Orissa to challenge report on Polavaram in Supreme Court
BHUBANESWAR: Orissa government has decided to challenge the findings of Gopal Krishnan report on Pollavaram dam project in the Supreme Court. The Apex Court had manadated Gopal Krishnan to examine whether construction in Pollavaram is as per the law of the land.
The ruling Biju Janta Dal in Orissa in the recent past had organised a series of centre-bashing protest rallies across the state raking up the issue of clearance by the union ministry of environment and forest [MOEF] to the Andhra Pradesh government's Polavaram project over the Godavari river.
The BJD run Naveen Patnaik government has been maintaining that no public hearing was conducted in Malkangiri district before issuing environmental clearance to the project and the project violated Forest Conservation Act, 1980 so far as diversion of forest land for submergence was concerned. It also found many deficiencies in the procedures followed for the hydrology of the project and computation of backwater submergence, an official said here.
A high-level meeting held under chairmanship of Chief Secretary Bijay Kumar Patnaik here revealed that the proposed project would result in submergence of vast areas in the state. The project in its present state is in violation of Godavari Water Dispute Tribunal orders in which the design flood of the dam was limited to 36 lakh cusec. The project also included upstream projects like Inchampalli and Bhopalapatnam for moderating flood water at Pollavaram project, the officials said.
The Andhra Pradesh Government has not taken up these upstream projects. In the absence of the upstream projects Polavaram will be a large reservoir making huge backwater submergence in Odisha.
Check out Brand Equity's Most Trusted Brands List 2011
Showing posts with label Inter-state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Inter-state. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Chhattisgarh approaches SC against Polavaram dam
31 August 2011
press trust of india
NEW DELHI, 31 AUG: Chhattisgarh government has filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking its directions to restrain Andhra Pradesh from continuing construction of a dam on the river Godavari at Polavaram, saying the clearances given to the project are illegal and the project threatens the environment and tribals of the state.
Chhattisgarh is the second state after Orissa to move the apex court against the Polavaram project by AP government.
“The project will threaten valuable ecology and wildlife. The project will bring misery to thousands of tribals by submerging more than 300 villages in Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Orissa,” Chhattisgarh government said.
The state contended around 2015.52 hectares of land falling in South Bastar, Dantewada in Chhattisgarh will be submerged by the dam and the environment clearances have been granted to the project without conducting public hearings in the area.
“Chhattisgarh is a tribal state. A very large population of tribals will be displaced due to submersion of areas. The area is a notified area under Schedule-V of the Constitution and therefore the permission of Gram Sabha is required under the PESA (Panchayat Extension to the Scheduled Areas Act),” the petition filed through advocate Mr Atul Jha said.
“In this regard, it may be noted that the ministry of tribal affairs, in its order dated 17 April, 2007, granting clearance to the Polavaram Project has noted that there had not been any consultation with the Gram Sabhas in the affected areas in the states of Chattisgarh and Orissa,” it added.
Chhattisgarh has sought “removal of all structures related to the Polavaram project”.
It pleaded the environment clearance, forest clearance, resettlement and rehabilitation clearance and Central Water Commission's clearance granted to the project should be declared illegal and null and void.
“The project proposals were suitable in the times when it was conceived (in 1978). But over the years, many changes have taken place in the society and its priorities. The proposed displacement of such a huge population and settlement is likely to cause degradation in their lives,” it said.
In its petition, Chhattisgarh questioned the legality of the Polavaram project saying its construction is in “blatant violation” of laws as well as the 1978 and 1980 agreements between Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh and the final award of 7July, 1980, passed by the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal.
“CWC (Central Water Commission) and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs have shown complete disregard to the Godavari Water Dispute Tribunal (GWDT) Award, 1980, and to illegally facilitate the construction of Polavaram dam at the cost of state of Chhattisgarh,” it said. “The Ministry of Tribal Affairs gave clearance on such a project formulation which are not part of GWDT Award. Therefore, the order dated April 17, 2007 (granting clearance) issued by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs is erroneous and needs to be cancelled,” it added.
31 August 2011
press trust of india
NEW DELHI, 31 AUG: Chhattisgarh government has filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking its directions to restrain Andhra Pradesh from continuing construction of a dam on the river Godavari at Polavaram, saying the clearances given to the project are illegal and the project threatens the environment and tribals of the state.
Chhattisgarh is the second state after Orissa to move the apex court against the Polavaram project by AP government.
“The project will threaten valuable ecology and wildlife. The project will bring misery to thousands of tribals by submerging more than 300 villages in Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Orissa,” Chhattisgarh government said.
The state contended around 2015.52 hectares of land falling in South Bastar, Dantewada in Chhattisgarh will be submerged by the dam and the environment clearances have been granted to the project without conducting public hearings in the area.
“Chhattisgarh is a tribal state. A very large population of tribals will be displaced due to submersion of areas. The area is a notified area under Schedule-V of the Constitution and therefore the permission of Gram Sabha is required under the PESA (Panchayat Extension to the Scheduled Areas Act),” the petition filed through advocate Mr Atul Jha said.
“In this regard, it may be noted that the ministry of tribal affairs, in its order dated 17 April, 2007, granting clearance to the Polavaram Project has noted that there had not been any consultation with the Gram Sabhas in the affected areas in the states of Chattisgarh and Orissa,” it added.
Chhattisgarh has sought “removal of all structures related to the Polavaram project”.
It pleaded the environment clearance, forest clearance, resettlement and rehabilitation clearance and Central Water Commission's clearance granted to the project should be declared illegal and null and void.
“The project proposals were suitable in the times when it was conceived (in 1978). But over the years, many changes have taken place in the society and its priorities. The proposed displacement of such a huge population and settlement is likely to cause degradation in their lives,” it said.
In its petition, Chhattisgarh questioned the legality of the Polavaram project saying its construction is in “blatant violation” of laws as well as the 1978 and 1980 agreements between Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh and the final award of 7July, 1980, passed by the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal.
“CWC (Central Water Commission) and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs have shown complete disregard to the Godavari Water Dispute Tribunal (GWDT) Award, 1980, and to illegally facilitate the construction of Polavaram dam at the cost of state of Chhattisgarh,” it said. “The Ministry of Tribal Affairs gave clearance on such a project formulation which are not part of GWDT Award. Therefore, the order dated April 17, 2007 (granting clearance) issued by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs is erroneous and needs to be cancelled,” it added.
Polavaram Politics
After Orissa now Chhatisgarh filed a petition in SC over Polavaram damhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
Report by OrissaDiary.com correspondent; Bhubaneswar: Chhattisgarh government has filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking its directions to restrain Andhra Pradesh from continuing construction of a Polavaram dam on river Godavari. In a petition filed before the Apex Court Chhatisgarh Govt. has said, the clearances given to the project are illegal and the project threatens the environment and tribals of the state.
Chhattisgarh is the second state after Orissa to move the apex court against the Polavaram.
"The project will threaten valuable ecology and wildlife. The project will bring misery to thousands of tribals by submerging more than 300 villages in Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Orissa," Chhattisgarh government said.
Orissa is already filing a legal battle over Polavarm project. The Apex Court had already constituted M. GopalKJrishnan Committee to look into the matter. The Committee had submitted its report to the Supreme Court.
Chahtisgarh Govt. claimed that, around 2015.52 hectares of land falling in South Bastar, Dantewada in Chhattisgarh will be submerged by the dam and the environment clearances have been granted to the project without conducting public hearings in the area.
Report by OrissaDiary.com correspondent; Bhubaneswar: Chhattisgarh government has filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking its directions to restrain Andhra Pradesh from continuing construction of a Polavaram dam on river Godavari. In a petition filed before the Apex Court Chhatisgarh Govt. has said, the clearances given to the project are illegal and the project threatens the environment and tribals of the state.
Chhattisgarh is the second state after Orissa to move the apex court against the Polavaram.
"The project will threaten valuable ecology and wildlife. The project will bring misery to thousands of tribals by submerging more than 300 villages in Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Orissa," Chhattisgarh government said.
Orissa is already filing a legal battle over Polavarm project. The Apex Court had already constituted M. GopalKJrishnan Committee to look into the matter. The Committee had submitted its report to the Supreme Court.
Chahtisgarh Govt. claimed that, around 2015.52 hectares of land falling in South Bastar, Dantewada in Chhattisgarh will be submerged by the dam and the environment clearances have been granted to the project without conducting public hearings in the area.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Polavaram Politics
Orissa Argues About Polavaram Dam With Expert Panel
PTI | Bhubaneswar | May 27, 2011
Strongly objecting to the construction of multi-purpose Polavaram dam in Andhra Pradesh, the Orissa government has drawn the attention of the Supreme Court-appointed expert committee to four different aspects of the project, including the design, officials said today.
The state government along with neighbouring Chhattisgarh in a joint memorandum to the expert committee, headed by Gopalkrishna, said that the Polavaram project would adversely affect the two states if its design was not changed, said Water Resource secretary Suresh Mohapatra.
While Polavaram project was initially made with a capacity for flow of 36 lakh cusecs, it was later increased to 50 lakh cusecs after changing its original design, he said.
The state government, represented during a spot verification by the committee at the project site by engineer-in-chief Harish Behera, said the proposed embankment in a river in Orissa, would lead to the submergence of many tribal villages in Malkangiri district.
Besides, Behera also pointed out that the mandatory palli sabha (village council) meeting was not held in areas likely to be affected due to the project. "Therefore, we have every reason to oppose the project," Behera said.
Earlier, the state government had moved the Supreme Court seeking a halt to the Polavaram project as it was allegedly being constructed by violating several laws and an agreement between Orissa and Andhra Pradesh.
PTI | Bhubaneswar | May 27, 2011
Strongly objecting to the construction of multi-purpose Polavaram dam in Andhra Pradesh, the Orissa government has drawn the attention of the Supreme Court-appointed expert committee to four different aspects of the project, including the design, officials said today.
