National Water Development Agency

Ken-Betwa: No Cost Analysis or Environment Impact Study, Structures Make Way into Project

Several new structures, including barrages and pick-up weirs, which were initially not part of the draft Memorandum of Agreement were added at the last minute through a manipulative choice of words, like ‘repair’ for ‘reconstruction’.

Note: This is the fifth in a six-part series on the Ken-Betwa Link Project. Read the first, second, third and fourth parts.

New Delhi: On March 22, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched the ‘Jal Shakti Abhiyan: Catch the Rain’ campaign on World Water Day, pointing out the importance of water conservation, he also witnessed the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) for the ambitious Ken-Betwa Link project (KBLP).

Eulogising Modi and his governance in his address, the moderator of the programme said: “All of us have seen buildings of development once they have been constructed, but very few of us are fortunate enough to see the foundation stone being laid. Today, all of us have the privilege to witness that historic moment in the august presence of Honourable Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as the foundation stone is laid for what will later become an edifice of development.”

After this introductory address, Gajendra Singh Shekhawat, the Union jal shakti minister, Yogi Adityanath, the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, and Shivraj Singh Chouhan, the chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, signed the tripartite agreement on the KBLP which had been pending for several years and is viewed as a grave environmental threat to the country by experts who have demanded its withdrawal.

Whether or not the project will mark a milestone in the history of India’s development, only time will tell. But the government certainly seems to be in a hurry to launch the KBLP, calling it the ‘Bhishma Pratigya‘ (passionate pledge) of the late former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and flouting several rules to implement it.

Such was the Modi government’s haste to begin implementing the KBLP that a clause for the construction of several new structures, including barrages and pick-up weirs, was incorporated in the MoA even though there had been no evaluation of the additional expenditure and ecological impact of these structures.

Also read: Ignoring Damning SC Panel Report, Modi Govt Kickstarts Work on Ken-Betwa Link Project

This provision found its way into the draft of the final MoA via jal shakti ministry’s manipulative choice of words, as revealed in documents obtained by The Wire under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

Downplayed information

During the period from 2017 and until the time MoA was signed, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh had been at loggerheads over water-sharing during the non-monsoon or lean season, even after major requisite clearances were obtained for KBLP. This led to constant delays in the planning of the project.

The venture was also delayed due to environmental and ecological concerns raised by various sections of civil society.

A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on possible water-sharing in the future that had been signed by Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh in 2005 had envisaged that Uttar Pradesh would draw 1,700 million cubic metres (MCM) of water from the project whenever the project was implemented.

But in 2017, when the Uttar Pradesh government demanded 935 MCM of the total allocated amount in the lean season, the Madhya Pradesh government strongly objected and agreed to provide only 700 MCM.

One cubic meter of water equals 1,000 litres while one MCM contains one billion litres.

Ken River. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra.

To resolve the contentious issue, the Centre recommended measures that would involve the construction of many additional structures under the KBLP. However, clearances for these structures from the relevant environmental departments have not been sought.

The final agreement states that 750 MCM out of the total amount of water sought by Uttar Pradesh in the lean season will be provided from the KBLP, while the rest will be supplied from three sources: water harvested in tanks in Mahoba district, remodelled or repaired or strengthened hydro structures in the area and new barrages.

But none of these sources have been mentioned in the project’s environmental impact assessment report.

In the first phase of the project, a 77-metre high and 2,031-metre-long dam will be constructed at Daudhan village, located near the river Ken.

In addition, a 221-km long Ken-Betwa link canal will be constructed which will divert water from the Ken to the Betwa basin. Two tunnels of 1.9 km and 2.5 km length will also be constructed.

In view of the Uttar Pradesh government’s demand for 935 MCM of water in the lean season, the MoA provides for the repair or strengthening or remodelling of the Bariyarpur pick up weir, the Parichha weir and the Barwa Sagar dam along with appurtenant structures and a 7.1 km long Barwa Nallah to carry water from Barwa Sagar to the Betwa river upstream to the existing Parichha weir.

Additionally, two new barrages will be constructed. The existing tanks and their connecting links in Mahoba district will be renovated and a carrier system for the transfer of water from the Ken-Betwa link canal to the tanks will be constructed in order to enable Uttar Pradesh to store monsoon water for use during the non-monsoon season.

