place even if they were rehabilitated
at Pundrapattapalem, 30 km away from the reservoir.
- Deccan Chronicle, June 14, 1991
Photo
Contour
Map of Bhupatipalem reservoir
Annexure
VII
Brief
note on Bhupathipalem project by P.O., I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram
The submerged area of the Project covers
an extent of 998-36 Acres of which private land is 158.93 Acres, D. Patta Land
is 193.39, Government Land is Rs. 82.04 and the Forest Land is 544-00 Acres.
The D. Patta and the Government Lands
covered under the Project were already handed over to the Irrigation
Department. Regarding Private Land of
158.93 Acres, an extent of 29.55 Acres situated in Bhupathipalem Village was
acquired and 80% land compensation was paid to the affected ryots and the
possession of the lands was also handed over to the Requisition
Department. The balance extent of 129.38
Acres situated in Gandhinagaram Village has to be acquired. The problem here is that the Villagers of
Gandhinagaram represented that some portion of their Patta Lands for an extent
of 73-40 Acres. (Which is also under
submerged area was not covered officially in submerged area as per the records
of the Irrigation Department and finally requested to conduct survey and
include these lands also in the submerged area.
It requires the presence of Irrigation personnel for conduct of Joint
inspection. The survey work is under progress.
Similarly some of the D. Patta lands for an extent of 30-60 Acres was also not
covered in the submerged area prepared by the Irrigation Department and
requested to include these lands also in the list of submerged lands. The matter is already placed before the
Project Officer, I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram who in turn directed to conduct
joint survey and later on to decide whether to include the proposed private and
D. Patta lands in the list of area under submersion.
Annexure
VIII in a separate file - Gandhinagaram
Annexure
IX - (MOU with Dist. Collector 06 -2005)
MEMORANDUM
OF UNDERSTANDING June 2005
Andhra Pradesh State Government proposed
to construct a Reservoir across Sitapalli vagu, a tributary of Godavari near
Bhupathipalem village in Rampachodavaram agency of East Godavari district for
the benefit of tribal development and programme for people's benefit like
irrigation facility. As part of the
Resettlement and rehabilitation (R&R) benefits for the submerged oustees
under the said reservoir, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) is agreed between
the State represented by the District Collector, East Godavari district and
tribal villagers of Gandhinagaram on
-06-2005.
Agreement
As per the agreement agreed between the
Andhra Pradesh State represented by East Godavari District Collector and their
representatives (I party) and the villagers of Gandhinagaram village,
Rampachodavaram mandal, East Godavari district (II party), the I party, East
Godavari district Collector and their representatives agreed upon the following
compensations, Resettlement and rehabilitation benefits to the II party, the
villagers of Gandhinagaram, oustees under Bhupathipalem reservoir.
It
is agreed that -
1.
2
acres of more government land in addition to the submerged patta land should be
issued to the Gandhinagaram villagers.
2.
2
acres of government land would be allotted to those whose D-patta lands are
acquired and landless poor of Gandhinagaram village.
3.
All
married persons would be sanctioned 5 cents of land and a house of value Rs.
50000/- by government reservoir oustees.
4.
50
cents of land should be kept as village base (grama kantham) for future needs.
5.
An
amount equal to the income per acre per year would be paid as compensation for
those who lose their crops under reservoir.
6.
For
the MFP (fruitful) trees that are to be submerged, the compensations to be paid
per tree are as follows
A
category B category C category
Mango Rs.
695/- Rs. 556/- Rs. 420/-
Cashew Rs.
250/- Rs. 216/- Rs. 162/-
Tamarind Rs.
2825/- Rs. 2260/- Rs. 1695/-
Jack Rs.
2595/- Rs. 2076/- Rs. 1557/-
Neredu Rs.
420/- Rs.336/- Rs. 252/-
Sapota Rs.
Rs. 1239/- Rs. 929/-
Coconut Rs.
250/-
Soapnut Rs.
200/-
Palmyrah Rs.
250/-
Teak Rs.
Lime
family Rs. 304/-
7.
Employment
as Security guard/ Home guard/ Reservoir works would be provided for all the
eligible as per their eligibility.
8.
Those
who do not get employed under above provision, they would be granted self
employment under Rajiv yuva shakti/ Tricor/ NFDC or any other programme.