The state government along with neighbouring Chhattisgarh in a joint memorandum to the expert committee, headed by Gopalkrishna, said that the Polavaram project would adversely affect the two states if its design was not changed, said Water Resource secretary Suresh Mohapatra.
While Polavaram project was initially made with a capacity for flow of 36 lakh cusecs, it was later increased to 50 lakh cusecs after changing its original design, he said.
The state government, represented during a spot verification by the committee at the project site by engineer-in-chief Harish Behera, said the proposed embankment in a river in Orissa, would lead to the submergence of many tribal villages in Malkangiri district.
Besides, Behera also pointed out that the mandatory palli sabha (village council) meeting was not held in areas likely to be affected due to the project. "Therefore, we have every reason to oppose the project," Behera said.
Earlier, the state government had moved the Supreme Court seeking a halt to the Polavaram project as it was allegedly being constructed by violating several laws and an agreement between Orissa and Andhra Pradesh.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Polavaram Politics
Chhattisgarh to file petition in SC soon
BS Reporter / Kolkata/ Bhubaneswar April 05, 201http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif1, 0:39 IST
No difference of opinion with Orissa, says Chhattisgarh minister
The row over the controversial Polavaram project is set to intensify further with the Chhattisgarh government bracing itself to file a petition in the Supreme Court of India, keeping in view the interests of its affected people.
"The negotiations with the Orissa Chief Minister were optimistic. There is no difference of opinion with the Orissa government on the Polavaram project. We are soon going to file a petition in the Supreme Court keeping in view the concerns of the people of our state to be affected by the project", Vikram Usendi, minister (forest, public enterprises & public grievances), Chhattisgarh government told media persons after emerging out of a meeting with the Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik.
"We don't have any difference of opinion with the Chhattisgarh government as far as the Polavaram project is concerned", said Suresh Mohapatra, principal secretary (water resources), Orissa government.
Meanwhile, the hearing on the Polavaram project in the apex court has been deferred till next Monday. The Andhra Pradesh government today filed the names of three experts- M Gopalakrishnan, B M Ahuja and J Hassan with the apex court.
It may be noted that on last Friday, the Supreme Court had pulled up the Andhra Pradesh government for its failure to submit names of experts in connection with the Polavaram project within the time-frame stipulated by the court.
The Orissa government has already filed the names of experts with the apex court.
The members of the expert committee constituted by the Orissa government are Anil D Mohile, former chairman of the Central Water Commission (CWC), D K Goswami, professor of IIT-Delhi and M Perumal, professor of IIT-Roorkee.
In accordance with the direction of the Supreme Court, Orissa had constituted a three-member expert committee to examine various issues pertaining to the controversial Polavaram project.
The Orissa government had approached the Supreme Court on September 4 last year, challenging the Centre's decision to give final environmental clearance for the project.
On October 4 last year, the apex court had asked the Government of India to file its response within a month to the petition filed by the Orissa government in connection with the controversial Polavaram project.
In its suit, Orissa had sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the Polavaram project on the Godavari river. It had also stated that embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
Moreover, the extent of submergence due to design flood (which had been revised to 50 lakh cusecs from the original 36 lakh cusecs by the CWC itself) and the backwater effect along the Sabari and Sileru limbs (flowing through Orissa territory into the Godavari in Andhra Pradesh) had been finalised by the CWC without estimating the flood contributions from these limbs separately by following any rational procedure or acceptable norm, according to the petition filed by the Orissa government.
As per the estimates of the state government, the project was likely to submerge 2119.38 hectares of land in Naxalite-affected tribal areas of Malkangiri .
BS Reporter / Kolkata/ Bhubaneswar April 05, 201http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif1, 0:39 IST
No difference of opinion with Orissa, says Chhattisgarh minister
The row over the controversial Polavaram project is set to intensify further with the Chhattisgarh government bracing itself to file a petition in the Supreme Court of India, keeping in view the interests of its affected people.
"The negotiations with the Orissa Chief Minister were optimistic. There is no difference of opinion with the Orissa government on the Polavaram project. We are soon going to file a petition in the Supreme Court keeping in view the concerns of the people of our state to be affected by the project", Vikram Usendi, minister (forest, public enterprises & public grievances), Chhattisgarh government told media persons after emerging out of a meeting with the Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik.
"We don't have any difference of opinion with the Chhattisgarh government as far as the Polavaram project is concerned", said Suresh Mohapatra, principal secretary (water resources), Orissa government.
Meanwhile, the hearing on the Polavaram project in the apex court has been deferred till next Monday. The Andhra Pradesh government today filed the names of three experts- M Gopalakrishnan, B M Ahuja and J Hassan with the apex court.
It may be noted that on last Friday, the Supreme Court had pulled up the Andhra Pradesh government for its failure to submit names of experts in connection with the Polavaram project within the time-frame stipulated by the court.
The Orissa government has already filed the names of experts with the apex court.
The members of the expert committee constituted by the Orissa government are Anil D Mohile, former chairman of the Central Water Commission (CWC), D K Goswami, professor of IIT-Delhi and M Perumal, professor of IIT-Roorkee.
In accordance with the direction of the Supreme Court, Orissa had constituted a three-member expert committee to examine various issues pertaining to the controversial Polavaram project.
The Orissa government had approached the Supreme Court on September 4 last year, challenging the Centre's decision to give final environmental clearance for the project.
On October 4 last year, the apex court had asked the Government of India to file its response within a month to the petition filed by the Orissa government in connection with the controversial Polavaram project.
In its suit, Orissa had sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the Polavaram project on the Godavari river. It had also stated that embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
Moreover, the extent of submergence due to design flood (which had been revised to 50 lakh cusecs from the original 36 lakh cusecs by the CWC itself) and the backwater effect along the Sabari and Sileru limbs (flowing through Orissa territory into the Godavari in Andhra Pradesh) had been finalised by the CWC without estimating the flood contributions from these limbs separately by following any rational procedure or acceptable norm, according to the petition filed by the Orissa government.
As per the estimates of the state government, the project was likely to submerge 2119.38 hectares of land in Naxalite-affected tribal areas of Malkangiri .
Chhattisgarh delegation meets Odisha CM over problems of drinking water in Jagdalpur
Report by Orissa Diary correspondent; Bhubaneswar: A high level delegation from Chhattisgarh meets Orissa CM Naveen Patnaik at Bhubaneswar on Monday. The delegation of Chhattisgarh has discussed with the Chief Minister on Monday in the Orissa Secretariat on the problems of drinking water in Jagdalpur of Chhattisgarh.
The Chief Minister has directed to construct two barrages on Indrâvati river and Ghora canal. The funds will be given by the Chhattisgarh government for construction of above two projects. After construction of abovetwo projects, the drinking water problem of Jagdalpur will be solved.
The delegation of Chhatisgarh headed by the Minister of Forest Bikram Ussendi discussed with the Chief Minister. Secretary of Water Resources Suresh Chandra Mohapatra and other senior officers were present at the time of discussion.
Report by Orissa Diary correspondent; Bhubaneswar: A high level delegation from Chhattisgarh meets Orissa CM Naveen Patnaik at Bhubaneswar on Monday. The delegation of Chhattisgarh has discussed with the Chief Minister on Monday in the Orissa Secretariat on the problems of drinking water in Jagdalpur of Chhattisgarh.
The Chief Minister has directed to construct two barrages on Indrâvati river and Ghora canal. The funds will be given by the Chhattisgarh government for construction of above two projects. After construction of abovetwo projects, the drinking water problem of Jagdalpur will be solved.
The delegation of Chhatisgarh headed by the Minister of Forest Bikram Ussendi discussed with the Chief Minister. Secretary of Water Resources Suresh Chandra Mohapatra and other senior officers were present at the time of discussion.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Polavaram Politics
Public hearing on Polavaram irrigation project
Raipur, March 16 (IANS) After strong objections of Chhattisgarh, the central government has decided to hold a public hearing over a planned irrigation project on Godavari river by neighbouring Andhra Pradesh, the state assembly was informed Wednesday.
"Union Minister for Forest and Environment Jairam Ramesh has agreed to hold a public hearing on Polavaram irrigation project after the Chhattisgarh government strongly put the case before him," an official statement said.
According to the Chhattisgarh government, the project will submerge 7,500 hectares of forest land in the state and will affect population of 20 villages in Dantewada district.
The statement said Ramesh has informed Chief Minister Raman Singh by a letter about the decision to hold a public hearing.
Last week too, Raman Singh told the state assembly that the government would oppose the project "at all levels as it is not acceptable to Chhattisgarh".
Ramesh too has objected to the Andhra Pradesh going ahead with the project without settling the issue of building embankments with the Chhattisgarh and Orissa governments.
Raipur, March 16 (IANS) After strong objections of Chhattisgarh, the central government has decided to hold a public hearing over a planned irrigation project on Godavari river by neighbouring Andhra Pradesh, the state assembly was informed Wednesday.
"Union Minister for Forest and Environment Jairam Ramesh has agreed to hold a public hearing on Polavaram irrigation project after the Chhattisgarh government strongly put the case before him," an official statement said.
According to the Chhattisgarh government, the project will submerge 7,500 hectares of forest land in the state and will affect population of 20 villages in Dantewada district.
The statement said Ramesh has informed Chief Minister Raman Singh by a letter about the decision to hold a public hearing.
Last week too, Raman Singh told the state assembly that the government would oppose the project "at all levels as it is not acceptable to Chhattisgarh".
