PRESS NOTE: 23-11-2015

Tehri Dam affected village get revenue status after 3 decades

 

On 16^th November 2015, The State Government of Uttarakhand recognized Pathri Part-2, Pathri Part-3 and Pathri Part-4 as revenue village renamed as Tehri Bhagirathi Nagar, Ghonti Village, and Chhaam respectively after the proposal by District Magistrate. We congratulate State Government of Uttarakhand, fellows of Matu Jansanghtan and others organizations on this gleeful event.

Since many years, the oustees of Tehri dam are left out from their land rights. Many Project Affected People have been rehabilitated in Pathri Part -1, 2, 3 and 4. In this regard, the issue has been seriously raised many times in petitions pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

We also extend gratitude to the administrative officers after the accomplishment. Since last two – three years, Matu Jansanghthan and other organizations has work with an understanding and pushed the files ahead which resulted in recognition of these rehabilitation sites into revenue villages. In addition, we are also hoping that in the same manner, Uttarakhand Government will soon declare the left out villages such as Pashulok, and Parts of Pathri as revenue villages. The process of giving land rights to displaced people will only complete after recognition of rehabilitation sites as revenue villages.

On this occasion, the displaced people felt it like a relief but at the same time, we also want to bring it to notice that these rights should have been given to them right during the displacement. A whole generation has suffered in the absence of land rights. They have also been through the process when Haridwar District Administration has abandoned them and refused to recognize them as their citizens. This shows the sadistic attitude of the government towards their own people. It also exposed the idea of development by Dams where the oustees are deprived from their basic rights for decades.

We hope, Government will soon complete the rest issues like:

• Since the year of 1978, The Tehri Dam affected people are struggling for the very basic amenities like electricity, water, health services, educational institutions, bank, post offices and also the fencing which can protect the agricultural crops from animals.
• The issue of Landslide across the 40 villages situated on the bank of Tehri Dam reservoir.
• Pending rehabilitation of oustees came out in new survey done in Tehri dam affected areas.
• Make sure for rightful and transparent working of Grievance Redressal Authority.

All these issues along with left rehabilitation work should be accomplished with broader and responsible way with keeping humanitarian values intact.

Vimal bhai and Puran Singh Rana

3 दशकों बाद मिला टिहरी बांध प्रभावित गांवों को राजस्व गांव का दर्जा

उत्तराखंड राज्य सरकार ने 16 नवंबर को जिलाधिकारी के प्रस्ताव पर हरिद्वार के अंर्तगत पथरी भाग दो को टिहरी भागीरथी नगर, पथरी भाग तीन को ग्राम घोंटी व भाग पथरी भाग चार को छाम के नाम से अलग अलग राजस्व ग्राम का दर्जा प्रदान कर दिया है। हम इस महत्ती कार्य के पूर्ण होने पर राज्य सरकार, माटू संगठन सहित विभिन्न संगठनों के कार्यकर्ताओं को बधाई देते है।

बरसो से टिहरी बांध से विस्थापित लोग भूमिधर अधिकार से वंचित रहे है। प्रभावित इलाकों से सब से ज्यादा लोग हरिद्वार के पथरी भाग 1,2,3 व 4 ग्रामीण इलाकों में पुनर्वसित हुए। इस संदर्भ में उच्चतम न्यायालय में चल रहे मुकद्दमों में ये मुद्दा गंभीरता से बार-बार उठाया गया है।

हम इस महत्वपूर्ण कार्य को पूर्ण करने के लिए राज्य सरकार के कर्मचारियों को भी बधाई देते है। लगभग पिछले दो-तीन वर्षाे से अन्य संगठनों व माटू जनसंगठन के साथी राज्य कर्मचारियों के साथ तालमेल बिठाने व संबधित फाइलों को आगे बढ़ाने का काम करते रहे है जिसका नतीजा है की आज ये क्षेत्र राजस्व ग्राम बन पाये है। हमारी अपेक्षा है की सरकार जल्द ही छूटे हुए इलाकों जैसे पशुलोक व पथरी के कुछ इलाकों को भी राजस्व ग्राम घोषित करेगी। राजस्व ग्राम बनने के बाद ही विस्थापितों को भूमिधर अधिकार मिलने की प्रक्रिया पूरी हो पायेगी।

इस ख़ुशी के साथ की विस्थापितों को एक बड़ी राहत मिली है हम यहाँ यह महत्पूर्ण बात भी कहना चाहेंगे की ये अधिकार उन्हें विस्थापन के साथ-साथ मिल जाना चाहिये था। एक पूरी पीढ़ी ने बिना भूमिधर अधिकार के बिना बहुत परेशानियों में समय बिताया है। बरसों तक लोगों ने एक ऐसी स्थिति झेली है जिनमे हरिद्वार जिला प्रशासन ने उनको नागरिक मानने तक से इनकार कर दिया था। एक प्रकार से ये सरकारी उदासीनता का प्रतीक है। साथ ही बांध से विकास के दावे की पोल खोलता है। जहंा लोगो को कई दशकों अपने मूलभूत अधिकारों से वंचित रहना पड़ा है।

