bachawat Tribunal faulty on polabvaram award

Polavaram  award by Bachawat tribunal is illegal and disastrous 
https://sites.google.com/site/shivajirao32/defectiveclearncesforpolavaram[illegalities in clearences]
                                              Prof.T.Shivaji Rao,
                                                               Director for Environmental studies,
                                                             Gitam university, Visakhapatnam, India
https://gandhipv.wordpress.com/2014/07/19/decoding-godavari-breaching-papikondalu/comment-page-1/#comment-470[Humanists among lakhs of indians abroad who are patriots,a rare species amongN,R.I.'s
https://sites.google.com/site/shivajirao32/defectiveclearncesforpolavaram[illgalities in clearences]

            The polavaram dam is proposed to be constructed across the river Godavari at polavaram village in west Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh . sir. Arthur cotton completed the Anicut  at Dowleswaram to Utilize the river water for growing crops in several lakhs of Acres in Godavari delta  region,. When the project made a tremendous success he felt that the additional flood water still wastefully joining the sea in Bay of Bengalcan beused.he recommended that the upper reaches of the districts can also be irrigated by constructing another waterand flood diversion structure in a location upstream of Rajahmundry town. French experts also made similar suggestions .The Madras state Government directed the Engineers to take up such a project. During 1940’s  the chief engineer of the state Government proposed a huglarge-scale project known as Ramapada sagarDam and for this purpose a concrete dam was proposed near polavaram . But after investigations, it was found to be too- expensive as the foundation had to be taken for  200ft depth from bed to the rock level in the riverd. Ultimately thisdam was given up due to abnormal cost and difficulties in construction.Now Polavaram dam project is facing similar problems and it also needs to be modified.

            Due to the growing needs of water for drinking irrigation and Industries of visakhapatnam, the project was revived by changing the proposed  concrete dam into a barrage in June 1970 and was submitted to the Bachawat tribunal on Godavari water disputes [G.W.D.T.]on 7.8.1970 and it was marked as Exhibit: No. M.R.G. 34, volume A.P.P.G- 5.This project should have been immediately approved.

            The project was conceived as a barrage by the most experienced irrigation  expert’s who followed the prevailing guidelinesand commonsense which envisage  that when there are large human habitations commercial and Industrial establishments in the downstream vicinity, a barrage will be preferred for such a locality. If there is a water storage behindsuch a dam. It will sometimes work as a water bomb, and when it’ fails for one reason or the other. The stored water becomes flowing water and a huge wall of flood water and causes damage downstream,, creating a flood havoc that kills many people, cattle, and destroys,crops valuable propertiesand commercial, and Industry complexes. If such a  dam causes tolerable  damages then only a dam should be considered for such a location. The then experts knew that several dams have failed in India and other countries, causing loss of life and economic losses too. In the case of polavarm  with in  about 30k.m. distance. There are many villagers and Industrial towns like, Kovvuru, and Megacities, like Rajahmundry with huge population and many villages downstream of the project. (1).In order to avoid such damage due to a dam burst they suggested that only a barrage as a diversion work must be located at polavarm(2) But due to westred interests  among the emerging currupt politicians, officials and contractors Andhra Pradesh state converted polavaram barrage into a earth and rock-fill dam with storage reservoir of 200 T.M.C.  and a placed this polavaram  dam project before the tribunal, In May 1978. The tribunal failed to know why a dam is proposed for a barrage.