Ramesh too has objected to the Andhra Pradesh going ahead with the project without settling the issue of building embankments with the Chhattisgarh and Orissa governments.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Polavaram Politics
Since I have made a commitment on the floor of the House and I have stressed the need to implement the Polavaram project with the full cooperation of Orissa and Chhattisgarh, I would request for your cooperation in the matter to facilitate conduct of public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh soon Jairam Ramesh, environment minister
SEEKING to mediate in the inter-state dispute over the Polavaram hydel and irrigation project in Andhra Pradesh, environment minister Jairam Ramesh on Friday asked the governments of Orissa and Chhattisgarh to help Andhra Pradesh in carrying out the mandatory public hearings for construction of embankments in areas under their jurisdiction.
Jairam wrote to the chief ministersof boththestatessayingthat Andhra Pradesh had already re questedthestatepollutioncontrol boards of Orissa and Chhattisgarh to facilitate public hearings fortheprojectbuthadnotreceived any response so far. The letter was sent after Jairam gave an assurance in the Rajya Sabha today that he would get the three states together to resolve the long-standing dispute over the R17,000 crore mega-project that will produce 960-MW electricity and irrigate nearlythreelakhhectaresof land.
"Since I have made a commitmentonthefloorof theHouseandI have stressed the need to implement the Polavaram project with the full cooperation of Orissa and Chhattisgarh, I would request for your cooperation in the matter to facilitate conduct of public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh soon," Jairam said in his letter to RamanSinghandNaveenPatnaik. The public hearings have been necessitated by the design changesmadebyAndhraPradesh in the project because of which a fresh environmental clearance was required. Andhra Pradesh of fered to construct protective embankments on Sabari and Sileru rivers in Chhattisgarh and Orissa after the two states had had protestedagainsttheproject,complaining that it was likely to sub merge a number of their villages.
The project had initially been cleared by the Environment Ministry in 2005. Following the design changes, an amended clearance was granted in 2009 subject to the result of the public hearings to be conducted by Andhra Pradesh government in the two states. The affected areas fall under Dantewada district of Chhattisgarh and Malkangiri district of Orissa, both naxal-infested areas with large tribal populations.
Since the public hearings were not held, the Ministry had last November issued a showcause notice to Andhra Pradesh asking why the clearance must not be withdrawn.
Earlier, Jairam made a statement in Rajya Sabha on the issue after BJP's Venkaiah Naidu raise the matter and suggested that the Central government needed to intervene in resolving the dispute between the three states. He offered to arrange a meeting between the three chief ministers if that was required.
http://epaper.financialexpress.com/FE/FE/2011/03/05/ArticleHtmls/05_03_2011_005_010.shtml
SEEKING to mediate in the inter-state dispute over the Polavaram hydel and irrigation project in Andhra Pradesh, environment minister Jairam Ramesh on Friday asked the governments of Orissa and Chhattisgarh to help Andhra Pradesh in carrying out the mandatory public hearings for construction of embankments in areas under their jurisdiction.
Jairam wrote to the chief ministersof boththestatessayingthat Andhra Pradesh had already re questedthestatepollutioncontrol boards of Orissa and Chhattisgarh to facilitate public hearings fortheprojectbuthadnotreceived any response so far. The letter was sent after Jairam gave an assurance in the Rajya Sabha today that he would get the three states together to resolve the long-standing dispute over the R17,000 crore mega-project that will produce 960-MW electricity and irrigate nearlythreelakhhectaresof land.
"Since I have made a commitmentonthefloorof theHouseandI have stressed the need to implement the Polavaram project with the full cooperation of Orissa and Chhattisgarh, I would request for your cooperation in the matter to facilitate conduct of public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh soon," Jairam said in his letter to RamanSinghandNaveenPatnaik. The public hearings have been necessitated by the design changesmadebyAndhraPradesh in the project because of which a fresh environmental clearance was required. Andhra Pradesh of fered to construct protective embankments on Sabari and Sileru rivers in Chhattisgarh and Orissa after the two states had had protestedagainsttheproject,complaining that it was likely to sub merge a number of their villages.
The project had initially been cleared by the Environment Ministry in 2005. Following the design changes, an amended clearance was granted in 2009 subject to the result of the public hearings to be conducted by Andhra Pradesh government in the two states. The affected areas fall under Dantewada district of Chhattisgarh and Malkangiri district of Orissa, both naxal-infested areas with large tribal populations.
Since the public hearings were not held, the Ministry had last November issued a showcause notice to Andhra Pradesh asking why the clearance must not be withdrawn.
Earlier, Jairam made a statement in Rajya Sabha on the issue after BJP's Venkaiah Naidu raise the matter and suggested that the Central government needed to intervene in resolving the dispute between the three states. He offered to arrange a meeting between the three chief ministers if that was required.
http://epaper.financialexpress.com/FE/FE/2011/03/05/ArticleHtmls/05_03_2011_005_010.shtml
Polavaram Politics
Jairam misled the house to give a push to Polavaram Project
"A short-time green crusader Jairam Ramesh is perhaps coming to his own colours. One of the key persons who advocated for economic liberalisation in India, Jairam became the green terror for a while by putting a halt to the projects of Vedanta, POSCO, JSPL in Orissa and many other projects in other parts. But his sudden turn to uphold the interests of TATA, POSCO, Jindal Steel and Powers in Orissa and a few other corporate houses in other parts has given him the image of a green traitor. Recently, his presentation of facts about Polavaram Project in the upper house of Indian Parliament has come as another blame for misleading the house."
In response to a Short Notice Question in Rajya Sabha on the controversial Polavaram Project of Andhra Pradesh, the Union Environment & Forests Minister for State Shri Jairam Ramesh, whose basic statutory role is that of a regulator, acted like a promoter and promissory statement in the house on March 4, 2011 that he would call a meeting of the Chief Ministers of Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh to clear the path for environment clearance to the project. Mr Ramesh and his promise were more in line to promote the project that was in clean conflict with his statutory role as a regulator. While role of the Environment ministry is to ensure that statutory and legal procedures are followed before a project is considered for environment clearance, the Minister clearly acted against his statutory role by making such a promise.
The Minister should instead be concerned that the Polavaram project authorities have not submitted a single half yearly compliance report since the project was given a clearance in October 2005 and, the irony is, his ministry has taken no action yet. He should also be concerned about the embankment that the ministry cleared was not part of the original plan and project proposal.
When there has been no study or assessment of the possible impacts or viability of the proposed embankment, the question thrown by Jairam against himself is, on which basis his ministry gave the forest clearance in July 2010?
During the debate on March 4, 2011 the minister also informed the Parliament that “the final stage-II forest clearance for the Polavaram Project was given way back in July, 2010” and never mentioned about non-compliance of FRA (Forest Rights Act) while giving the clearance. The minister seemed to be misleading the Parliament here.
It has been brought to the attention of the Minister by water management expert Himanshu Thakkar that the forest clearance was given by the MoEF in July 2010 without settling issues related to the Rights of dwellers living in the affected villages as required under the FRA. Gram Sabha resolutions to that effect from seven villages to be affected by proposed forest diversion for the Polavaram project have been sent to the Minister and also to the members of the statutory Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) constituted under the Forest Conservation Act. Similar resolutions from additional fifteen villages have been sent from Andhra Pradesh. Following Mr. Thakkar’s letter, Minister had responded that he would get the issues examined. The very next day, on Nov 22, 2010, Mr Ramesh himself wrote to the then AP CM Shri K Rosaiah saying, “the matter that has been made available to me clearly seems to indicate that the claims of local tribal communities do not seem to have been settled. This is a very serious matter.”
The Minister, however, having received no response from the AP Chief Minister, wrote again to the new AP CM Kiran Kumar Reddy on Jan 25, 2011 adding, “I am awaiting a response from the state government.”
In the meantime, following a detailed representation including gram sabha resolutions to all the FAC members, the statutory committee in its meeting on Oct 25, 2010 (minutes are available on MEF website) decided, “The FAC recommended that these complaints may be sent to the Ministry of Environment & Forests to take appropriate action at the Ministry level. The Ministry may give special consideration to the following:
Examine the alleged FRA violations and request the State Government to provide details on FRA compliance as per the law and circular of Aug. 2009; Examine the issue of forest land diversion for the embankments which are planned to prevent the submergence in adjoining States (the existing project report makes no mention of forest diversion for embankment even though it requires huge forest land and needs a special mention or, at least, an inclusion) in the Project proposal; Examine the discrepancies between the facts submitted when seeking clearance from the FAC and EAC respectively and take action if necessary.”
FAC being a statutory body, the state government has to satisfy the committee on the issues specifically raised by it. This is yet to happen.
Under these circumstances, the forest clearance given to the project cannot be considered final and the minister should have brought this issue to the notice of the upper house. Not mentioning these issues while talking about the Forest clearance is tantamount to misleading the house.
Here, it may also be added that the Central Electricity Authority is yet to give concurrence to the power component of the Polavaram project. Such a concurrence is a statutory requirement under section 8 of Electricity Act 2003. The CEA, in response to an RTI query has informed SANDRP that the application of concurrence from Polavaram was returned to the developer without any concurrence due to issues related to hydrology and because proposed installed capacity of 960 MW is unviable. The proposal to increase the cost of the project to Rs. 16010.45 crores from Rs. 10151.04 crores was also not accepted by the advisory Committee on Irrigation, Flood Control and Multi Purpose Projects in its meeting on Oct 27 2010 following intervention by Joint Secretary (Exp), Dept of Expenditure. A number of petitions are also pending in courts against the project. The Project was earlier given funding under the Accelerated Irrigation Benefits Programme (AIBP) under erroneous claims. The Command area of the Polavaram project also significantly coincides with the command areas of Pushkara and Tadipudi Lift Irrigation Schemes, both of which are also getting funds under AIBP. CAG has already raised questions about all these. Almost all the claimed clearances of the project seem to be raising a lot more questions on many fronts.
Under these circumstances, when the project looks to be moving against all laws of the land, consideration of the project by the Union government under National Project scheme (as stated by the minister in Parliament) and making it eligible for 90% central funding seems to be a more unlawful act pursued by the government itself.
