Sunday, 18 December 2011

{DUU-29} Tehri Dam Case 06-02-07

Complete the rehabilitation till 31st March
Next hearing will be on10th April 2007.
Project Name: Tehri Dam Project (1000+1000+400 MW)
Rivers: Bhagirathi -Bhilangna
Agency: Tehri Hydro Development Corporation (THDC)
Environmental Clearance granted on 19-7-1990

The Tehri Dam case of N. D. Jayal & another vs. Union of India & Others where issues concerning environment and rehabilitation were considered by the Supreme Court came up before the bench consisting of the Chief Justice, Justice D.K. Jain and Justice Sirpurkar on 6-2-2007. After hearing arguments, the court directed the UOI, MOEF, THDC and the State of Uttarakhand to complete the rehabilitation of the oustees affected between EL-790 meters to 840 meters by 31st March 2007 and submits an affidavit before the Court. The court also gave an opportunity to the petitioner to put on record the facts indicating non rehabilitation of oustees between 760-790 meters against the claim of the State of Uttarakhand that all oustees between 760 to 790 meters have been rehabilitated. The Supreme Court will consider the rehabilitation and implementation of the environmental conditions on the next date of hearing i.e. 10th April 2007.
Arguments in the Supreme Court:-
Advocate Sanjay Parikh who is working on Tehri Case since 1992 put the history of the Tehri case in the court. He argued that in its order of 1-9-2003 the apex court said that prior to closing of diversion tunnels T1/T2 for impoundment of the reservoir, evacuation; resettlement and rehabilitation are completed in all respects.
It was never the question of completing the rehabilitation till 760M-790M of reservoir level. Total dam height is 840M from the sea level. Now the situation is that the ocean is ahead and the affected person has to run away. The pari-pasu term was related with the engineering work of the dam not with the filling of reservoir as it was wrongly defined by the Uttarakhand High Court in its order dated 29-10-2005. And that is why we challenged the High Court order in the Apex Court.
It is in the Sardar Sarovar of Narmada where authorities have to complete rehabilitation and environment condition before taking permission to raise the height of the dam wall. Where in Tehri Dam there was no Environmental Impact Assessment, it is rock fill dam and dam work has been completed earlier.
The aim of environment conditional clearance was to save the hardship of the affected people and to take necessary action for protecting environment but it is not followed. Since 2002 govt. is filing affidavits that they will complete the bridge before submergence and still they are saying same after the submergence. Grievance Redressal machinery is not functioning. No command area operational.
Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, who was arguing Kishor Upadhayay Vs. GOI and another elegits the authorities that he gave a list of problems to the authorities after doing village by village survey but answer is only—under consideration, we will do, money has been sanction etc. not the real benefits given to the affected persons of this list.
Central Monitoring Committing only visited 4 villages till now.
Additional Solicitor General B. Dutta we have done the rehabilitation till 790 M.
Development for all. Not only for few.

No comments:

Post a Comment