            The foundation stone for the polavaram dam project was laid by Dr.Y.S.R. Reddy chief minister. while the previous chief ministers sri T.Anjayya aid the foundation for polavaram barrage project in 1982, at the same location. In 1986 parliament passed a bill on environment protection bill and it became  a  law in 1986. Under this act all major development  projects have to prepare the environmental impact assessment reports,(E.I.A.)  risk assessment and dam break analysis, along with disaster management report and also emergency action plans (E.A.P.)  for ensuring  safety of the project and the people downstream. If the polavaram project was completed by 1985 on the basis of interstate agreement dated 3.4.1980 the problem of securing environmental clearance from the union Government would not have arisal. Since 2004 environmentalists were opposing this dam on the ground that it bursts 50 lakhs of people in Godavari delta will be killed and about 4 lakhs of tribal’s and weaker section will be displaced due to inundation and backwater effect of the dam. Hence tribals began to oppose this project. At present work on this project was stopped by the union Ministry of environment for the reason that A.P. state did not obtain consent of the people of Orissa, and Chattisgarh, who will be affected by the floods and backwater levels likely to be built due to polavaram dam. During March 2005, a farmer legislator of Orissa Mr. Laxman Munda filed writ petition in the Orissa high court requesting it to stop this project, and the court ordered on 26.3.2006 that the polavaram dam construction can proceed provided there is no sub-mersion of lands- Forest lands and displacement of people of Orissa. This order was accepted by union Government, and its concern  departments. So the union ministry of environment ministry of tribal affairs toldAndhra pradesh state that this condition must be incorporated. In the letters of clearance given by them for this project.
 Bachawat tribunal ordered that FRL of polavaram dam must be fixes at + 150  at polavaram . While the upper states insisted that their lands and villages should not be inundated beyond + 150 feet. Rl at Motu of Orissa and Konta of Chattishgarh. This is a serious contradiction . How can the tribunal order that FRL of polavaram be fixed at + 150 Rl while simultaneously insisting that design of the dam must be entirely left to the central water commission. This is another serious contradiction because the design parameters of fixing FRL was made by the tribunal itself without giving a chance to C.W.C. to do its duty as per standards . Moreover the tribunal stated that the design must be based on maximum flood discharge of 36 lakhs cusecs  and simultaneously stated that the design must be based on peak flood on the advice of C.W.C . But the tribunal itself decided the peak flood at 36 lakhs cusecs without allowing the C.W.C. to make its own technical caliculations. This grave mistake , of the tribunal was corrected by C.W.C. which raised the peak flood from 36 to 50 lakhs cusecs due to the  devastating floods of Godavari in August 2006 . The order of the tribunal regarding F.R.L. of 150 feet Rl for polavaram dam and peak flood of  36 lakhs cusecs cannot be reconciled and hence it is illegal . Moreover, by ordering C.W.C. to fix the peak flood the tribunal itself took the responsibility and fixed it at 36 lacks cusecs and thereby entered into an area of Hydrology in which the tribunal has no competence  hence the tribunal commited a grave error .

            The states of Orissa and  Andhra pradish agree for the construction of polavaram project of the state of Andhra Pradesh, so that the maximum submersion in the state of Orissa territory at motu/Konta does not exceed RL+ 150ft, due to all effects including backwater effect. The polavaram project shall be designed for the maximum probable flood in consultation with the central water commission so as not to exceed the limit of submergence mentioned above. For the submerged lands and properties both the Government as well as private parties, the cost of compensation and rehabilitation  on the basis of the norms in vogue in the state of Orissa at the time of the construction of the projects shall be charged to the project. Model villages with facilities etc., shall be constructed at the cost of the project before the submergence actually takes place.

            Mistakes by Bachawat Tribunal

           

          7.(a)       Subject to the clearance of polavaram project by the central water commission for FRL/MWL plus 150 ft. state of Andhra Pradesh agrees that a quantity of 80 TMC at 75 percent dependability of Godavari waters from polavaram project can be diverted into Krishna river above Vijayawada Anicut displacing the dischargers from Nagarjunasagar project for Krishna delta, thus enabling the use of the said 80 TMC for projects upstream of Nagarjunasagar.

(b)        The states of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka agree that the said quantity of 80 TMC shall be shared in the proportion of Andhra Pradesh  45 TMC, Karnataka and Maharashtra together 35 TMC.

            (c)        Andhra Pradesh agrees to submit the poalvaram project report to central water commission within three months  of reaching an over- all agreement on Godavari waters among the five party states.

            (d)        Andhra Pradesh agrees to  bear the cost of diversion fully.

            (e)        Maharashtra and Karnataka are at liberty to utilize their share of 35 TMC mentioned in sub-para7(b) above from the date of clearance of the polavaram project by central water commission with FRL/MWL of plus 150ft., irrespective of the actual diversion taking place.( the above 17 lines are part of the agreement dated 4^th August 1978.The tribunal wanted to modify the agreement on the basis of the following reasons.In the two following paragraphs.)