"A short-time green crusader Jairam Ramesh is perhaps coming to his own colours. One of the key persons who advocated for economic liberalisation in India, Jairam became the green terror for a while by putting a halt to the projects of Vedanta, POSCO, JSPL in Orissa and many other projects in other parts. But his sudden turn to uphold the interests of TATA, POSCO, Jindal Steel and Powers in Orissa and a few other corporate houses in other parts has given him the image of a green traitor. Recently, his presentation of facts about Polavaram Project in the upper house of Indian Parliament has come as another blame for misleading the house."
In response to a Short Notice Question in Rajya Sabha on the controversial Polavaram Project of Andhra Pradesh, the Union Environment & Forests Minister for State Shri Jairam Ramesh, whose basic statutory role is that of a regulator, acted like a promoter and promissory statement in the house on March 4, 2011 that he would call a meeting of the Chief Ministers of Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh to clear the path for environment clearance to the project. Mr Ramesh and his promise were more in line to promote the project that was in clean conflict with his statutory role as a regulator. While role of the Environment ministry is to ensure that statutory and legal procedures are followed before a project is considered for environment clearance, the Minister clearly acted against his statutory role by making such a promise.
The Minister should instead be concerned that the Polavaram project authorities have not submitted a single half yearly compliance report since the project was given a clearance in October 2005 and, the irony is, his ministry has taken no action yet. He should also be concerned about the embankment that the ministry cleared was not part of the original plan and project proposal.
When there has been no study or assessment of the possible impacts or viability of the proposed embankment, the question thrown by Jairam against himself is, on which basis his ministry gave the forest clearance in July 2010?
During the debate on March 4, 2011 the minister also informed the Parliament that “the final stage-II forest clearance for the Polavaram Project was given way back in July, 2010” and never mentioned about non-compliance of FRA (Forest Rights Act) while giving the clearance. The minister seemed to be misleading the Parliament here.
It has been brought to the attention of the Minister by water management expert Himanshu Thakkar that the forest clearance was given by the MoEF in July 2010 without settling issues related to the Rights of dwellers living in the affected villages as required under the FRA. Gram Sabha resolutions to that effect from seven villages to be affected by proposed forest diversion for the Polavaram project have been sent to the Minister and also to the members of the statutory Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) constituted under the Forest Conservation Act. Similar resolutions from additional fifteen villages have been sent from Andhra Pradesh. Following Mr. Thakkar’s letter, Minister had responded that he would get the issues examined. The very next day, on Nov 22, 2010, Mr Ramesh himself wrote to the then AP CM Shri K Rosaiah saying, “the matter that has been made available to me clearly seems to indicate that the claims of local tribal communities do not seem to have been settled. This is a very serious matter.”
The Minister, however, having received no response from the AP Chief Minister, wrote again to the new AP CM Kiran Kumar Reddy on Jan 25, 2011 adding, “I am awaiting a response from the state government.”
In the meantime, following a detailed representation including gram sabha resolutions to all the FAC members, the statutory committee in its meeting on Oct 25, 2010 (minutes are available on MEF website) decided, “The FAC recommended that these complaints may be sent to the Ministry of Environment & Forests to take appropriate action at the Ministry level. The Ministry may give special consideration to the following:
Examine the alleged FRA violations and request the State Government to provide details on FRA compliance as per the law and circular of Aug. 2009; Examine the issue of forest land diversion for the embankments which are planned to prevent the submergence in adjoining States (the existing project report makes no mention of forest diversion for embankment even though it requires huge forest land and needs a special mention or, at least, an inclusion) in the Project proposal; Examine the discrepancies between the facts submitted when seeking clearance from the FAC and EAC respectively and take action if necessary.”
FAC being a statutory body, the state government has to satisfy the committee on the issues specifically raised by it. This is yet to happen.
Under these circumstances, the forest clearance given to the project cannot be considered final and the minister should have brought this issue to the notice of the upper house. Not mentioning these issues while talking about the Forest clearance is tantamount to misleading the house.
Here, it may also be added that the Central Electricity Authority is yet to give concurrence to the power component of the Polavaram project. Such a concurrence is a statutory requirement under section 8 of Electricity Act 2003. The CEA, in response to an RTI query has informed SANDRP that the application of concurrence from Polavaram was returned to the developer without any concurrence due to issues related to hydrology and because proposed installed capacity of 960 MW is unviable. The proposal to increase the cost of the project to Rs. 16010.45 crores from Rs. 10151.04 crores was also not accepted by the advisory Committee on Irrigation, Flood Control and Multi Purpose Projects in its meeting on Oct 27 2010 following intervention by Joint Secretary (Exp), Dept of Expenditure. A number of petitions are also pending in courts against the project. The Project was earlier given funding under the Accelerated Irrigation Benefits Programme (AIBP) under erroneous claims. The Command area of the Polavaram project also significantly coincides with the command areas of Pushkara and Tadipudi Lift Irrigation Schemes, both of which are also getting funds under AIBP. CAG has already raised questions about all these. Almost all the claimed clearances of the project seem to be raising a lot more questions on many fronts.
Under these circumstances, when the project looks to be moving against all laws of the land, consideration of the project by the Union government under National Project scheme (as stated by the minister in Parliament) and making it eligible for 90% central funding seems to be a more unlawful act pursued by the government itself.
Friday, November 26, 2010
SC orders infrastructure for Orissa-Andhra Inter-state Water disputes tribunal
26.11.2010 | 14:56
New Delhi
Upmanyu Trivedi
An unhappy Supreme Court today directed the Centre to provide all necessary infrastructure for a functional Inter-state Water Disputes tribunal which was set up to settle water dispute between Orissa and Andhra Pradesh. The centre has been given three months time to make all arrangements.
Both states have for once joined hands to file a joint interim application before the apex court to operationalise the tribunal which was set up by a Supreme Court order dated 6.2.2009 to adjudicate dispute between the two states arising from construction of side channel and flood canal project at village Katragada on the river Vansadhara in Andhra Pradesh.
Supreme Court bench of Justice Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph passed the order today for providing suitable infrastructure and accommodation for all members of the Commission and judges of the tribunal.
The tribunal although was setup on February 24 this year could not start functioning for lack of infrastructure and accommodation for judges. The bench ordered "we direct union of India to provide suitable infrastructure and suitable accommodation for members within 3 months."
The bench also observed that it is unfortunate that even after one and a half years after Supreme Court order of constitution of the tribunal it is still not functional. The bench noted "we hope union of India takes immediate steps."
The state of Orissa had in February 2006 communicated to the Central Government for constitution of a tribunal to look into its grievances on construction of a flood flow canal at Katragada under section 3 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act, 1956. The Supreme Court in a petition filed by state of Orissa had held on 6.2.2009 that, “It is now almost three years since the complaint was made by the state of Orissa but the central government has not taken any action in the matter. In this scenario, the prayer made by the state of Orissa does not appear to be unreasonable since the dispute between the two states does not confine itself to the construction of the side channel weir and the flood flow canal, but primarily involves the unilateral decision taken by the state of Andhra Pradesh to divert the river waters to the state of Andhra Pradesh, which could possibly disturb the agreement [between the two states] to share the waters of the river equally.”
26.11.2010 | 14:56
New Delhi
Upmanyu Trivedi
An unhappy Supreme Court today directed the Centre to provide all necessary infrastructure for a functional Inter-state Water Disputes tribunal which was set up to settle water dispute between Orissa and Andhra Pradesh. The centre has been given three months time to make all arrangements.
Both states have for once joined hands to file a joint interim application before the apex court to operationalise the tribunal which was set up by a Supreme Court order dated 6.2.2009 to adjudicate dispute between the two states arising from construction of side channel and flood canal project at village Katragada on the river Vansadhara in Andhra Pradesh.
Supreme Court bench of Justice Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph passed the order today for providing suitable infrastructure and accommodation for all members of the Commission and judges of the tribunal.
The tribunal although was setup on February 24 this year could not start functioning for lack of infrastructure and accommodation for judges. The bench ordered "we direct union of India to provide suitable infrastructure and suitable accommodation for members within 3 months."
The bench also observed that it is unfortunate that even after one and a half years after Supreme Court order of constitution of the tribunal it is still not functional. The bench noted "we hope union of India takes immediate steps."
The state of Orissa had in February 2006 communicated to the Central Government for constitution of a tribunal to look into its grievances on construction of a flood flow canal at Katragada under section 3 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act, 1956. The Supreme Court in a petition filed by state of Orissa had held on 6.2.2009 that, “It is now almost three years since the complaint was made by the state of Orissa but the central government has not taken any action in the matter. In this scenario, the prayer made by the state of Orissa does not appear to be unreasonable since the dispute between the two states does not confine itself to the construction of the side channel weir and the flood flow canal, but primarily involves the unilateral decision taken by the state of Andhra Pradesh to divert the river waters to the state of Andhra Pradesh, which could possibly disturb the agreement [between the two states] to share the waters of the river equally.”
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Polavaram Politics
SC grants "last opportunity" to Centre on Polavaram row
New Delhi, Nov 18 (PTI) The Supreme Court today granted "last opportunity" to the Centre to file within three weeks its response on Orissa''s plea for quashing clearance granted by Environment Ministry to the controversial Polavaram project in Andhra Pradesh, which it fears would inundate several parts of the state.
A bench of Justices Mukundakam Sharma and A R Dave while passing the order also posted after 8 weeks hearing of the main suit filed by Orissa in 2007 challenging the construction of the project also known as Indira Sagar, which the Centre has agreed to treat as a national project.
The apex court gave the "last opportunity" as it was irked by the Centre''s failure to file the response despite its earlier directive on October 4.
