Author: Pioneer News Service
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: July 11, 2006
Shunglu Committee report damns NGO ---- Exposing
the Narmada Bachao Andolan's claims that Madhya Pradesh had not carried out
adequate rehabilitation of several thousand people affected by the Sardar
Sarovar Project, the Shunglu Committee report submitted to the Supreme Court
on Monday has said the NGO's allegations are "without substance."
The committee, in an obvious reference to
the NGO led by anti-dam activist Medha Patkar, added, they "occasionally
attempted to impede the progress of the work by interfering with field activities."
Negating the far-fetched claims of poor rehabilitation
by the anti-dam activists, the Shunglu Committee has tallied the National
Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) verification of payments made and entitlements
recorded in the State Government's action taken report and found these to
"correspond with ground reality."
Upon door-to-door verification, the NSSO found
that "most of the claims of exclusion (from rehabilitation) now being
made are probably without substance."
The committee has based its conclusion on
three facts. One, verification of names of 3,000 of the 5,118 of those who
claimed that they had not received compensation for loss of home, showed that
they did not reside in the village on or around the date of land acquisition
proceedings. They had based their observation on the 2001 Census.
Two, it observed "unusual demographic
profile" in villages with 50 or more new claims. And three, "every
claim of affected land not being compensated has on verification proved to
have been without substance."
Contrary to NBA's claims and also belying
an earlier ministerial report headed by Water Minister Saifuddin Soz, the
committee found that of the 86 resettlement sites, development work was good
at 37 sites, average at 25 sites and deficient elsewhere. The committee found
that basic edifice for many infrastructural facilities and civic amenities
does exist in respect of a majority of sites. The team found that most of
the sites are provided with buildings for schools, dispensary, panchayat bhavan,
seed storage, and even anganwadis and veterinary dispensary. However as people
have not moved to the site these are not functional.
"The project affected people were not
legally obliged to shift to R&R sites and most of them chose not to relocate
as they did not feel threatened by inundation. There is always the attraction
of tilling acquired land and enjoying the crop till the land is actually submerged.
As a result, they continue to live at their erstwhile homes," the report
noted.
The NBA has alleged that cash compensation
offered by the Government is illegal. However, the committee found that an
overwhelming majority favoured hard cash offered under special rehabilitation
package to land offered by Government. "While it is true that the offer
of Government land was made to an overwhelming majority of the project affected
families, but it is equally true that most of them expressed their unwillingness
to accept the land because it could not be directly put under the plough.
Special rehabilitation package (SRP) was appealing, especially from the point
of view of buying land of one's own choice. That an overwhelming majority
of families opted for SRP opted for SRP needs to be understood and interpreted
in terms of choices open to them at that time," the report said.
Causing severe embarrassment to the NBA, the
report put on record their dismay at hurdles created by the NGO. Without naming
them, the report said "group of local activists occasionally attempted
to impede the progress of the work by interfering with field activities. The
civil society groups periodically questioned the survey methodology in the
most general terms."
The activists felt that survey of all families
was not necessary and a sample survey should be enough. But the Oversight
Group felt that all the families should be surveyed to ascertain the facts
as comprehensively and accurately as possible. The interference goes against
the Supreme Court May 8 order to "not cause any obstruction in the project
assigned to the Group."
SC refuses to stop SSP work
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused
to interfere with the Prime Minister's decision to allow construction of the
Sardar Sarovar Dam after the Oversight Group constituted by the Centre submitted
a "largely satisfactory" report on the relief and rehabilitation
measures undertaken by the State of Madhya Pradesh.
A three-judge special bench headed by Chief
Justice YK Sabharwal invited responses from the States of Gujarat and Madhya
Pradesh and the petitioner, Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) on the Oversight
Group's report and the decision taken by Prime Minister, placed before court
by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Gopal Subramanium in a sealed cover.
The hearing in the case will come up in September next.
While stressing, "relief and rehabilitation
measures are of primary importance" the PM made it clear that holding
back the construction of the dam had no purpose. He noted that in certain
sites, rehabilitation is not up to the desired level. The same could however
be remedied by the Madhya Pradesh Government by accelerating the pace of relief
and rehabilitation, the PM added, since beginning Monday the Gujarat Government
had decided to temporarily stall the construction till monsoons are over.
Asking the Centre to make available PM's response
to all concerned parties, the Bench held no merit in sustaining the initial
objection raised by NBA against raising the dam height to 119 metre across
all project-affected villages. Noting the contention of senior advocate Shanti
Bhushan, who demanded on behalf of NBA that "spillway blocks be spared"
the Bench said, "I see no reason to restrict construction (of dam) at
this stage."
The Gujarat Government also gave an undertaking
to court that the dam height will be maintained at 119 metre, despite the
Narmada Control Authority's (NCA) concurrence to extend the height to 121.92
metre. Senior advocate Ashok Desai stated such a decision was in the best
interest of the villages that face threat of submergence owing to the monsoon
season. He however clarified that the said restriction will only operate during
the monsoon period.
The Prime Minister's response had emanated
from the findings by the Oversight Group constituted by him in April this
year to ascertain the number of project-affected families and whether adequate
relief and rehabilitation measures were provided to them as per entitlement.
The three-member Group headed by former Comptroller and Auditor General VK
Shunglu had submitted its findings in the first week of July to the Water
Resources Ministry. It indicated out of 86 relief and rehabilitation sites,
37 sites were good, while 24 were described as poor.
Taking into account these deficiencies, the
Prime Minister in his response sought direction to Madhya Pradesh Government
to accelerate the rehabilitation work in the period when the work is stopped
on account of monsoons. But the MP Government represented by senior advocate
Harish Salve and advocate CD Singh contested the claims of the Centre seeking
to file a response after obtaining a copy of the same.