            The central water commission , shall no doubt take care that such lowering of FRL/MWL will be to the minimum extent possible under the circumstances of the case. Taking this view of the matter we are making some modifications as mentioned hereinafter in the Agreement of 4--8-1978                           claims of the Tribunal powers to modify the agreement of 4-8-1978
=============================================================

            The tribunal has power to modify the Agreement dated the 4^th August, 1978 to bring it into harmony with the other two Agreements. The Indus commission whole referring  to the order of the Government of India made on the most part with the consent of the units concerned observed “If owing to material  errors in the original data, or a material change in river conditions, or other sufficient cause, those orders are now found to be inequitable, and if a more equitable arrangements can be discovered in present circumstances, with due regard to the interest of all the units concerned, the original orders may properly be modified. This implies of course that a modification of the orders in one particular may necessitate consequential modifications in other particulars by way of redressing the balance between the several units” . Similarly the Anderson committee recommended that circumstances may arise  justifying review of an agreement which is no longer equitable. The committee found that the Satlej Agreement of 1920 required modification and this finding was upheld by the Government of India ( see report of the Indus commission, volume I,p. 120, item26)

            Considering all the aspects of the matter, we direct that the Agreement of the 4^th  August , 1978 between the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh be modified as follows:-

            “In clause 7 (a) after the words FRL/MWL plus 150ft” and in clause 7 (e) after the words FRL/MWL of plus 150ft” , the following words be added:-

            “or such other FRL/MWL as the central Water commission may find necessary and Technically  feasible , keeping in view that as far as possible (i) all the areas of the state of Andhra Pradesh mentioned in the polavaram project Report of May, 1978 and polavaram project stage 1 of March 1978 are brought under irrigation (ii) the other benefits mentioned  in the said Reports of the state of Andhra Pradesh are realized, and (iii) water to the extent of 80 T.M.C. or more is diverted to the river Krishna”.(The tribunal made further modification as noted below)

“After clause 7 (a) the following proviso’’ be added

            “Provided that the excess submergence over and above the natural submergence due to all effects including backwater effect on account of the construction of the polavaram Dam does not exceed the limits mentioned in the Agreement  dated the 7^th August 1978 between the states Of  Maharashhtra, Madhya Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh and the Agreement dated the 15^th December 1978 between the states of Andhra Pradesh and Orissa or in any other agreement that may be entered  into here after”.     In our final order, the Agreement dated the 4^th August , 1978 between the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh shall stand  amended as aforesaid.  For more detailed information kindly go through the following websites.http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2015/04/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none.html.http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2015/04/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none.htmlhttp://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2015/04/engineers-mistakes-on-polavaram-dam-prof.html

Note:- The above map is place on this website by the Author from his personel copy of the state Government report an Environmental impact of polavaram project .The Author got this copy as he was an expert member of the Environmental apraiser commitee of the A.P. state Government during 1984 and 1985 when this report was sent to the union ministry of Environment and forest. This plan clearly shows that we have caliculated the backwatetr effect of polavaram dam by keeping F.R.L. of project at 150 feet elevation. It also shows that the submersion of Lands and villages and forests in Orissa will extend up to 200feet elevation . But A.P. state Government ignored this expert advice and assumed that the maximum submersion will be limited to only 150 feet elevation in submercible areas of Orissa. THis clearly shows that the Bachawat award conditions have been deleberately violated.

             Environmental conditions that canot be fulfilled

            Bachawat tribunal faulty on polavaram award
                                                                 prof.T. Shivaji Rao,
                                           Director center for Environmental studies, 
                                                      Gitam university, Visakhapatnam
http://www.orissadiary.com/CurrentNews.asp?id=14867 [orissa HHHhhIGH courtorder against polavaram dam]
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2010/06/polavaram-dam-design-engineers-mistakes.html 
http://www.indiawaterportal.org/articles/barrages-would-prevent-polavaram-dam-being-economic-a 
http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2015/06/polavaram-dam-illegal-and-disastrous_95.html 


 

Under paragraphs 119  and 120 of the Bachawat tribunal first  report of 1979 the tribunal  notified certain changes in the interstate agreement on polavaramis in harmony project Dated. 4.8.1978 to bring with another two agreements dated 7^th August 1978 and 15.12.1978. Consequently tribunal made modifications for reconciling the above three  agreements. In order to highlight these mistakes made  in modifying, the following extracts are presented here under with the comments presented ie at the end.   

The contents of the agreement dated 4.8.1978 are presented below: by the deviding them under several paragraphs 7(a) , (b),and (e).Comments are also made by Author .
       

    Paragraph-1 Agreement clause 7(a)   Subject to the clearence of polavaram project by the central water commision for FRL /MWL plus 150 ft the stateof Andhra pradesh agrees that a quantity of 80 TMC at 75 percent dependability of Godavari waters from polavaram project can be diverted into krishna river above Vijayawada Anicut, displacing the discharges from Nagarjunasagar project for Krishna delta, thus, enabling the use of the said 80 TMC for projects upstream of Nagarjunasagar.