9.
In
the resettlement zone, one school building and a temple would be constructed.
10.
Fishing
rights shall be given in the reservoir area to the tribal co-operative society
formed by tribal oustees.
11.
Each
PAF shall get Rs. 2000/- as transportation charges and one side travel facility
by I.T.D.A. trucks to move to the newly constructed colonies.
12.
Every
PAF should be given Rs. 6000/- under productive P.V.G. grant.
13.
If
land is allotted to the land acquired, land development charge of Rs. 7000/-
per acre would be given or otherwise, land should be developed by I.T.D.A.
14.
Each
PAF should be issued Antyodaya Anna Yojana (AAY) card.
15.
PAF
having cattle shall get financial assistance of Rs. 1200/- for cattle rearing.
16.
Each
PAF shall get Rs. 600/- towards non smoke ovens (chullas).
17.
Each
women headed family shall be paid Rs. 1000/- as thrift grant.
18.
All
the eligible for occupational training should be sanctioned Rs. 3000/- to get
such trainings.
19.
Every
major female and male should be paid Rs. 8000/- as productivity grant.
20.
Each
PAF should be paid Rs. 4500/- for family maintenance.
21.
The
wages for the tribal labourers engaged in the reservoir works shall get their
wages as per minimum wages act.
The II party, Gandhinagaram tribal
villagers would not obstruct the works of construction of reservoir and
rehabilitation works and offers complete cooperation to the government. It is decided that the above mentioned
rehabilitation programmes should be carried out by the District Collector
represented by Project Officer, I.T.D.A.
As per the pleas of the villages of submerged under Bhupathipalem
project construction, the negotiations between the tribals and District
administration authorities, the outstanding circumstances that tribals going to
face problems, and the benefits to tribals by construction of this reservoir,
some extra facilities are provided and they should be implemented by the
district authorities. This
rehabilitation package is applicable only for the Gandhinagaram village, which
is going to be submerged under Bhupathipalem reservoir.
Both parties should obey the agreement.
I Party |
|
II Party |
1. District Joint Collector,
Kakinada, East Godavari on behalf of District Collector, East Godavari |
|
Gandhinagaram villagers
1. Thurram Jagganna dora
2. Thurram Papa rao |
2. Representative to the District
Collect (implementation of rehabilitation
package) Project Officer, I.T.D.A., Rampachodavaram. |
|
3. K.Pedavenkateswara rao
4. Kunjam Ammanna dora
5. Thurram Rajjanna dora
6. Belam Lakshmi
7. Parasa Mani
8. Kurasam Nalini
9. Kurasam Ganganna dora
10.
Kurasam Appanna dora
11.
Kurasam Urmila
12.
Maddikonda Istheramma
13.
Parada Lakshmi
14.
Madakam Lakshmi
15.
Madaka Bhadranna dora
16.
Kurasam Swamy dora
17.
Madakam Mallu dora
18.
Kurasam Bulli dora
19.
Kurasam Chellamma
20.
Kurasam Buchanna dora
21.
Kurasam Veerabbai dora
22.
Madakam Bujjamma
23.
Parada Bapanna dora
24.
Kurasam Swamy dora
25.
Kunjam Venkanna dora
26.
Kunjam China Venkateswarlu
27.
Madi Rajya lakshmi
28.
Kurasam Balu dora
29.
Kurasam Abbulu dora
30.
Kunjam Chantamma
31.
Subha lakshmi
32.
Parada Venkata lakshmi
33.
Pusam Balu dora
34.
Madakam Ramanna dora
35.
Aidiredla Veera swamy
36.
Venkateswarlu reddy
37.
Madakam Thammanna dora
38.
Madakam Sankuru dora
39.
Kurasam Sankuru dora
40.
Kurasam Venkanna dora
41.
Karam Chellayya
42.
Thurram Rajamma
43.
Kunjam Abbai dora
44.
Madakam Thathabbai dora
45.
Madakam Thammanna dora
46.
Madakam Chinnaalu dora
47.
Madakam Swamy dora
48.
M. Murali Krishna
49.
Kunjam Buchamma
50.
Belam Satyanarayana
51.
Madakam Veerayamma
52.
M.Venkanna dora
53.
Madakam Ramanna dora
54.
Parada Rajanna dora
55.