हमारी अपेक्षा है की सरकार टिहरी बांध से विस्थापितों के अन्य मुद्दोंः-

• विस्थापित क्षेत्रों में बिजली, पानी, स्वास्थय सेवाएं, शिक्षा व्यवस्था, बैंक, पोस्ट ऑफिस और जानवरों से खेती की सुरक्षा के लिए ताड़-बाड़ जैसी मूलभूत समस्याओं के लिए जिनके लिये विस्थापित 1978 से संघर्ष कर रहे है।
• टिहरी बांध जलाशय के किनारें के लगभग 40 गांवों में भूस्खलन व धसकने की समस्या।
• टिहरी बांध से प्रभावित क्षेत्र के नये सर्वे के बाद जो विस्थापित सामने आये है उनका पुर्नवास।
• शिकायत निवारण प्रकोष्ठ का सही रुप में कार्य होना

इन सब समस्याओं पर अधिक व्यापकता व ज़िम्मेदारी से माननीय दृष्टीकोण रखते हुए छूटे हुए पुर्नवास कार्यों को पूरा करेगी।

विमलभाई व पूरण सिंह राणा

PRESS NOTE 6 November, 2015

 

MATU JANSANGHTHAN ALONG WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANISATIONS COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS (AMENDMENT) BILL 2015

ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANISATIONS, LEGAL INITIATIVE FOR FOREST & ENVIRONMENT, SOUTH ASIA NETWORK ON DAM, RIVER & PEOPLE, MATU JANSANGHTHAN and other environmental organisations sent a letter to Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climet Change (MoEFCC) regarding the concerns of the Draft Environmental Laws (amendment) Bill, 2015.

The concerned of the environmental organisations that registered to the MoEF in the letter, that 15 days is not enough for this kind of critical amendment in environment laws. The effected community does not have way to access your notification and neither aware about it. It is a totally unjust with them. Rather providing the notification on internet, it could be better that MoEFCC make it more publically through newspaper, District magistrate offices till block level and other sources.

There are the few point that environmental organisations concerned and requested to recommend it by the MoEF in the letter

1. An amendment of such magnitude the time period of 15 days is a very short period. It should have been a minimum of 90 days. There should be comprehensive discussions and consultations with a cross section of society.

2. The Bill in its present form also violates India’s international commitment under the Rio Declaration, 1992, specifically Principle 10.

3. The Ministry should have followed at least some of the processes it lays down for public participation, including announcements in newspapers. Citizens of India are affected and they have a right to know and participate.
4. The Bill in its present form does not achieve the stated Objective to provide for “effective deterrent penal provisions and introducing the concept of monetary penalty for violation and contraventions”. The maximum penalty of Rs. 20 crores irrespective of the nature of industry and offence cannot act as a comprehensive deterrent.
5. While the party against whom a penalty is imposed by the Adjudicating Authority can directly approach the National Green Tribunal (NGT), the affected citizens have to go through a process which is complicated if the penalised party fails to pay the penalty. By doing so, the Bill favours the guilty over those affected by the offense.
6. The Bill curtails the powers of the NGT to award compensation and damages and the NGT will be made accessible only for polluting units for redressal of their grievances and not for affected people. The Bill favours the guilty over those affected by the offense.
7. The proposed Adjudicating Authority is only an executive body which is neither independent nor capable of being independent. It lacks the required qualifications of judicial and technical experts of the NGT.
8. The Central Government has not shown that it has the required administrative will and willingness to provide resources for setting up the Authorities in various States. The 186th Report of the Law Commission has also raised serious concerns with respect to the manner in Authorities under various environmental statutes are functioning. Under the circumstance, no further Authorities should be constituted without further serious deliberations.
9. The Adjudicating Authority is to have a person who is “qualified to be” a District Judge. Qualification to be a District Judge cannot substitute experience of a District Judge. The Supreme Court has opined that all appellate authorities and tribunals should be headed by a retired High Court judge.
10. There is no scientific and legal basis for categorising offences as “substantial”, “non substantial” and “minor”. For certain categories of industries the damage near the project site can be more than the damage beyond 5 kms. Yet the penalty is the least for damages within 5 kms. Also, there is no basis for deciding on 5 kms.
11. The Bill suffers from excessive delegation as the definition of the terms “substantial”, “non substantial” and “minor” are to be defined by the executive. They should be defined in the statute.

In the letter the environmental organisations concerned about a serious limitations and problems with the current Bill. Environmental organisations requested to Ministry of environment, forest and climate change to conduct wide, public oriented consultations on the Bill and transparently address the objections received. This entire process was missing even while drafting the High Level Subramanian Committee dated 29^th August 2014, Report, which resulted in a seriously flawed and problematic report.

It’s a hard concerned that how the ministry involved in the flaws and making the policies that favour the project proponents. It’s to be remembered that MoEFCC was sated up with the aim to make a critical eye on the environment condition but it’s seem that the ministry plays a vice-versa role, and its not be accepted. Policy makers must understand that environment safe guard policies very much associated with economic policies. We cannot forget that environmental hazards reimburse by a huge amount of money and the recent example is Uttrakhand June 2013 calamity in which dam played a big role.

Vimalbhai and Puran Singh Rana