From: Initiative India <initiativeindia@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Subject: [initiative-india] Narmada Canals: SC issues notices to GoMP - Expert Commitee disapproves NVDA's Plans
To:
Date: 25th September, 2010
Supreme Court issues notices to Government in the case of
Omkareshwar and Indira Sagar Project (Canals)
Reply of GoMP sought on violation of court's directions pertaining to the environmental plans and land-based rehabilitation: Next hearing on Oct 20th
A Special Three Judge Bench of Justice Deepak Verma, Justice J.M. Panchal and Justice B.S Chauhan issued notices to the Government of Madhya Pradesh (GoMP) and the Narmada Valley Development Authority (NVDA) to respond to three applications filed by Narmada Bachao Andolan, alleging serious violation and contempt of two interim orders dated 25-02-2010 and 05-05-2010 pertaining to environmental and rehabilitation aspects of the Indira Sagar and Omkareshwar canals.
Disposing of an application for urgent hearing filed by NBA, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued these notices directing GoMP and NVDA to file their replies within three weeks from the date or order i.e. 14-09-2010 and directed issue of special notice by dasti to the Ministry of Environment and Forests. MoEF is yet to take a position and decision on the canal-related command areas plans of the GoMP which have already been rejected by its own Expert Committee for being incomplete and against the stipulated guidelines. The Court has also permitted NBA and Narmada Control Authority to file their rejoinders within a week of reply filed by GoMP & NVDA.
It may be noted that the work on the two canal projects and the related land acquisition has been stayed since July 2009 and later since November 2009 by the orders of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in view of the large scale impacts on the irrigated agricultural land, water logging, salinization, impacts on flora and fauna, health as also pending rehabilitation of thousands of canal affected families. Subsequently, when the GoMP and NVDA went in appeal to the Supreme Court against this judgement, the Apex Court directed a temporary and conditional vacation of the High Court's stay on 25-02-2010, subjecting the same to the approval of the CAD Plans of NVDA by Devender Pandey Experts Committee and the MoEF within 10 weeks.
The Pandey Committee has given not one, but two scathing reports; one in April and the other in July 2010, categorically concluding that what the GoMP/NVDA has submitted is not a 'Plan' at all and hence the same cannot be approved. Proving the NVDA statements that it had already submitted a CAD plan for Omkareshwar in 1992 as false, the Committee has accused the 'Authority of trying to justify its failures and actions by making self-contradictory and misleading statements". Even in its latest report, the Committee has reiterated its stand that the CAD Plans of GoMP cannot be approved and has in fact suggested that the "conditional permission given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for excavation or construction of canal work may be withdrawn".
Since no decision was forthcoming from MoEF even after the expiry of ten full weeks, NBA issued a Legal Notice in June 2010 and within months' time filed an Interim Application before the Supreme Court seeking appropriate directions and actions from the Court regarding violation of its Interim Order.
Violation of the Interim Order on Rehabilitation: Court seeks reply:
The Apex Court had issued another Interim Order of 05-05-2010, granting interim relief to the 'severely affected' land holders losing 60% or more land. However, NVDA has not provided land in the vicinity of the village or in the command area even to a single CAF but has only offered uncultivable, un-irrigated or encroached land from the land bank and has been compelling the affected persons to accept cash compensation. This has been challenged by the NBA and the affected persons in the Supreme Court through a separate application, seeking appropriate directions.
It is established that the NVDA does not have final and complete information as to how much land would be acquired for the entire canal network and how many families would be affected. The GoMP itself has admitted in its data submitted to NCA in July 2010 that with regard to the 60% or more Omkareshwar canal-affected landholders, there is only information pertaining to 57 villages (out of 206), while the number of families to be affected only by the main and branch canals is stated to be 11,835 till now.
Is destruction through canals in fully irrigated belt necessary and justified?
The High Court in in its judgement of November 2009 has already stated that the canal network must be planned in such a way so as to avoid destruction of prime agriculture land, minimize displacement and avoid wasteful expenditure from the state exchequer in the irrigated river bank villages that are already affected by Sardar Sarovar and Maheshwar Projects. But the state Government has provided highly underestimated and out dated figures of irrigation in this area before the Supreme Court and despite people's strong and continuing protest, is pushing the land acquisition process and excavation which is to result in unnecessary and unjustifiable destruction of land and livelihood of the people. All these issues are yet to be argued before and decided by the Supreme Court and the challenge in the field and the Court shall intensify.
Medha Patkar Devram Kanera Ranveer Tomar Shailabh Kumar
Contact: 09423965153 / 09179148973/07290-222464
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Initiative India" group.
To post to this group, send email to initiative-india@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to initiative-india+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/initiative-india?hl=en.
--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment