|
|||||
|
THE Government of Madhya Pradesh was initially supposed to undertake the process of land acquisition for the families displaced by the Indira Sagar Project (ISP), but it handed over the responsibility to the National Hydro Development Corporation (HYDC). This was tantamount to absolving itself of the responsibility and is, according to the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA), "illegal". Initially the government said it had about 2,000 hectares of government land meant for housing and that it would purchase about 44,000 hectares for relief and rehabilitation (R&R) from private owners. There is no visible proof of the government having kept its word. To date no farmer has received the official land-for-land settlement. The following are the issues that have emerged from what seems to be a deliberate misinterpretation of the R&R rules.
Inaccurate surveys
The Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal Authority is clear on one fact: All land that is likely to be affected by the backwaters of the dam has to be acquired compulsorily. While on paper the law is fair, its actual implementation is not. Acquiring land that comes in the shadow area of temporary submergence is something the authorities avoid because it lessens their responsibility of R&R. But the potential for tragedy is great in the backwater villages. This monsoon, for instance, Dagarkhedi village could easily have gone under if the dam had got filled to its capacity. Fortunately, the High Court's judgment averted the disaster. But the fact remains that Dagarkhedi was not included in the survey of backwater villages.
The government finally acknowledged that there were major flaws in the survey, and resurveys were started. However, its intentions are doubtful since the resurvey is only conducted up to the Maximum Water Level (which is what the level will be at the dam site) instead of the backwater impact at MWL, which could go up to 17 m at the farthest reaches and on the tributaries.
Had the gates of the ISP been closed this monsoon, an estimated 75,000 people in the command area would have been affected severely.
Irrational distinction in submergence
Making a distinction between permanent and temporary submergence is irrelevant from the point of view of compensation or R&R. It is used as a convenient escape route by the authorities to avoid the responsibility of paying compensation. Even temporary submergence leaves land unfit for use or habitation.
The twin towns of Handia and Nimavan face each other on the opposite banks of the Narmada. With the dam water at a height of 254 m, the two towns are about 15 m above river level. This is unsafe as was demonstrated by the last rains when floodwaters entered the town's nullahs. Arun Agarwal, a shop owner in the trading town of Handia, says they were told that there would only be temporary submergence even with the full reservoir level (FRL) of 262 m. According to him, when he asked the Collector about the consequences of temporary submergence, he was told, "Wouldn't we tell you if you were going to drown?"
Double displacement
Bhavar Singh came to Bijoramafi five years ago after his village, Nirudiamal, was declared to be in the submergence zone. He accepted the meagre cash compensation - his land was undervalued by 50 per cent. In Bijoramafi, he bought 20 acres (8 ha) and settled down to start a new life. Within three years of his relocation, Bijoramafi was served with a submergence notice. This time round, however, Bhavar Singh was not eligible for compensation because he had already received it once. The fact that he was being displaced twice and now has a large family is of no consequence to the R&R managers.
A further twist in the tale comes from obtuse planning. The location of R&R villages is so poorly calculated that they often go under floodwaters themselves. Chittaroopa Palit of the NBA says the authorities have a track record of submerging R&R villages. She recalls that 22 R&R villages of the Bargi dam ultimately went under water. The displaced people of Bijoramafi have been relocated just a few kilometres away from the submergence site. Local people say that even if the waters do not flood their new homes, waterlogging of fields will be a huge problem in the near future.
Skewed pre-R&R procedures
Oova village has known about the possibility of submergence for the past five years but, there has been no official interaction with the village residents. Sarpanch Kailashbhai says, "They only survey our lands and not our homes." The government says compensation is available only for land that is in the submergence zone, but as Kailashbhai points out, it is impossible to separate a farmer from his land. "They tell us that our homes will not be lost and so we can stay on. When our fields go under, what can we live on?"
Severely undervalued land
The meagre compensation does not enable people to purchase alternative land. In Harda, where Kisanbhai Wagadiya wants to go when his village, Tipras, gets flooded, one acre of cultivable land is available for Rs.10 lakhs. In Tipras, Wagadiya owned 55 acres (22 ha) but the cash compensation being offered to him is Rs.38,000 an acre for irrigated land and Rs.28,000 an acre for non-irrigated land. He estimates the market rate for his land at Rs.1.5 lakh an acre. He knows he will never own 22 ha again but feels the government should give him enough compensation to restart his life. "The amount that is being given to me will not even cover the registration costs," he says, referring to the 10 per cent stamp duty.
Surendra Khandelwal of Harsud refuses to move out of his ancestral home. He has demanded a revaluation of his property and has written to everyone - from the Collector to the Governor. "I have received one-fourth of the actual value. I had 110 acres [44 ha), two tubewells and seven open wells. The authorities have given me Rs.94 lakhs whereas the market value is Rs.4.5 crores.
Double messages
When the residents of Badkhaliya were told they would have to move out, they obliged. Later they were told they could return as there would be no submergence. They obliged. Now they have been informed that Badkhaliya does fall in the submergence zone and so they will be displaced. When they returned the residents rebuilt their homes. Now the government is accusing them of building their homes in an attempt to be eligible for compensation.
Inexplicable process of selection
Tipras, Fatehgad and Joga villages exemplify the bizarre process of deciding who is `in' and who is `out'. Joga, on the riverbank, a few metres above the water, is not slated for submergence. Across the river, Fatehgad, located at a considerable height, was the victim of a surprise demolition operation by the police and the local administration. They destroyed 100 houses in two hours. Although all the houses were razed to the ground, only some owners have received compensation. The residents are still unsure about the criteria adopted.
The residents of Tipras, located at a lower elevation but much further inland from the river, have been told that their fields will go under water but not the houses. Inexplicably, in earlier natural floods it was always the houses that were affected. The irrationality is further exposed when farmer Chotulal Tokhia talks about how the local administration evacuated the village last year because it got flooded. Describing the surveyor's technique, Tokhia says the survey done in 1987 was a thorough job. "It took into account the fact that a little more land than was known would go under water. But those old markings in our fields vanished in due course. Then the NHDC sent in a new surveyor who drew a straight line, and that became the new boundary." Practically, the same amount of land is slated to go but with one difference - the upper ground has been marked as the submergence zone and the lower ground as safe. "It will be the other way round when the water comes," says Tokhia.
Printer friendly
page
|