All this major additional construction work that has been assimilated into the project has been downplayed in the agreement.

For instance, rather than use the word ‘reconstruction’, the MoA uses terms like ‘repair’, ‘remodel’ and ‘strengthening’ in reference to the Bariyarpur pick-up weir, the Parichha weir and Barwa Sagar dam, even though the structures are so old and dilapidated that building them anew is the only option.

According to the documents accessed by The Wire, the Uttar Pradesh government had objected to the Centre’s choice of words.

In a letter dated September 23, 2020, the state government had said after a meeting with the jal shakti minister that the word ‘reconstruction’ or ‘replacement’ should be added to the MoA in relation to these structures.

However, in its response to this letter, the National Water Development Agency (NWDA), the agency of the ministry of jal shakti that is implementing this project, insisted on retaining the term ‘remodelling’, claiming that it implies ‘reconstruction of any structure, if required’.

This was not the first time that the Uttar Pradesh government had pointed out that these structures are outdated, have functioned beyond their stated life spans and have outlived their designed lives, leaving no scope for any modification or repair. The only solution is to rebuild them.

The Wire obtained a copy of the discussions held between a team of officials from the NWDA and Uttar Pradesh’s water department with the Central Soil and Materials Research Station (CSMRS) to ascertain the status of the Parichha weir. The Parichha weir is a 135-year-old British-era structure built in 1886 that supplies water to the Jhansi district for irrigation and other purposes.

According to this document, the water storage capacity of the reservoir is reducing due to the deposit of silt. To improve the storage capacity of the reservoir, barrages with gates will be needed in place of the weir.

The CSMRS was tasked with conducting non-destructive tests of the weir to decide whether it needs renovation, repair or consolidation.

‘Another spin’

Interestingly, U.P. Singh, the secretary of the jal shakti ministry (then called the ministry of water resources, river development and Ganga rejuvenation), had rejected certain provisions regarding the allocation of water to the two states, claiming that accepting these demands would divert the project from its course.

To ascertain the accuracy of Uttar Pradesh’s water demand, the NWDA had called a meeting with the state’s irrigation and water resources department. After surveying the area, the NWDA supported the Uttar Pradesh government’s demand for 935 MCM of water in the non-monsoon season.

But according to the estimates made by the jal shakti ministry, Daudhan dam will not have enough water for Uttar Pradesh to receive 935 MCM in the lean season.

Since this is the Modi government’s ‘dream project’ and the government is adamant on its implementation at any cost, the NWDA recommended providing Uttar Pradesh with 788 MCM or 750 MCM water from the project during the lean season, with the remaining 147 MCM or 185 MCM to come from storing water in tanks in Mahoba district during the monsoon, as well as two new barrages.

Uttar Pradesh’s demand for the replacement or repair or strengthening of the Bariyarpur pickup weir, Parichha weir and the Baruasagar dam were also accepted by the NWDA, although Singh said that it would “throw the KBLP in another spin”.

Ken-Betwa Link Project MoA by The Wire

However, Singh acceded to the Uttar Pradesh government’s demand that the Centre should bear the cost of storing rainwater in the Mahoba tanks.

According to the official notes of the NWDA, the agency had estimated the cost of these works at about Rs 5,000 crore, but had also asserted the need for a thorough investigation to assess the actual costs. However, this investigation has not yet been carried out.

The Centre says that the estimated expenditure on KBLP is Rs 35,111 crore, based on cost calculations done in 2017-18. Once the demands of the Uttar Pradesh government are accounted for, the cost is bound to escalate.

A costlier project would mean that the government’s cost benefit evaluation and data presented before the environment ministry are flawed.

After examining the KBLP, the Supreme Court’s Central Executive Committee (CEC) had already presaged in its August 2019 report that the project would incur an expenditure much higher than the Centre’s estimated cost.

Ignored conditions

The MoA includes a clause for the construction of two powerhouses under Phase-I of KBLP, which will generate 78 MW of electricity and cater to Madhya Pradesh.

However, the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (SC NBWL) did not agree to the construction of the power houses while granting its clearance to the project.

The Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) also gave Stage-I clearance to the project on the condition that the power houses are to be kept out of the Panna Tiger Reserve’s (PTR) forested area.

“The state govt. and the user agency shall ensure that the proposed Powerhouse, which have the capacity of 78 MW, shall not be constructed in the forest area to be diverted to avoid constant disturbance in the PTR (sic),” the FAC said.

Also read: Ken-Betwa Link: Jal Shakti Secy Had Rejected Provisions on Water-Sharing Between UP and MP

However, documents reveal that the government has proposed to build two power houses, one with a capacity of 60 MW and the other with a capacity of 18 MW in the vicinity of the Daudhan dam under the project. A large portion of the Panna Tiger Reserve will be cleared for the construction of this dam.

The UP government had sought power supplied from these plants, but the request was dismissed.

Under the Ken-Betwa Link Project, Panna Tiger Reserve will be damaged on a large scale. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra.

Himanshu Thakkar, the coordinator of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, said that this is a direct violation of the conditions put forward by the FAC.

“Under no circumstances should the power houses be installed in this area,” said Thakkar. “If the government wants to set up a power plant, it will have to redesign the entire project as the previous plan was turned down by the FAC. They will also have to conduct an environmental impact assessment again. Complying with the conditions of forest clearance will not be easy for them.”

Thakkar challenged the environmental clearance granted to the project on August 25, 2017 in the National Green Tribunal. He said that the environmental impact assessment of the project had already been carried out in an arbitrary manner. Adding new structures to the project without evaluating their impact would be an additional violation.

Thakkar alleged: “The environmental clearance granted to this project is illegal, arbitrary and illogical. All the facts had been ignored in its preparation, public hearings and clearances, which violates the concept of inclusive development. Now the government plans to construct additional barrages and reconstruct old structures which will have serious repercussions, but no assessment has been carried out. The documents clearly show that the government will construct additional structures, but they are close-mouthed about it.”

Other modifications

There are considerable differences between the detailed project report (DPR) of April 2010 and the comprehensive report of October 2018. New structures have been provided for in the comprehensive report, as well as substantial changes in the structures that were already approved.

For example, compared to the 2010 DPR, the design and other aspects of the Ken-Betwa link canal were revised in the 2018 report. The 2018 report lists additional pumping stations, rising main, pressure tanks and transmission lines for pressurised or micro-irrigation.

Earlier, the project had envisioned flow irrigation through the canal. This has now been switched to lift irrigation, by which water is supplied to the fields via pumps. Experts do not consider this irrigation method very effective.

Similarly, the length of the Ken Left Bank Canal was 57.30 km according to the 2010 DPR. But the 2018 report says that the length of the canal will be 90 km and it will be dug through a telescopic pipeline. Lift irrigation will be employed here as well and additional structures will be installed.

Ken-Betwa Link Project by The Wire

Earlier, it was estimated that the canal would irrigate about 1.72 lakh hectares in Madhya Pradesh. However, although both the length of the canal and the expenditure on it have been increased, the target has been reduced to 1.39 lakh hectares employing micro irrigation/pressurised irrigation techniques.

Meanwhile, the Panna and Hatta (Damoh) lift irrigation systems have been added to the project’s comprehensive report of October 2018 to irrigate an additional 90,101 hectares of land in Madhya Pradesh. This had not been mentioned in the 2010 DPR.

Work on these structures is bound to increase the total cost of the project. Earlier, the cost-benefit ratio was estimated at 1.70:1, that is, a profit of 70 paise per one rupee. However, in the 2018 report, the ratio has reduced to 1.58:1.

According to the documents accessed by The Wire, switching from flow irrigation to pressurised or micro irrigation which involves pumping systems, transmission lines, BPT tanks and so on has increased the project budget by a further Rs 5,835 crores.

An additional amount of Rs 1,668 crores has been incurred due to a change in the distribution channels of the water (U-distributaries). These figures are based on calculations till October 2018 and therefore may rise further if calculated again.

Is the KBLP viable?

The Ken-Betwa Link Project is based on the claim that the water content of the Ken basin is high and its flow can therefore be diverted to the Betwa basin by constructing a dam at Daudhan and a canal.