T. Venkateswarlu dora
56.
Thurram Rajamanai
57.
Thurram Chellayamma
58.
Thurram China balu dora
59.
Thurram Papanna dora
60.
Thurram Ganganna dora
61.
M.Achanna dora
62.
Parada Pentamma
63.
Madakam Chinnaalu dora
64.
Madakam Suranna dora
65.
Madakam Venkata rao
66.
Madakam Papa rao
67.
Parada Abbulu dora
68.
Parada Sathi babu
69.
Madakam Chellanna dora
70.
Madakam Venkanna dora
71.
Thammanna
72.
Madakam Chinna kuru dora
73.
Madakam Kannayya dora
74.
Valala Chellanna dora
75.
Madakam Subba rao dora
76.
Valala Rajanna dora
77.
Kosi Butchamma
78.
Kurasam Ramanna dora
79.
Kunjam Pottamma
80.
Madakam Venkateswarlu
81.
Kurasam Pentanna dora
82.
Pothuri Bulli dora
83.
Veeka Narsanna dora
84.
Karam Nageswara rao
85.
Chavalam Nuka raju
86.
Ranga mana raju
87.
Karam Thammanna dora
88.
Karam Ramanna dora
89.
Pusam Appanna dora
90.
Thurram Swamy dora
91.
Kalum Bullamma
92.
Veeka Abbai dora
93.
Kalum Rajanna dora
94.
Kalum Panjamma
95.
Kalum Krishna
96.
Kurasam Peda lakshmi
97.
B. Sitarathnam
98.
Adabala Sheshayamma
99.
Thurram Rajamma
100. M. Nagamani
101. Madakam Venkateswarlu
102. Madakam Sankuramma
103. Madakam Satyavathi
104. Madakam Ram chellamma |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annexure
X - G.O. Table with comments
Annexure
XI (Property Estimates) in a separate file
Indira
Sagar The Polavaram Project (map) in a separate file
Demographic
profile of people facing displacement under Indira Sagar (Polavaram) Village
wise
Annexure
XII - CEC recommendations
CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE
(CONSTITUED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA)
ORDER
IN WRIT PETITION NO. 202/95 AND
171/96
Gate_No.
3Mawahar Lal Nehru Stadium, Lodhi Road,
New
Delhi - 110003 Tel: 30944904-5-7
F.
No. 1-19/CEC/SC/2006-Pt. XII Dated :
15.11.2006
Sub : Application Nos. 839, 875 and 944 filed before
the CEC regarding construction of Indira Sagar Project (Polavaram Project)
The
Application No. 839 filed by Sh. Jayaramachandra Rao, Advocate and Sh. T.
Srikanth Rao, Advocate, Application No. 875 filed by Sh. R.Vidyasagar Rao,
Chief Engineer, Central Water Commission and Application No. 944 filed by Dr. P. Sivarama Krishna, Director,
SAKTI stand disposed of in terms of the CEC's Report dated 9.11.2006 in
I.A. No. 1572 & 1578 regarding construction of Indira Sagar Project
{Polavaram Project).
Member Secretary
Distribution:
1. Sh. Siddhartha Chowdhary, Supreme Court
Advocate and Amicus Curiae.
2. Sh. A.D.N. Rao, Advocate on Record for MoEF.
3. Standing
Counsel for the State
of Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Chattisgarh
4. Sh. Ramachandra Rao, Advocate, Applicant in
Application No. 839 (Copy of Report Dated 9.11.2006 in I.A. No. 1572 & 1578
is enclosed)
5. Sh. R. Vidyasagar Rao, Chief Engineer, Central
Water Commission (Copy of Report Dated 9.11.2006 in I .A. No. 1572 & 1578
is enclosed)
6. Dr. P. Sivaramakrishna, Director,
SAKTI (Copy of Report
Dated 9.11.2006 in I.A. No. 1572 & 1578 is enclosed)
7. All Respondents / Respondents in above
applications.
Dr.
Anmol Kumar, DIG (WL) Sh. A.K. Joshi, Advocate Ms. Neelam, Advocate Ms. Shewta,
Advocate Sh. Prathibha Raj, IPS, AIG (EAP) & NE CEIl
For the State of Andhra Pradesh:
Sh.
Mohan Reddy, Advocate General
Sh.