It also asked the Andhra Pradesh Government to file its response within three weeks and allowed Maharashtra to file its impleadment application on the issue as the project had a bearing on the State''s interest too.
According to Andhra Pradesh government, the project will provide drinking water to three million people, produce 960MW of power and give 23,500 million cubic feet of water to the industries.
In its application, Orissa has urged the apex court to quash the clearance on the ground that it would affect the lives of thousands of people in the state due to the massive embankment being constructed by Andhra Pradesh.
Senior counsel Raju Ramachandran questioned the Centre''s logic in granting clearance when the construction of the project was being examined by the apex court.
Orissa has already filed a suit before the apex court challenging the construction of the multi-crore Polavaram project.
The state has argued that the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MOEF) had granted clearance to the project despite the fact that Andhra Pradesh failed to conduct the mandatory public hearing before constructing the 45-feet high embankment spread over 35 kms.
It maintained that the clearance was granted despite the fact that the dispute over the construction of the project was pending adjudication in the apex court.
The UPA government had earlier assured Andhra Pradesh government that it would accord a national status to the project, which means that a bulk of the project cost would be borne by the Centre.
Inordinate delay in execution of Polavaram Project has led to steep escalation of project cost from about Rs. 12,000 crore to over Rs. 17,600 crore now.
Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had during his last visit to Delhi urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to withdraw forest and environmental clearance to Polavaram project as it would submerge vast areas in Orissa''s Malkangiri district.
The Prime Minister, on his part, had assured him that the tribal villages would not be allowed to be submerged.
Initially planned by the British in 1941, the Polavaram project envisages construction of a dam on Godavari river and diversion of a large volume of water through a 174-km link canal to Krishna river.
Orissa government had first moved the Supreme Court after the MoEF had given its interim approval for the project in 2008.
New Delhi, Nov 18 (PTI) The Supreme Court today granted "last opportunity" to the Centre to file within three weeks its response on Orissa''s plea for quashing clearance granted by Environment Ministry to the controversial Polavaram project in Andhra Pradesh, which it fears would inundate several parts of the state.
A bench of Justices Mukundakam Sharma and A R Dave while passing the order also posted after 8 weeks hearing of the main suit filed by Orissa in 2007 challenging the construction of the project also known as Indira Sagar, which the Centre has agreed to treat as a national project.
The apex court gave the "last opportunity" as it was irked by the Centre''s failure to file the response despite its earlier directive on October 4.
It also asked the Andhra Pradesh Government to file its response within three weeks and allowed Maharashtra to file its impleadment application on the issue as the project had a bearing on the State''s interest too.
According to Andhra Pradesh government, the project will provide drinking water to three million people, produce 960MW of power and give 23,500 million cubic feet of water to the industries.
In its application, Orissa has urged the apex court to quash the clearance on the ground that it would affect the lives of thousands of people in the state due to the massive embankment being constructed by Andhra Pradesh.
Senior counsel Raju Ramachandran questioned the Centre''s logic in granting clearance when the construction of the project was being examined by the apex court.
Orissa has already filed a suit before the apex court challenging the construction of the multi-crore Polavaram project.
The state has argued that the Ministry of Environment and Forest (MOEF) had granted clearance to the project despite the fact that Andhra Pradesh failed to conduct the mandatory public hearing before constructing the 45-feet high embankment spread over 35 kms.
It maintained that the clearance was granted despite the fact that the dispute over the construction of the project was pending adjudication in the apex court.
The UPA government had earlier assured Andhra Pradesh government that it would accord a national status to the project, which means that a bulk of the project cost would be borne by the Centre.
Inordinate delay in execution of Polavaram Project has led to steep escalation of project cost from about Rs. 12,000 crore to over Rs. 17,600 crore now.
Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had during his last visit to Delhi urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to withdraw forest and environmental clearance to Polavaram project as it would submerge vast areas in Orissa''s Malkangiri district.
The Prime Minister, on his part, had assured him that the tribal villages would not be allowed to be submerged.
Initially planned by the British in 1941, the Polavaram project envisages construction of a dam on Godavari river and diversion of a large volume of water through a 174-km link canal to Krishna river.
Orissa government had first moved the Supreme Court after the MoEF had given its interim approval for the project in 2008.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Polavaram Politics
Divide between Telangana and coast hits Polavaram
Ashok Das, Hindustan Times
Email Author
Hyderabad, November 18, 2010First Published: 00:08 IST(18/11/2010)
Last Updated: 00:10 IST(18/11/2010)
The Rs 16,010-crore Polavaram dam project on the Godavari river in Andhra Pradesh — already a source of anguish in Orissa and Chhattisgarh — has attracted opposition from the most unexpected quarters: leaders of the ruling Congress in Telangana. The project that may displace 1.8 lakh people in the
state, as a vast swath of land will be submerged in those states, has already been served a show-cause notice from the Union environment ministry as well.
The dam, being built for five years with more than Rs3,000 crore already expended, will submerge 276 villages in Andhra Pradesh alone. Of them, 205 villages are in Telangana.
Over 1.3 lakh people in the region, mostly the Koyas and the Konda Reddy tribesmen, will be uprooted by the project. What’s more, the project will help irrigate 7.2 lakh acres in coastal Andhra region, while Telangana will get water for only 1.33 lakh acres.
IT minister Komatireddy Venkat Reddy, who is from the Telangana region, said, "The Nagarjunasagar and Pulichintala dams were built displacing Telangana tribesmen. Now, the tribesmen are set to be displaced again due to the Polavaram project."
As the dam is expected to benefit the coastal region more than Telangana, it has added fuel to the traditional rivalry between the two regions and created a sharp divide even between the Congress leaders of the regions.
For the past 24 hours, Telangana is witnessing a wave of protests, demanding a review of the dam project. This time, however, the lead is not being by the Telangana Rastra Samiti.
The central government, in view of the protests in Telangana, may not take an early call on the project. And the environment ministry's show-cause notice has brought work on the project to a standstill.
Ashok Das, Hindustan Times
Email Author
Hyderabad, November 18, 2010First Published: 00:08 IST(18/11/2010)
Last Updated: 00:10 IST(18/11/2010)
The Rs 16,010-crore Polavaram dam project on the Godavari river in Andhra Pradesh — already a source of anguish in Orissa and Chhattisgarh — has attracted opposition from the most unexpected quarters: leaders of the ruling Congress in Telangana. The project that may displace 1.8 lakh people in the
state, as a vast swath of land will be submerged in those states, has already been served a show-cause notice from the Union environment ministry as well.
The dam, being built for five years with more than Rs3,000 crore already expended, will submerge 276 villages in Andhra Pradesh alone. Of them, 205 villages are in Telangana.
Over 1.3 lakh people in the region, mostly the Koyas and the Konda Reddy tribesmen, will be uprooted by the project. What’s more, the project will help irrigate 7.2 lakh acres in coastal Andhra region, while Telangana will get water for only 1.33 lakh acres.
IT minister Komatireddy Venkat Reddy, who is from the Telangana region, said, "The Nagarjunasagar and Pulichintala dams were built displacing Telangana tribesmen. Now, the tribesmen are set to be displaced again due to the Polavaram project."
As the dam is expected to benefit the coastal region more than Telangana, it has added fuel to the traditional rivalry between the two regions and created a sharp divide even between the Congress leaders of the regions.
For the past 24 hours, Telangana is witnessing a wave of protests, demanding a review of the dam project. This time, however, the lead is not being by the Telangana Rastra Samiti.
The central government, in view of the protests in Telangana, may not take an early call on the project. And the environment ministry's show-cause notice has brought work on the project to a standstill.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Polavaram Politics
SC hearing on Polavaram project on Thursday
BS Reporter / Kolkata/ Bhubaneswar November 17, 2010, 0:52 IST
The fate of the controversial Polavaram project is likely to be decided by the Supreme Court of India which would hear the case on Thursday.
"The Supreme Court will hear the case relating to the Polavaram project on Thursday”, Suresh Mohapatra, secretary (water resources), Orissa government told Business Standard
It may be noted that the Orissa government had approached the Supreme Court of India on September 4 this year, challenging the Centre's decision to give final environmental clearance for the project.
On October 4, the apex court had asked the Government of India to file its response within a month.
In its suit, Orissa had sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the Polavaram project on the Godavari river. It has also stated that embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
Meanwhile, Orissa has gone soft on its demand for the conduct of public hearing for the controversial multipurpose Polavaram project. The state Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, who has of late been unrelenting in his demand for holding public hearings for the project, announced that the state will wait till the apex court gives its verdict on the project.
The Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister had categorically stated that there was no need for conducting public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh, as adequate measures were taken to prevent submergence of villages in the two states.
Rosaiah's statement had sparked off a war of words between him and Patnaik.
Reacting to Rosaiah's comments, Patnaik had said, “Our concern is that the tribal people, particularly in Malkangiri district do not suffer because of the implementation of the Polavaram project. They (Andhra Pradesh government) may be taking measures to prevent submergence of villages but public hearings must be conducted.”
The Union ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) on November 2, had asked the Andhra Pradesh government to specify the reasons for not holding public hearings for the project in Orissa and Chattisgarh even after one and a half years of issue of the letter of the ministry dated March 9 last year.
BS Reporter / Kolkata/ Bhubaneswar November 17, 2010, 0:52 IST
The fate of the controversial Polavaram project is likely to be decided by the Supreme Court of India which would hear the case on Thursday.
"The Supreme Court will hear the case relating to the Polavaram project on Thursday”, Suresh Mohapatra, secretary (water resources), Orissa government told Business Standard
It may be noted that the Orissa government had approached the Supreme Court of India on September 4 this year, challenging the Centre's decision to give final environmental clearance for the project.
On October 4, the apex court had asked the Government of India to file its response within a month.
In its suit, Orissa had sought a declaration that Andhra Pradesh had no right or entitlement to undertake or proceed with the Polavaram project on the Godavari river. It has also stated that embankments were not permanent solutions to effectively contain submergence during floods.