Various studies carried out by different government departments on the Ken River between 1982 and 2010 have furnished different data on the figure of 75% dependable annual yield, ranging between 4,490 MCM and 6,590 MCM.

A study conducted by the NWDA in 2010 stated that only 3,830.1 MCM of water will be annually collected at 100% dependability at the Daudhan dam site.

The figure of 75% or 100% dependable yield is the amount of water continuously available in a water source for 75% or 100% of the study period.

The draft MoA of the KBLP and the final agreement signed on March 22 are also quite contradictory. For instance, the MoA claims that the dependable annual yield of Daudhan Dam will be 6,590 MCM whereas the draft mentions 6,188 MCM as the dependable annual yield. Such conflicting figures raise serious questions over the credibility and utility of the project.

Women from Daudhan village drawing water from Ken river. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra.

All the studies have been conducted by government departments and the data has not been scrutinised by any independent team of experts. The CEC strictly reprimanded the government about this.

The CEC said in its report that the catchments of the Ken and Betwa rivers receive only 90 cm of rain on an average. This can have dire consequences in times of drought because much less water will be stored in the basins of the two rivers.

However, the government insists that collecting rainwater under the project will solve the water scarcity issue in the whole Bundelkhand region. The Centre claims that the net live storage capacity available in the reservoir on October 1 of any year will be 2,584 MCM, out of which 1,834 MCM will be given to Madhya Pradesh and 750 MCM to Uttar Pradesh in the lean (November to May) season.

Rejecting these claims, the CEC questioned the design of the entire project, saying: “It is to be noted that deficit of 384 MCM projected in DPR in upper Betwa basin is a result of similar commitment of all available water of Betwa basin for development of lower Betwa basin command in the earlier irrigation projects of Betwa basin (sic).”

Also read: Ken-Betwa River Linking Project May be Economically Unviable, Says SC Committee

The CEC said that this faulty planning in the development of irrigation facilities in the lower Betwa basin at the cost of the upper Betwa basin is proposed to now be rectified by substitution of water from the Ken basin.

The committee observed that the commitment of all the water available in the river Ken through Phase-1 of the KBLP to develop the Ken lower basin and upper Betwa basin in the future is bound to deprive the farmers in the upper Ken basin catchment area of even minor irrigation projects.

Therefore, launching a project to divert ‘excess’ water from the Ken basin to the Betwa basin without exploring all the possibilities of better and cheaper irrigation facilities in the upper reaches of the Ken basin is premature, especially as it also involves a huge amountof taxpayers’ money, the Supreme Court committee said.

A total area of around 9,000 hectares will be submerged due to the proposed dam of which 5,803 hectares lies within the Panna Tiger Reserve, considered to be the core habitat of tigers in the region.

Under the project, 6,017 hectares of forest land will be submerged, ravaging at least 23 lakh trees and adversely affecting the Ken Gharial Sanctuary and vulture nesting sites.

Threat to many wildlife species found in Panna Tiger Reserve. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra.

When The Wire asked Bhopal Singh, the director general of the NWDA, about the CEC report, he said that there can be no better project than the KBLP for the development of Bundelkhand.

Bhopal Singh said: “The Bundelkhand region is prone to frequent floods and droughts. As most of the rainfall occurs in a few days during the monsoon period and water availability during the non-monsoon period is very scarce, the region faces recurring shortages of water during the non-monsoon period.”

He added: “Therefore, there is a need for a project of a scale which will help in harnessing the floodwater during the monsoon period and stabilise the water availability in the region in the lean period, particularly during drought years. The Ken-Betwa Link Project is the only best option available to meet the irrigation and drinking water needs of the area and will provide relief to the drought-prone Bundelkhand region.”

Ken-Betwa Link: Refusing to Do New Hydrological Study, Govt Moves Ahead With 18-Year-Old Data

The feasibility of an irrigation project can be assessed is through the latest hydrological data. The Ken-Betwa Link project is based on 2003-04, but the government did not bother to obtain fresh data in violation of norms.

This is the third in a six-part series on the Ken-Betwa Link Project. Read the first and second articles here and here.