     Paragraph-2  Agreement clauses  (b) The states of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka agree that the said quantity of 80 TMC shall be shared in the proportion of Andhra Pradesh  45 TMC, Karnataka and Maharashtra together 35 TMC.           (c)            Andhra Pradesh agrees to submit the poalvaram project report to central water commission within three months  of reaching an over- all agreement on Godavari waters among the five party states.           (d)   Andhra Pradesh agrees to  bear the cost of diversion fully.

Paragraph-3    (e)       Maharashtra and Karnataka are at liberty to utilize their share of 35 TMC mentioned in sub-para7(b) above from the date of clearance of the polavaram project by central water commission with FRL/MWL of plus 150ft., irrespective of the actual diversion taking place.( the above 17 lines are part of the agreement dated 4^th August 1978.The tribunal wanted to modify the agreement on the basis of the following reasons.In the two following paragraphs.)

Paragraph-4. Intention of Tribunal  to modify agreement of 4.8.1978.

            The central water commission , shall no doubt take care that such lowering of FRL/MWL will be to the minimum extent possible under the circumstances of the case. Taking this view of the matter we are making some modifications as mentioned hereinafter in the Agreement dated the 4^th August 1978.

Paragraph-5    The tribunal has power to modify the Agreement dated the 4^th August, 1978 to bring it into harmony with the other two Agreements. The Indus commission while referring  to the order of the Government of India made on the most part with the consent of the units concerned observed “If owing to material  errors in the original data, or a material change in river conditions, or other sufficient causes, those orders are now found to be inequitable, and if a more equitable arrangements can be discovered in present circumstances, with due regard to the interest of all the units concerned, the original orders may properly be modified. This implies of course that a modification of the orders in one particular may necessitate consequential modifications in other particulars by way of redressing the balance between the several units” . Similarly the Anderson committee recommended that circumstances may arise  justifying review of an agreement which is no longer equitable. The committee found that the Satlej Agreement of 1920 required modification and this finding was upheld by the Government of India ( see report of the Indus commission, volume I,p. 120, item26)

Paragraph-6    Considering all the aspects of the matter, we direct that the Agreement of the 4^th  August , 1978 between the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh be modified as follows:-

(a) principal amendment :(Addition of words)

            “In clause 7 (a) after the words FRL/MWL plus 150ft” and in clause 7 (e) after the words FRL/MWL of plus 150ft” , the following words be added:-

            “or such other FRL/MWL as the central Water commission may find necessary and Technically  feasible , keeping in view that as far as possible (i) all the areas of the state of Andhra Pradesh mentioned in the polavaram project Report of May, 1978 and polavaram project stage 1 of March 1978 are brought under irrigation (ii) the other benefits mentioned  in the said Reports of the state of Andhra Pradesh are realized, and (iii) water to the extent of 80 T.M.C. or more is diverted to the river Krishna”.(The tribunal made further modification as noted below)

(b) Supplementary amendment : (Addition of new provision)

 “After clause 7 (a) the following proviso’’ be added

            “Provided that the excess submergence over and above the natural submergence due to all effects including backwater effect on account of the construction of the polavaram Dam does not exceed the limits mentioned in the Agreement  dated the 7^th August 1978 between the states Of  Maharashhtra, Madhya Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh and the Agreement dated the 15^th December 1978 between the states of Andhra Pradesh and Orissa or in any other agreement that may be entered  into here after”.

Paragraph -7 

In our final order, the Agreement dated the 4^th August , 1978 between the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh shall stand  amended as aforesaid.

Paragraph-8 comments :    Errors committed  by Tribunal.

Explanations

1.   The first paragraph deals with the transfer of 80T.M.C.  of water from Godavari into Krishna river, so that this  80T.M.C.         can be drawn from storages above  Nagarjuna sagar for utilization for 45 T.M.C. BY Andhra Pradesh 22 T.M.C.  by Maharashtra and 13 T.M.C. BY Karnataka.

2.Second paragraph deals with the remaining clauses under section 7 of the agreement dated 4.8.1978.

3.The third paragraph shows the intension of the tribunal; to modify agreement dated 4.8.1978 to bring it into harmony with the  other agreements of 7.8.1978 and 15.12.1978.