Meanwhile, Orissa has gone soft on its demand for the conduct of public hearing for the controversial multipurpose Polavaram project. The state Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, who has of late been unrelenting in his demand for holding public hearings for the project, announced that the state will wait till the apex court gives its verdict on the project.
The Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister had categorically stated that there was no need for conducting public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh, as adequate measures were taken to prevent submergence of villages in the two states.
Rosaiah's statement had sparked off a war of words between him and Patnaik.
Reacting to Rosaiah's comments, Patnaik had said, “Our concern is that the tribal people, particularly in Malkangiri district do not suffer because of the implementation of the Polavaram project. They (Andhra Pradesh government) may be taking measures to prevent submergence of villages but public hearings must be conducted.”
The Union ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) on November 2, had asked the Andhra Pradesh government to specify the reasons for not holding public hearings for the project in Orissa and Chattisgarh even after one and a half years of issue of the letter of the ministry dated March 9 last year.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Polavaram Politics
Orissa to wait for apex court verdict on Polavaram
2010-11-12 22:30:00
Bhubaneswar, Nov 12 (IANS) Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik Friday said his government will wait for the Supreme Court verdict on the controversial Polavaram dam project, to be built by Andhra Pradesh on river Godavari, to chalk out its future course of action.
'We will wait for the judgment of the Supreme Court. Then we will see what needs to be done,' Patnaik told reporters here.
The Rs.12,000 crore Polavaram multipurpose project has been planned on river Godavari in Andhra Pradesh. If built, it will be south India's biggest dam, providing irrigation to 7.19 lakh acres in that state.
The Orissa government first moved the Supreme Court after the central environment and forests ministry granted interim approval to the project in 2008.
The state government knocked on the door of the apex court again in September this year after the union environment and forests ministry granted final approval for diversion of 3,731.07 hectares of forest land for the project.
Chhattisgarh and Orissa fear that after completion of the project, in case of floods, the back water of the Godavari on which the dam would be built will flow into its tributaries Saberi and Sileru in Orissa and Chhattisgarh and submerge dozens of villages.
Andhra Pradesh has said it will put embankments on the river but Orissa says it will not help.
The project ran into more trouble after the union environment and forests ministry earlier this month questioned Andhra Pradesh for beginning work on the project without holding public hearing in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Polavaram Politics
Polavaram project: AP flays neighbouring states
PTI
First Published : 12 Nov 2010 10:21:10 PM ISTLast Updated : 12 Nov 2010 11:40:56 PM IST
NEW DELHI: Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K Rosaiah has accused Orissa and Chhattisgarh governments of not "cooperating" in conducting public hearings on the construction of the proposed Polavaram irrigation project.
The Union Environment Ministry had issued a show-cause notice to Andhra Pradesh government to explain why it had failed to conduct a public hearing on the construction of the dam as asked by it while giving clearance to the multi-purpose project in the state.
However, Rosaiah tried to put the ball in the courts of neighbouring Orissa and Chattisgarh which have been opposing the proposed dam fearing displacement of a large number tribals in their territories.
"You will appreciate that in our federal set-up specific functions such as holding of public hearings have to be performed by the respective states. Andhra Pradesh cannot hold public hearing either in Orissa or Chhattisgarh," Rosaiah said in a letter to Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh.
He argued that instead of asking the neighbouring states to furnish reason for not holding public hearings, the Environment Minister had been directing questions at his government in the matter.
Questioning the need for issuing the show-cause notice, the chief minister also pointed out that his government had been from time to time informing the Environment Ministry about the steps taken by it in the matter as well "inaction and reluctance" of the relevant authorities of Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Taking a serious view of Andhra Pradesh government's inaction in conducting a public hearing on Polavaram project and obtaining a fresh green clearance, the Ministry had written a letter to the state seeking an explanation on the issue.
Rosaiah asked the Environment Ministry to accord its concurrence for construction of protective embankments along the rivers Sabari and Sileru without insisting on public hearing as there was no change in the scope of the project.
Besides, flood protective bunds did not require environmental clearance as per the provisions of EIA Notification, 2006, he added.
The project was granted forest clearance on July 28 by the Environment Ministry with a condition that no land will be submerged in Orissa and Chhattisgarh and public hearing will be conducted in the two states.
PTI
First Published : 12 Nov 2010 10:21:10 PM ISTLast Updated : 12 Nov 2010 11:40:56 PM IST
NEW DELHI: Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K Rosaiah has accused Orissa and Chhattisgarh governments of not "cooperating" in conducting public hearings on the construction of the proposed Polavaram irrigation project.
The Union Environment Ministry had issued a show-cause notice to Andhra Pradesh government to explain why it had failed to conduct a public hearing on the construction of the dam as asked by it while giving clearance to the multi-purpose project in the state.
However, Rosaiah tried to put the ball in the courts of neighbouring Orissa and Chattisgarh which have been opposing the proposed dam fearing displacement of a large number tribals in their territories.
"You will appreciate that in our federal set-up specific functions such as holding of public hearings have to be performed by the respective states. Andhra Pradesh cannot hold public hearing either in Orissa or Chhattisgarh," Rosaiah said in a letter to Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh.
He argued that instead of asking the neighbouring states to furnish reason for not holding public hearings, the Environment Minister had been directing questions at his government in the matter.
Questioning the need for issuing the show-cause notice, the chief minister also pointed out that his government had been from time to time informing the Environment Ministry about the steps taken by it in the matter as well "inaction and reluctance" of the relevant authorities of Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Taking a serious view of Andhra Pradesh government's inaction in conducting a public hearing on Polavaram project and obtaining a fresh green clearance, the Ministry had written a letter to the state seeking an explanation on the issue.
Rosaiah asked the Environment Ministry to accord its concurrence for construction of protective embankments along the rivers Sabari and Sileru without insisting on public hearing as there was no change in the scope of the project.
Besides, flood protective bunds did not require environmental clearance as per the provisions of EIA Notification, 2006, he added.
The project was granted forest clearance on July 28 by the Environment Ministry with a condition that no land will be submerged in Orissa and Chhattisgarh and public hearing will be conducted in the two states.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Polavaram Politics
Orissa's objections on Polavaram project invalid: Rosaiah
2010-11-03 15:20:00
Last Updated: 2010-11-03 17:03:12
Hyderabad: Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K Rosaiah on Wednesday asserted that the objections raised by Orissa over the construction of multi-purpose Polavaram irrigation project on river Godavari were "not valid."r
Replying to a question during a brief interaction with newsmen in the State Secretariat, the Chief Minister said there was no question of Andhra Pradesh conducting a public hearing on the Polavaram project in Orissa and Chattisgarh as directed by Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF).
"How can we conduct a public hearing in those states? We have already taken adequate measures to prevent submergence of land in those states. The MoEF accorded environmental clearance for Polavaram only after that," Rosaiah pointed out.
The Chief Minister said the state government would "reply suitably" to the MoEF letter seeking an explanation on the construction of Polavaram.
"The Irrigation department will be replying to the MoEF letter. I have been trying to talk to Union Minister of State for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh since yesterday but could not get across to him. I am writing a letter to Jairam today appraising the need for giving early clearance for Polavaram," Rosaiah added.
News and tweets from Hyderabad
The Chief Minister recalled that he had spoken "more than once" with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi and Union Water Resources Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal requesting them to expedite the process of granting national status for Polavaram.
"Not only Polavaram, we are also requesting national status for Pranahita-Chevella lift irrigation project but it is yet to get some clearances from the Centre," he pointed out.
2010-11-03 15:20:00
Last Updated: 2010-11-03 17:03:12
Hyderabad: Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K Rosaiah on Wednesday asserted that the objections raised by Orissa over the construction of multi-purpose Polavaram irrigation project on river Godavari were "not valid."r
Replying to a question during a brief interaction with newsmen in the State Secretariat, the Chief Minister said there was no question of Andhra Pradesh conducting a public hearing on the Polavaram project in Orissa and Chattisgarh as directed by Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF).
"How can we conduct a public hearing in those states? We have already taken adequate measures to prevent submergence of land in those states. The MoEF accorded environmental clearance for Polavaram only after that," Rosaiah pointed out.
The Chief Minister said the state government would "reply suitably" to the MoEF letter seeking an explanation on the construction of Polavaram.
"The Irrigation department will be replying to the MoEF letter. I have been trying to talk to Union Minister of State for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh since yesterday but could not get across to him. I am writing a letter to Jairam today appraising the need for giving early clearance for Polavaram," Rosaiah added.
News and tweets from Hyderabad
The Chief Minister recalled that he had spoken "more than once" with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi and Union Water Resources Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal requesting them to expedite the process of granting national status for Polavaram.
"Not only Polavaram, we are also requesting national status for Pranahita-Chevella lift irrigation project but it is yet to get some clearances from the Centre," he pointed out.
Mahendra Tanaya_Vamshadhara
Mahendratanaya next bone of contention
BHUBANESWAR: At a time when Andhra Pradesh and Orissa governments are involved in a legal fight in the Supreme Court over the Polavaram project, another dam project on the river Mahendratanaya by AP is turning contentious because of increasing local opposition.
The 'Save Mahendratanaya' movement (Mahendratanaya Banchao Andolan) wanted the State Government to move the Supreme Court over the issue as the AP Government had allegedly violated the 1962 agreement between the two states regarding the project.
Criticising the inaction of the State Government, convenor of the movement Srikant Padhi alleged that no action has been taken on the issue though Andhra government is proceeding with the project without any concern for the local people on this side of the border.
The State Government had planned to construct two anicuts on the river Bansadhara Bansadhara integrated project to thwart the designs of the Andhra government. Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had laid the foundation of the two anicuts at Dambapur village on the Mahendratanaya and at Champapur village on the river Jalanga, a tributary of Mahendratanaya on April 30, 2008.