New Delhi: Before the implementation of any project that could have repercussions on the people and the environment of an area, there is usually a demand for an independent study on the utility and impact of the project. Such a study ensures that any undesirable effects of the project can be mitigated and damages may be judiciously compensated.

An independent study of this nature, conducted by experts in the relevant fields, usually takes months to complete. But one administrative official could end the study with just one phone call.

The scenario described above actually happened in the case of one of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s most ambitious schemes: the Ken-Betwa Link Project (KBLP).

When the final tripartite memorandum of agreement (MoA) between the Union government and the Uttar Pradesh and the Madhya Pradesh governments for the KBLP was being drafted, some officials felt that a fresh study of the river Ken was necessary to update the comprehensive report on the project with the latest data.

Also read: Ken-Betwa Link: Not Enough Land to Compensate for 23 Lakh Trees Cut, Govt Tries to Bend Rules

But on the instructions of one official, the report retained the old data. And it was this old data that was the basis of the MoA on the Ken-Betwa Link Project signed by three governments.

This fact was uncovered in internal documents of the jal shakti ministry obtained by The Wire under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

A disputed claim

The Ken-Betwa Link Project is based on the claim that the Ken has surplus water which can be diverted to the Betwa basin via a dam at Daudhan village and a canal. However, the government has not so far released any data to support this claim.

Experts say that the reason the government does not make its study of the Ken public is because they know there is not enough water in the Ken to support the KBLP. The experts also allege that the study on Ken conducted by the government has many errors.

However, the government has rejected all these objections and is preparing to implement the KBLP in two phases. In the first phase, a 77-metre high and 2,031-metre-long dam will be constructed at Daudhan village located near the Ken and a 221-km long Ken-Betwa link canal will be built through which water from the Ken will flow into the Betwa basin. Two long tunnels of 1.9 km and 2.5 km will also be constructed.

A total area of around 9,000 hectares will be submerged due to the proposed dam of which 5,803 hectares lie within the Panna Tiger Reserve, which is considered to be the core habitat of tigers in the region.

The project was delayed for a long time because of disputes between the governments of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh over water-sharing.

The Ken River. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra.

To resolve this issue, a meeting headed by U.P. Singh, the then secretary of the ministry of water resources, river development and Ganga rejuvenation (later renamed the ministry of jal shakti) was convened on April 23, 2018, where Singh suggested that Madhya Pradesh may receive 1,796 million cubic metres (MCM) of water in the non-monsoon/lean season, while Uttar Pradesh may draw 788 MCM.

However, Uttar Pradesh demanded 935 MCM of water in the non-monsoon (October to May) months. One cubic meter equals 1,000 litres while one MCM contains one billion litres.

About a year and a half later, the National Water Development Agency (NWDA), the agency of the ministry of jal shakti in charge of implementing the KBLP, opined that the availability of water in the Ken should be assessed in order to decide water-sharing between the states.

Therefore, Muzaffar Ahmed, the NWDA superintendent engineer, wrote a letter to the Lucknow-based NWDA chief engineer (north) on November 26, 2019, asking him to revise the comprehensive report of the KBLP by incorporating the updated working table of the Daudhan reservoir considering the latest inflow data and the provision of 788 MCM of water to Uttar Pradesh during the non-monsoon season.

This letter was also forwarded to the superintendent engineer of Investigation Circle, Gwalior, and executive engineer of Investigation Division, Gwalior/Bhopal/Jhansi of the NWDA.

However, the documents accessed by The Wire reveal that no new study was conducted on the instruction of the chief engineer (north) and the report that was forwarded to the NWDA headquarters retained the old data.

On January 7, 2020, executive engineer Raghavendra Kumar Gupta wrote a letter to the superintendent engineer of the Investigation Circle, saying: “We have received instructions to make necessary amendments and corrections in the comprehensive report by updating latest figures in the simulation study, water plan, etc., on allotment of 788 MCM water in the lean season to Uttar Pradesh under the Ken-Betwa link project.”

Gupta’s letter continued: “Thereafter, instructions have been received by the chief engineer (north) on phone to revise the comprehensive report and modify the simulation study and water plan without updating the said study on the basis of the data obtained in 2003-04.”