K.S. Rao, IPS, PCCF (WL)
Sh.
Satish Chandra, Secretary (Irrigation)
Sh.
M. Venkateshwara Rao, Chief Engineer, Indira Sagar Project
Sh.
M. Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, G.P. for Irrigation
Sri
K D R Jayakumar, Special Secretary (Forests)
Sh.
E.V.Raghavulu, I & CAD Deptt.
Sh.
N. Jaganmohan, Executive Engineer
Sh.
B. Sata Ramavl, SE/DPM
Sh.
M. Nagi Reddy, Dy. Ex. Engineer
Sh.
S.K. Azam Ali, AEE
Sh.
A. Umesh Kumar, AEE
Sh.
S. Nageshwara Rao, Dy. Executive Engineer
Sh.
P.V.S. Bhaskar, Dy. Executive Engineer
Sh.V.
K.Yadav, Forester
For the State of Orissa:
Sh.
P.M. Padhi, CCF (Nodal)
Sh.
J. P. Agarwal, Addl. Secretary, Water
Resources
Sh.
H. Ch. Behera, EIC, Water Resources
Sh.
S.K. Parida, Liason Officer, Water Resources
Sh.
S.K. Sehrawat, Addl. Resident Commissioner
For the State of Chattisgarh:
Ms.
Suparana Srivastava, Advocate
Ms.
Pooja Mathani, Advocate
For the applicant:
Sh.
J. Ramachandra Rao, Advocate in Application No. 839, 875 and
Sh.
T.Srikantha Rao, Advocate 944 filed before
Sh.
J.P.Rao, Professor the CEC
Sh.
R. V. Rao, Advocate
Sh.
C. Balaji Sh. G.P.Nehru
Sh.
K. Krishna Reddy
Sh.
Sravan Kumar, Journalist
OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
54. The Polavaram Multipurpose Project being
constructed at an estimated cost of Rs. 12,590.70 cores involves the use of
3833.39 ha. of forest area out of which 3,731.07 ha. forest area falls in Andhra
Pradesh, 102.16 ha. in the State of Orissa and the balance 0.16 ha. in
Chhattisgarh. The project involves use of 187.29 ha. of forest area falling in
Papikonda Wildlife Sanctuary in Andhra Pradesh. It also involves use of 1,553
ha. of non-forest area within the said sanctuary. The forest area required for
the project in the State of Andhra Pradesh is virgin mixed deciduous forest of
Eastern Ghats which is most important from the ecological point of view. The
area contains endangered species such as Tiger, Panther, Gaur, Wild Dog, Sloth
Bear, Barking Deer and other fauna. Many important species of flora are found
in the area. It is a unique and rich wilderness of this country.
55. The project is designed to provide irrigation
facility to the extent of 2.91 lakh ha., generation of 960 MW of hydro power,
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna River, providing 23.44 TMC of drinking
water supply to Vizag city and enroot 540 villages and development of
pisciculture and tourism. 1,95,357 persons will be affected by the project. The
R&R Scheme is yet to be approved by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs.
Environmental clearance to the project has been accorded. The use of forest
land falling within the sanctuary has been recommended by the Standing
Committee of the NBWL.
56. An equivalent area of non-forest land for
compensatory Afforestation has been identified. The State of Andhra Pradesh is
willing to add adjoining reserve forest area in East Godavari District to the
sanctuary, relocate isolated villages from the sanctuary and upgrade its status
to that of a National Park.
57. The project has been opposed by the State of
Orissa, State of Chhattisgarh and a number of applications have been filed
before the CEC on various grounds such as validity of environmental clearance,
pendency of F.C. Act clearance, importance of area from wildlife point of view,
large number of Project Affected Persons, non-approval of the R&R Plan by
the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, safety of dam, alternatives available, lack of
study on back water effect, alleged violation of the provisions of PESA,
requirement of joint survey, dam design and operation schedule not approved by
CWC, displaced persons being in Schedule V area, improper cost benefit analysis
etc. These issues have been dealt with in the preceding paragraphs under
appropriate headings. Many of these issues are beyond the technical competence
of the CEC and therefore no observation has been made by the CEC.