4.The intension of tribunal to modify agreement of 4.8.1978.

5.The fifth paragraph deals with the reasons adduced by the tribunal to take power to modify the agreement of 4.8.1978.

6.The sixth paragraph deals with the  principal  and the supplementary amendment of agreement dated 4.8.1978.

7. The seventh paragraph deals with the promise of the tribunal to incorporate the above modifications in the final order regarding the agreement of 4.8.1978.

Errors

1.The tribunal failed to in corporate a statement that their award can also be modified  for the same reasons, stated in paragraph 4 above.

2.The tribunal failed to incorporate both the principal and supplementary amendments in the final order of the tribunal.

3.As promised under paragraph seven the tribunal failed to incorporate the principal and supplementary amendments in the agreement dated 4.8.1978 in their final order. 4.The tribunal failed to incporporate the principal and supplementary amendment in the agreement dated 3.4.1980 as per the condition (iii) of the principal amendment.

           

           

                                   

           

Add caption
Unattainable Environmental clearences conditions by Andhra pradesh state Government
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=49885 

Rehabilitation Issues of Polavaram Dam Project

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=49885 [conditions on polavaram]

The Investment clearance to original cost of Indira Sagar (Polavaram) Project was accorded by the Planning Commission on 25.02.2009 for Rs. 10151.04 Crore (PL-2005-06) subject to certain conditions, which inter-alia include that :

i. The project authorities shall comply with the conditions stipulated in the Ministry of Environment and Forest letter No J-12011/74/2005-IA.I. dated 25.10.05 and J-12011/40/2002-IA.I. dated 25.04.06 regarding environmental clearance.

ii. The project authorities shall comply with the conditions stipulated in the Ministry of Tribal Affairs letter no 20011/15/2005-CP&R(NGO) Dated 17th April 2007 and letter no 20011/15/2005-CP&R(NGO) Dated 24th May 2007 regarding R&R clearance for Project Affected Scheduled Tribe families.

iii. The project authorities shall comply with the conditions stipulated in the 95th meeting minutes of the Advisory Committee of Ministry of Water Resources.

As per the Environmental Clearance from Ministry of Environment and Forest , Government of India, a total of 1,93,357 persons are likely to be affected due t construction of Polavaram Project, out of that 1,75,275 persons from Andhra Pradesh, 6,316 persons from Orissa and 11,766 from Chhattisgarh would be affected. As per the clearance of Resettlement & Rehabilitation (R & R) Plan for Scheduled Tribe Project Affected Families (ST PAFs) from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) , Polavaram Project would displace about 73,000 Scheduled Tribe persons in 299 villages in the States of Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Chhattisgarh with the maximum number being in Andhra Pradesh ( 60,770 ST persons in 276 villages). MoTA has granted clearance to the R & R Plan for ST PAFs for the project subject to Fulfillment of following conditions:

(a) The Government of Andhra Pradesh shall ensure that no submergence and displacement of people including Scheduled Tribes (STs) takes place in the territories of States of Orissa and Chhattisgarh.

(b) For the resettlement and rehabilitation of ST PAFs in respect of Andhra Pradesh, the Government of Andhra Pradesh shall follow their R & R Plan, in accordance with the provisions of National Policy on Resettlement and Rehabilitation, 2003.

(c) The State Government of Andhra Pradesh shall provide land to STs in lieu of the land acquired for the construction of project from them in the command of the project, and preferably within the Scheduled Area if the command area and Scheduled Area are co-terminus.

(d) The Government of Andhra Pradesh shall ensure that the R & R Plan is implemented and completed within a specified time schedule before the submergence in any area starts taking place.

(e) The Government of Andhra Pradesh shall ensure a better livelihood with dignity for the STs in the new set up and surroundings.

(f) All the rights and privileges enjoyed by STs in their original habitat shall be protected by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in the new set up.

There will be no submergence and displacement of people including Scheduled Tribes (STs) in the State of Orissa and Chhattisgarh after construction of protective embankment. Out of 276 villages to be displaced in Andhra Pradesh, 5 villages were shifted and balance 271 villages are to be shifted. During the year 2011-12, it is proposed by State Goernment to rehabilitate 105 villages.

The State Government has informed that there is adequate provision towards compensation and rehabilitation as per State Government R & R Policy.

The Minister of State in the Ministry Of Water Resources and Minority Affairs Shri Vincent H. Pala gave this information in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha today.

YSK/RS
(Release ID :78016)