Letter written by the executive engineer of National Water Development Agency regarding not conducting hydrological study.

Simulation studies can ascertain the flow, amount of water, and other aspects of a river at different locations.

Gupta said that updating the comprehensive report to incorporate data till 2019 would require re-editing the entire hydrological study, for which Roorkee’s National Institute of Hydrology (NIH) would have to be roped in.

“It will take about 6-8 months to complete the said work,” he argued in the letter. “Also, it is stated that both the states agree on 75% dependable yield of the river at 6,590 MCM and the issue is settled.”

The figure of 75% dependable yield refers to the amount of water continuously available in a water source for 75% of the time of the study period. Based on this formula, the Centre has claimed that 6,590 MCM water will be available at the Daudhan dam site in a normal year.

Also read: Ignoring Damning SC Panel Report, Modi Govt Kickstarts Work on Ken-Betwa Link Project

The executive engineer argued that conducting a fresh hydrological study to include data till 2019 may alter the river’s estimated annual yield, which may lead to a fresh row between Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh over water-sharing and further delay the project.

Loss of fresh data

The old report on the Ken was based on data collected between 1981-82 and 2003-04. When the department was asked to revise and update this comprehensive report, it would have meant incorporating data for the years 2003-04 to 2018-19, that is, for a period of 15 years.

Had the fresh study been conducted, the department would have had to collect data on rainfall, upstream utilisation, gauge and discharge data (G&D) of Banda and Madla, a G&D sites list (list of Central Water Commission monitoring sites on the river) of existing, ongoing and projected projects, land use data and the existing cropping pattern in the catchment of the Ken basin up to the Banda G&D sites and so on.

Apart from this, the work involved in the revision of the comprehensive report of the KBLP would have had to include an analysis of rainfall data and the construction of a Thiessen Polygon monthly consistency test of rainfall series by double mass curve technique, the processing of runoff data by various methods, assessment of yield at gauging discharge sites by (1) transformation of the 10 daily flow series to monthly values, (2) estimation of upstream utilisation and virgin flow, and (3) analysis by flow duration curve and so on.

The department would also have had to evaluate the water need assessment in the catchment of the Ken basin up to Banda, including the computation of gross irrigation requirement using existing and proposed cropping patterns in the catchment up to the year 2050.

This note of NWDA argues not to do a new study on the Ken river.

But when the fresh study was stopped, none of this took place.

The comprehensive report on the KBLP available on the NWDA’s website that was published in October 2018 thus contains hydrological data only till 2003-04. This was the basis on which the MoA between the Centre, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh was signed on March 22, 2021.

The detailed project report (DPR) of the KBLP on which the project is based was published in April 2010. The MoA was signed 11 years later.

According to the MoA signed this March, in a normal year, (when the annual gross yield in the Ken basin up to Daudhan dam is 6,590 MCM or more), Madhya Pradesh will utilise a total of 2,350 MCM and Uttar Pradesh will utilise a total of 1,700 MCM annually from Ken system.

The committed releases to MP and UP from the storage in the Daudhan reservoir during the non-monsoon period (November to May) will be 1,834 MCM and 750 MCM respectively. The basis on which 750 MCM was fixed for UP is not clear.

According to the minutes of a meeting headed by the secretary of the ministry of jal shakti on September 3, 2020, a joint team of officials of the Central Water Commission, the NWDA and the UP government had undertaken a study to assess the UP government’s demand for 935 MCM of water in the lean season.

The study found the demand to be legitimate as the amount of water requested was required for irrigation in the area. However, the Centre decided that UP would be allowed to draw 750 MCM of water and the remaining 185 MCM would be met through additional storage during the monsoon season.

The documents accessed by The Wire under RTI reveal that the decision on water-sharing between MP and UP was reached without a study to obtain the latest data on the actual amount of water in the river.

The MoA signed by Jal Shakti minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat and the chief ministers of the two states in the presence of Prime Minister Modi on March 22 is only based on data up to 2003-04.