58. The proposal for seeking approval under the
F.C. Act for the use of forest land falling in the State of Andhra Pradesh has
been forwarded by the Andhra Pradesh Forest Department to the MoEF. The
proposals in respect of use of forest land falling in Orissa and Chhattisgarh
have not been filed by the respective States. As stated earlier, they are
opposed to the implementation of the project in the present form.
59. In addition to
the permission of this Hon'ble Court, the following approvals are pending:
i) approval under the F.C. Act;
ii) techno-economic clearance from the CWC;
iii) approval of the designs of the dam and
operation schedule by the CWC as per the Bachawat Award;
iv) approval of the R&R Plan by the Ministry
of Tribal Affairs; and
v) Investment
Clearance from the Planning Commission.
RECOMMENDATION
60. As far as the
specific issue of using 187.29 ha. of forest land and 1,553 ha. of non forest
land falling within the Papikonda Wildlife Sanctuary, the CEC is of the view
that this Hon'ble Court may consider the same subject to compliance of the
following essential pre-conditions :
i. approval for the use of forest land will be
obtained under the F.C. Act;
ii. the NPV at the present rate shall be deposited
in the Compensatory Afforestation Fund along with an undertaking to deposit the
additional amount, if any, as per this Hon'ble Court's directions;
iii. the isolated villages falling within the
sanctuary will be shifted and the sanctuary will be notified as a National
Park;
iv. as agreed to by the State of Andhra Pradesh
during the site visit of the CEC, about 500 sq. kms. of the reserved forest
area with minimum habitation adjoining the sanctuary in the East Godavari
District will be added to the existing Sanctuary which will be notified as
National Park. Out of the above, 4,539 ha. of reserve forest area has already
been identified by the State of Andhra Pradesh. The identification of the
balance area will be completed within a period of two months and finalized in
consultation with the CEC. The tract of land besides protecting the flora and
fauna will also be a well preserved water catchment area for the region;
v. the project has been recommended by the
Standing Committee of the NBWL after considering the site inspection report of
the team deputed by it. The Conditions on which the project has been
recommended by the site inspection team will be fully complied with. The
conditions include depositing 5% of the project cost in the Compensatory
Afforestation Fund for conservation and protection of the National Parks and
Sanctuaries in the State of Andhra Pradesh; and
vi. a detailed study
at the project cost will be got done by the Wildlife Institute of India, (Wll)
Dehra Dun to assess the effect of the project on the flora and fauna and the
mitigative measures required to be taken including in respect of fragmentation
of the habitat because of construction of canals. The mitigative measures
recommended by the Institute shall be implemented at the cost of the project in
a time bound manner.
61. It is also
recommended that an independent Monitoring Committee consisting of the
representatives of the MoEF, Wildlife Institute of India, A.P. Forest
Department and reputed NGOs/experts may be constituted to monitor and supervise
the implementation of the above conditions.
62. Though it does
not strictly fall within the purview of the CEC to examine the effectiveness of
the R&R Plan, we are of the view that the present project is comparable
with Sardar Sarovar Project in terms of the magnitude of the displacement of
persons and that a proper rehabilitation plan, adherence to the time schedule for
its implementation, a strong mechanism for monitoring its implementation
including involvement of independent agencies and linkage of the implementation
schedule with the progress made in the rehabilitation of the project affected
persons is a pre-requisite. The lessons learnt from the earlier projects such
as Sardar Sarovar Project and the other major projects should be taken into
consideration while finalizing the R&R Plan. The following specific
suggestions are therefore made:
i) the precise details of the land identified
for the rehabilitation of the project displaced persons including the site for
the construction of house and agriculture land should be made public. This
would also imply that the particulars of the land proposed to be allotted to each
of the displaced person should be decided in advance;
ii) The monitoring and evaluation of the
implementation of the R&R should be done by an independent Monitoring
Committee consisting of eminent experts and NGOs with adequate powers to
effectively perform its function;
iii) Concurrent monitoring and evaluation of the
progress made in the implementation of the R&R should be carried out under
the directions and supervision of the Monitoring Committee. If the R&R is
found to be lagging with reference to the fixed bench marks, the construction
should accordingly be deferred/stopped;
iv) the R&R
should be implemented in such a way that minimum disturbance is caused to the
PAP and the compensation for land is in the form of land. Concurrent audit of
the R&R works should be carried out. The Monitoring Committee should be
capable of taking rational decisions and making recommendations independently
uninfluenced by the Government.