Padhi alleged that though both the projects had received administrative approval, work has not progressed during the last two years. These projects will provide irrigation facilities to thousands of tribals in Gajapati and Rayagada districts and drinking water to Parlakhemundi town, he said.
The seven demands raised by the movement include finalising the tender process of the two projects and immediate start of work. He said construction work should be handed over to the military engineering service if contractors refuse to take up the project because of fear from the Naxals.
A division of the military engineering service should be set up at Parlakhemundi, he said and added that the vacant posts of assistant engineer at Parlakhemundi and junior engineer of the integrated Bansadhara project should be filled up.
After flowing 56 km in Orissa, Mahendratanaya merges in Bansadhara in Andhra Pradesh. The Andhra Pradesh government has started Mahendratanaya project at Meliaput.
BHUBANESWAR: At a time when Andhra Pradesh and Orissa governments are involved in a legal fight in the Supreme Court over the Polavaram project, another dam project on the river Mahendratanaya by AP is turning contentious because of increasing local opposition.
The 'Save Mahendratanaya' movement (Mahendratanaya Banchao Andolan) wanted the State Government to move the Supreme Court over the issue as the AP Government had allegedly violated the 1962 agreement between the two states regarding the project.
Criticising the inaction of the State Government, convenor of the movement Srikant Padhi alleged that no action has been taken on the issue though Andhra government is proceeding with the project without any concern for the local people on this side of the border.
The State Government had planned to construct two anicuts on the river Bansadhara Bansadhara integrated project to thwart the designs of the Andhra government. Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had laid the foundation of the two anicuts at Dambapur village on the Mahendratanaya and at Champapur village on the river Jalanga, a tributary of Mahendratanaya on April 30, 2008.
Padhi alleged that though both the projects had received administrative approval, work has not progressed during the last two years. These projects will provide irrigation facilities to thousands of tribals in Gajapati and Rayagada districts and drinking water to Parlakhemundi town, he said.
The seven demands raised by the movement include finalising the tender process of the two projects and immediate start of work. He said construction work should be handed over to the military engineering service if contractors refuse to take up the project because of fear from the Naxals.
A division of the military engineering service should be set up at Parlakhemundi, he said and added that the vacant posts of assistant engineer at Parlakhemundi and junior engineer of the integrated Bansadhara project should be filled up.
After flowing 56 km in Orissa, Mahendratanaya merges in Bansadhara in Andhra Pradesh. The Andhra Pradesh government has started Mahendratanaya project at Meliaput.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Vamshadhara_ Mahendra Tanaya Banchao Andolan
Orissa must act to counter Andhra Pradesh initiatives: Rashtriya Odia Yubak Pratisthana
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Report by Golakha Chandra Das; Bhubaneswar: It was 2 & ½ year back when Odisha Chief Minister Mr. Naveen Patnaik laid foundation for Bansadhara integrated project on river Mahendratanayaa.
It was the project which can cater the needs of water for irrigation, drinking purpose & electricity production for tribal dominated Gajapati & Rayagada district. Even the plan to construct 2 anikatas is also approved by the state technical committee as well as it got administrative approval. But the Odisha government is doing nothing on this since then. Even if the water resource department is under direct control of Chief Minister, still the department only invited tenders for this project & then it halted.
Where as the Andhra Pradesh Government is constructing the dam on its side with full swing. Odisha Government is just sitting silently observing this. It will be harmful to the people of the above 2 districts.
So Rashtriya Odia Yubak Pratisthana on Sunday in a press meet organized at hotel Keshari, Bbsr criticized the state Government for its apathy towards the Mahendratanayaa project. It blamed that Odisha Govt. is neither doing anything to stop Andhra Govt. nor taking the case to court. The ROYP threatened to start a large scale agitation against such attitude of State Govt. if it will not do anything immediately.
Also it suggests 7point charter to state Govt. 1) to apply in Supreme Court against Andhra Govt. which violates 1962 agreement by constructing project at Meliaputa on its side 2) to invite tender for Jalanga Anikata project 3) to construct immediate 2 proposed Anikatas 4) Govt. take the task by own if no one agreed to build the project 5) the task may be handed over to Military Engineering Service 6) to open a division office at Paralakhemundi 7) to fulfill the vacant post at Paralakhemundi subdivision.
Mr. Srikanta Padhy, national chairman, ROYP & convener, Mahendratanayaa Banchao Andolan addresses the journalist friends on this occasion.
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Report by Golakha Chandra Das; Bhubaneswar: It was 2 & ½ year back when Odisha Chief Minister Mr. Naveen Patnaik laid foundation for Bansadhara integrated project on river Mahendratanayaa.
It was the project which can cater the needs of water for irrigation, drinking purpose & electricity production for tribal dominated Gajapati & Rayagada district. Even the plan to construct 2 anikatas is also approved by the state technical committee as well as it got administrative approval. But the Odisha government is doing nothing on this since then. Even if the water resource department is under direct control of Chief Minister, still the department only invited tenders for this project & then it halted.
Where as the Andhra Pradesh Government is constructing the dam on its side with full swing. Odisha Government is just sitting silently observing this. It will be harmful to the people of the above 2 districts.
So Rashtriya Odia Yubak Pratisthana on Sunday in a press meet organized at hotel Keshari, Bbsr criticized the state Government for its apathy towards the Mahendratanayaa project. It blamed that Odisha Govt. is neither doing anything to stop Andhra Govt. nor taking the case to court. The ROYP threatened to start a large scale agitation against such attitude of State Govt. if it will not do anything immediately.
Also it suggests 7point charter to state Govt. 1) to apply in Supreme Court against Andhra Govt. which violates 1962 agreement by constructing project at Meliaputa on its side 2) to invite tender for Jalanga Anikata project 3) to construct immediate 2 proposed Anikatas 4) Govt. take the task by own if no one agreed to build the project 5) the task may be handed over to Military Engineering Service 6) to open a division office at Paralakhemundi 7) to fulfill the vacant post at Paralakhemundi subdivision.
Mr. Srikanta Padhy, national chairman, ROYP & convener, Mahendratanayaa Banchao Andolan addresses the journalist friends on this occasion.
Polavaram Politics
Orissa to watch AP govt’s action on Polavaram
PTI , The Hindu
Bhubaneswar, November 2, 2010
The Orissa government today said it will maintain a “wait and watch” policy on the controversial Polavaram project following the Centre seeking an explanation from Andhra Pradesh for undertaking work without holding public hearing in areas to be affected in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Orissa government, opposing the multi-purpose project since its conception, had earlier refused to hold a discussion with Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K S Rosaiah.
“A senior Andhra Pradesh official called me yesterday and proposed to hold a discussion on Polavaram issue,” Orissa’s Water Resources Development Secretary Suresh Chandra Mohapatra told reporters adding that the State government is yet to take a decision on the fresh proposal.
As the State government had already moved the Supreme Court opposing the Polavaram project, there was no point in holding talks with Andhra Pradesh, another official said adding Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, in-charge of water resources development department, will decide on Andhra’s request.
Since the matter is sub-judice, the State government should wait for the Apex Court’s judgement, he said.
When the ruling BJD has launched a State-wide stir against Polavaram project, the State government demanded that law of the land be followed in case of Polavaram.
Orissa government is mainly opposed to design of the proposed dam and alleged violation of forest right act (FRA).
Under the present design, about 50 lakh cusec water would flow through the barrage over river Godavari, submerging a large tract of land in Orissa’s Malkangiri district, Mr. Mohapatra said.
To a query on Andhra government’s proposal of building a 30-km-long embankment along rivers Saberi and Saleru in Malkangiri, Mr. Mohapatra said, “Creation of embankment was not in the original plan. These embankments within Orissa territory could affect discharge of water to River Godavari. As a result, a large area could be inundated.”
It was not in accordance with the law to undertake construction work without making an environment assessment impact of the project, he said, adding there were clear guidelines to hold public hearing in affected areas but Andhra Pradesh government had not done so in Malkangiri district.
As the matter was too complicated, Orissa would like to maintain a wait and watch policy before reacting to the MoEF’s letter to Andhra Pradesh government, he said.
In its letter, the ministry has asked Andhra Pradesh government to give details of the construction status of the dam and also explain why a formal show-cause should not be issued (for not following norms).
PTI , The Hindu
Bhubaneswar, November 2, 2010
The Orissa government today said it will maintain a “wait and watch” policy on the controversial Polavaram project following the Centre seeking an explanation from Andhra Pradesh for undertaking work without holding public hearing in areas to be affected in Orissa and Chhattisgarh.
Orissa government, opposing the multi-purpose project since its conception, had earlier refused to hold a discussion with Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K S Rosaiah.
“A senior Andhra Pradesh official called me yesterday and proposed to hold a discussion on Polavaram issue,” Orissa’s Water Resources Development Secretary Suresh Chandra Mohapatra told reporters adding that the State government is yet to take a decision on the fresh proposal.
As the State government had already moved the Supreme Court opposing the Polavaram project, there was no point in holding talks with Andhra Pradesh, another official said adding Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, in-charge of water resources development department, will decide on Andhra’s request.
Since the matter is sub-judice, the State government should wait for the Apex Court’s judgement, he said.
When the ruling BJD has launched a State-wide stir against Polavaram project, the State government demanded that law of the land be followed in case of Polavaram.
Orissa government is mainly opposed to design of the proposed dam and alleged violation of forest right act (FRA).
Under the present design, about 50 lakh cusec water would flow through the barrage over river Godavari, submerging a large tract of land in Orissa’s Malkangiri district, Mr. Mohapatra said.
To a query on Andhra government’s proposal of building a 30-km-long embankment along rivers Saberi and Saleru in Malkangiri, Mr. Mohapatra said, “Creation of embankment was not in the original plan. These embankments within Orissa territory could affect discharge of water to River Godavari. As a result, a large area could be inundated.”
It was not in accordance with the law to undertake construction work without making an environment assessment impact of the project, he said, adding there were clear guidelines to hold public hearing in affected areas but Andhra Pradesh government had not done so in Malkangiri district.
As the matter was too complicated, Orissa would like to maintain a wait and watch policy before reacting to the MoEF’s letter to Andhra Pradesh government, he said.
In its letter, the ministry has asked Andhra Pradesh government to give details of the construction status of the dam and also explain why a formal show-cause should not be issued (for not following norms).
Polavaram Politics
Holes in Polavaram’s great wall
Samar Halarnkar, Hindustan Times
Email Author
November 02, 2010
A 30-km-long, 45-foot-high embankment to stop a river that generates one of the world’s fiercest floods from inundating parts of Orissa and Chhattisgarh is being belatedly questioned by the Centre as it puts on notice one of India’s largest dam projects. The wall escaped attention on Monday when India’s environment boss Jairam Ramesh — smarting from accusations of political bias for cancelling infrastructure in non-Congress states — issued notice to the Polavaram Indira Sagar project in Andhra Pradesh, a state ruled by Ramesh’s own party, the Congress.
The wall, technically an embankment, was one of the ambitious promises made in 2006 by an anxious Andhra Pradesh (AP) government after the Orissa High Court cleared the project on the condition that no people or villages would be displaced in Orissa by the Polavaram dam’s reservoir on the Godavari river and twotributaries.
The project received its final clearance — from the forests division — in September this year.
That clearance is becoming increasingly hard to justify because no studies were done, as environmental laws require, on the land, people and forests the giant embankment would displace. No plans were made for drains and pumps in a cyclone-prone land.
In India there is no reservoir that is restrained by embankments.
In referring to the wall, Monday’s bland notice asked the AP government "why a show-cause notice should not be issued … as work is continuing without getting the environmental clearance amended for additional components like construction of embankments, drainage sluices and pumping arrangements".
"How can anyone now accuse me of bias?" Ramesh, a Congress Member of Parliament from AP, said on Tuesday.
The notice was the first evidence of impartiality from India’s ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA). Polavaram’s irregular clearances led both Orissa and Chhattisgrah to request Supreme Court intervention in 2007.
Yet, both states say they are not impressed with Ramesh’s recent actions.
"At last the ministry has issued a notice, but it is an eyewash," said Surya Narayan Patro, Orissa revenue minister. "The AP government did all kinds of illegal things to push the project but got clearance after clearance."
"We are not opposed to anyone getting water, but what was the hurry in clearing it (Polavaram) and then issuing notices?" N Baijendra Kumar, principal secretary to the Chhattisgarh chief minister, told Hindustan Times. "We share the concerns of the Orissa government."
Allegations of bias from Orissa and Chhattisgarh — both states that could have objected at least 12 times during the Polavaram clearance but soft-pedalled instead — grew after Ramesh’s environment ministry questioned or cancelled clearances this year to high-profile projects as prestigious to them as Polavaram is to Andhra Pradesh.
First proposed in the 1940s, the 150-foot-high Polavaram dam will submerge a greater area than any other in India today. It is vital, observers say, that Ramesh’s ministry now follows its own laws and rescinds clearances that violated its own procedures.
Here are only some examples relating to Polavaram’s great wall:
When the application to clear Polavaram went to the environment ministry on October 19, 2005, there had been no public hearings as required. The first and only public hearings in four districts of AP were held on October 28, three days after the clearance was given.
The minutes of the Environmental Impact Assessment, a requirement, did not even mention that areas in Orissa and Chhattisgarh would be swamped by the tail end of the reservoir, 150 km from the main dam. Only when the two states protested did AP hastily propose a wall, or embankment, in 2006.
In April 2007, the Central Water Commission (CWC) said it was possible to avoid submergence in Orissa and Chhattisgarh by building embankments. Neither the CWC nor any other agency ever explained how, as required.
In February 2009, the ministry’s Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) first cleared the embankments and then called for an impact assessment and public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. None of this was done.
"That decision of the EAC was flawed," said Himanshu Thakkar of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, an advocacy group. "How can Ramesh claim (as he did in a letter to Orissa chief minister Naveen Patnaik in August this year) that not a hectare of forest land will be submerged, when he does not even know how much forest and non-forest land will be required (for the embankment)?"
Monday’s notice reminds AP that despite a reminder, there have been no public hearings in neighbouring states and that construction is continuing (the main dam hasn’t started yet but canal-building is in full swing).
Thakkar argues, as do Orissa and Chhattisgarh, that the condition of "no submergence", as outlined in the September 2010 forest clearance and Ramesh’s assurance, is "impossible to adhere to", that these are grounds enough for cancelling forest clearances.
"The conditions under which Polavaram was cleared were absurb," said Harish Behara, the engineer-in-chief of Orissa’s water resources department, arguing that the great Polavaram embankment could be built on the plains, not on hilly land, as AP now proposes.
With so much wrong, who then cleared Polavaram? It was Ramesh’s cabinet colleague, telecom minister A. Raja, whose methods of issuing telecom licences are, similarly, under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny.
(With Priya Ranjan Sahu in Bhubaneswar)
Samar Halarnkar, Hindustan Times
Email Author
November 02, 2010
A 30-km-long, 45-foot-high embankment to stop a river that generates one of the world’s fiercest floods from inundating parts of Orissa and Chhattisgarh is being belatedly questioned by the Centre as it puts on notice one of India’s largest dam projects. The wall escaped attention on Monday when India’s environment boss Jairam Ramesh — smarting from accusations of political bias for cancelling infrastructure in non-Congress states — issued notice to the Polavaram Indira Sagar project in Andhra Pradesh, a state ruled by Ramesh’s own party, the Congress.
The wall, technically an embankment, was one of the ambitious promises made in 2006 by an anxious Andhra Pradesh (AP) government after the Orissa High Court cleared the project on the condition that no people or villages would be displaced in Orissa by the Polavaram dam’s reservoir on the Godavari river and twotributaries.
The project received its final clearance — from the forests division — in September this year.
That clearance is becoming increasingly hard to justify because no studies were done, as environmental laws require, on the land, people and forests the giant embankment would displace. No plans were made for drains and pumps in a cyclone-prone land.
In India there is no reservoir that is restrained by embankments.
In referring to the wall, Monday’s bland notice asked the AP government "why a show-cause notice should not be issued … as work is continuing without getting the environmental clearance amended for additional components like construction of embankments, drainage sluices and pumping arrangements".
"How can anyone now accuse me of bias?" Ramesh, a Congress Member of Parliament from AP, said on Tuesday.
The notice was the first evidence of impartiality from India’s ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA). Polavaram’s irregular clearances led both Orissa and Chhattisgrah to request Supreme Court intervention in 2007.
Yet, both states say they are not impressed with Ramesh’s recent actions.
"At last the ministry has issued a notice, but it is an eyewash," said Surya Narayan Patro, Orissa revenue minister. "The AP government did all kinds of illegal things to push the project but got clearance after clearance."
"We are not opposed to anyone getting water, but what was the hurry in clearing it (Polavaram) and then issuing notices?" N Baijendra Kumar, principal secretary to the Chhattisgarh chief minister, told Hindustan Times. "We share the concerns of the Orissa government."
Allegations of bias from Orissa and Chhattisgarh — both states that could have objected at least 12 times during the Polavaram clearance but soft-pedalled instead — grew after Ramesh’s environment ministry questioned or cancelled clearances this year to high-profile projects as prestigious to them as Polavaram is to Andhra Pradesh.
First proposed in the 1940s, the 150-foot-high Polavaram dam will submerge a greater area than any other in India today. It is vital, observers say, that Ramesh’s ministry now follows its own laws and rescinds clearances that violated its own procedures.
Here are only some examples relating to Polavaram’s great wall:
When the application to clear Polavaram went to the environment ministry on October 19, 2005, there had been no public hearings as required. The first and only public hearings in four districts of AP were held on October 28, three days after the clearance was given.
The minutes of the Environmental Impact Assessment, a requirement, did not even mention that areas in Orissa and Chhattisgarh would be swamped by the tail end of the reservoir, 150 km from the main dam. Only when the two states protested did AP hastily propose a wall, or embankment, in 2006.
In April 2007, the Central Water Commission (CWC) said it was possible to avoid submergence in Orissa and Chhattisgarh by building embankments. Neither the CWC nor any other agency ever explained how, as required.
In February 2009, the ministry’s Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) first cleared the embankments and then called for an impact assessment and public hearings in Orissa and Chhattisgarh. None of this was done.
"That decision of the EAC was flawed," said Himanshu Thakkar of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, an advocacy group. "How can Ramesh claim (as he did in a letter to Orissa chief minister Naveen Patnaik in August this year) that not a hectare of forest land will be submerged, when he does not even know how much forest and non-forest land will be required (for the embankment)?"
Monday’s notice reminds AP that despite a reminder, there have been no public hearings in neighbouring states and that construction is continuing (the main dam hasn’t started yet but canal-building is in full swing).
Thakkar argues, as do Orissa and Chhattisgarh, that the condition of "no submergence", as outlined in the September 2010 forest clearance and Ramesh’s assurance, is "impossible to adhere to", that these are grounds enough for cancelling forest clearances.
"The conditions under which Polavaram was cleared were absurb," said Harish Behara, the engineer-in-chief of Orissa’s water resources department, arguing that the great Polavaram embankment could be built on the plains, not on hilly land, as AP now proposes.
With so much wrong, who then cleared Polavaram? It was Ramesh’s cabinet colleague, telecom minister A. Raja, whose methods of issuing telecom licences are, similarly, under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny.
(With Priya Ranjan Sahu in Bhubaneswar)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)