63. We are also
making the following observations in respect of some of the other issues which
may be considered by this Hon'ble Court:
a) While approving the project designs, the CWC
should take into consideration the operating in the ayacut, various
alternatives proposed in lieu of the present proposal, technical and financial
feasibility of the project, dam safety aspect and the other relevant technical
issues, the actual additional ayacut area which gets added on account of this
projects;
b) The project implementation shall be strictly in
accordance with the dam design and the operation schedule finalized by the CWC;
c) While examining the R&R plan the Ministry
of Tribal Affairs should also examine the connected relevant issues such as the
Constitutional provisions, applicability of PESA and the other legal
provisions;
d) The Ministry of Water Resources should examine
the various issues raised by the States of Orissa and Chhattisgarh in the
context of Bachawat Award; and
e) Forest land shall
be used for the project only after obtaining the requisite approvals under the
F.C. Act.
64. It is submitted that the
above observations are illustrative only and do not necessarily cover all the
issues raised during the hearing before the CEC. It is reiterated that many of
the issues raised are either beyond the technical competence or beyond the terms
of reference of the CEC.
This Hon'ble Court may
please consider the above recommendations and may please pass appropriate
orders in the matter.
(M.K, Jiwrajka)
Member Secretary
Dated:
9-11-2006
Annexure
XIII - Case study of a Rehabilitated family
Case
study of Karam Ramanna Dora of Gandhinagaram village
I am Ramanna Dora. I am from
Gandhinagaram village which is going to be submerged by Bhupathipalem
reservoir. I was very much worried here in Gandhinagaram I have got 29 acres of
land with settlement is there and we tribal live on NTFP collection.
Now with Sakti's support we fought with
govt. got good compensation.
I got compensation for 29.57 acres - Rs.10,34,750
compensation paid to me by govt. This Rs.35000 per acre in addition to that for
1) 6 Tamarind trees Rs.10170
2) 210 Palm trees Rs.54,000
3) 20 Neam trees Rs.4000
4) 8 Soap nut Rs.1000
5) Custard Apple Rs.1000
6) Jamoon Rs.400
7) Mango Rs.420
8) Cashew Rs.20000
9) Nallamaddi Rs.8000
Total Rs.98,990
House construction Rs.65000 and other
compensation transportation sustenance allowance etc Rs.74000 and old house
compensation Rs.7500
Total I have received Rs.12,06,440 with
this I have constructed good house deposited money back. I am happy now.
Ramanna Dora
Case Study of Madakam Mallu Dora
of Gandhinagaram village
My self Mallu Dora is from
Gandhinagaram village of Rampachodavaram Mandal of East Godavari district of
Andhra Pradesh.
In Bhupathipalem reservoir our village is going to be submerged. I
along with other villagers agitated against the dam. I was arrested for this I
have to spend two months in central jail in Rajhamundry SAKTI arranged bail.
SAKTI explained about GO 68 in our
village with the awareness we have understood how much compensation.
We
have demanded govt for better rehabilitation. I got compensation
For 194 Tamarind trees Rs. 2,13,525
3200 Tadi Trees Rs. 8,00,000
45 Coconut Trees Rs. 40,800
86 Mango trees Rs. 39,856
29 Custard Apple Rs. 3,306
12 Jama Rs. 1,368
10 Jack fruit Rs. 2,520
8 Soap nut Rs. 1,600
23 Lemons Rs. 6,992
Cashew
nut Rs. 6,91,600
I got for Total trees Rs. 18,21,567
In
addition to this I got compensation Rs.
1,75,000 for 5 acres of land.
And
transport charges Rs. 5,000
Cattle
Shed Rs. 3,000
Sustenance allowance
Rs. 20,400
Total Compensation
received Rs 20, 24,967 Twenty Lakhs Twenty four thousand Nine hundred and sixty
seven only.
In addition to this
I will be getting 2 acres of land .and got house.
With
the amount I received I have purchased 5 acres of land. I have spent money
towards Paralysis treatment before this rehabilitation I was having lot of
problems. I was not getting much from fields. With AKTI support only I got
better rehabilitation and I we got fishing rights I can fish and get in come. I
happy now
Madakam
Mallu Dora
Property estimate and compensation
calculated by Land acquisition officer
Meetings
with the Community (Photos)