Even the NWDA was not convinced that the dependable annual yield of the Daudhan dam is 6,590 MCM as stated in the April 2010 DPR. An early draft of the agreement obtained by The Wire shows that the agency preferred the figure of 6,188 MCM of water availability in the Ken basin up to Daudhan dam. This figure of an annual yield of 6,188 MCM came from a study that had been conducted by the Central Water Commission in 1995. But in the final draft of the MoA, the NWDA’s preferred figure of the annual yield of 6,188 MCM was replaced by the 6,590 MCM that had been stated in the April 2010 DPR.

When the NWDA was questioned by the Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh governments regarding the figure of 6,188 MCM of water it had placed in the early draft, the NWDA said: “Hydrology is a dynamic process and keeps on changing with time. It would be appropriate to stick to the figure of 6,188 MCM water availability of Ken Basin up to Daudhan Dam at 75% dependability and allocate water to both states for developmental needs accordingly.”

Also read: Ken-Betwa River Linking Project May be Economically Unviable, Says SC Committee

According to the MoA, at least 6,316 MCM of water is required to meet the irrigation and other needs of the two states. That is, 2,350 MCM for Madhya Pradesh, 2,266 MCM for MP upstream and 1,700 MCM for Uttar Pradesh.

So the NWDA’s 6,188 MCM annual yield of the Daudhan dam will not suffice for both the states and will eventually render the entire project futile.

Locals unaware of project

Speaking to The Wire, NWDA director general Bhopal Singh said that the project will also provide 494 MCM of water annually for ecological needs.

Thus, the annual yield required for the project is 6,810 MCM instead of 6,590 MCM.

The place where the Daudhan dam is to be built on the Ken river. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra.

This puts a question mark on the government’s claim that water availability in the Ken is high.

However, Bhopal Singh claims that due to this project, additional water will be available for ecological needs.

He said, “Madhya Pradesh will get 2,350 MCM, while UP shall utilise 1,700 MCM annually from the Ken system. Thus more water shall be available for the ecological needs of the river against the assessed requirement of 494 MCM.”

But Singh did not explain the basis on which he claims there will be surplus water.

Various studies carried out by different government departments on the Ken between 1982 and 2010 have furnished different data on water availability, ranging between 4,490 MCM and 6,590 MCM.

The credibility of these figures has been disputed as they have not been reviewed by independent experts.

Activist and researcher Siddharth Agarwal, who in 2018 undertook a journey on foot along the length of the Ken to document the river and the lives of people tied to it, told The Wire that anyone who visits the region can easily see that the water in the river is not enough for it to be diverted elsewhere.

“First of all, many people in the villages along the Ken River are not aware that such a project is in the offing,” said Agarwal. “Of those who do know, only a handful are aware of the entire scenario. Most people have the notion that once the rivers are connected, water from the Ken will fall into the Betwa and vice versa; so a dearth of water in any one river will be compensated by the other. But this is far from the reality.”

Agarwal said that when locals were educated about the project, most of them agreed that it would adversely affect the river.

Another issue pointed out by Agarwal is that the project sheds no light on the development of the upper reaches of the Panna Tiger Reserve, where people, mostly from tribal communities, carry out organic farming. The implementation of the project will push them towards chemical farming, he warned.

Questions raised by the CEC

The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) constituted by the Supreme Court had submitted a report on August 30, 2019 after conducting a detailed assessment of the Ken-Betwa Link Project. The report claimed that the implementation of the project will lead to a total loss of wildlife habitat spread over 10,500 hectares, which is the core area of the Panna Tiger Reserve.

Under the project, 6,017 hectares of forest land will be submerged, ravaging at least 23 lakh trees. In addition, the project will destroy the Ken Gharial Sanctuary and vulture nesting sites.

Taking cognisance of a number of such adverse effects, the CEC recommended that the government find alternatives to achieve its goals.

The government claims that a total of 9.04 lakh hectares of land will be irrigated owing to the project, including 6.53 lakh hectares of land in MP and 2.51 lakh hectares in UP.

In addition, 62 lakh people in both the states are expected to get access to drinking water owing to the project.

Responding to this, the CEC pointed out that there are 11 major/medium and 171 minor irrigation projects already in place in the Ken basin and the goal can be met simply by expanding the capacities of the ongoing projects.

Gangau dam built on theKen river. Daudhan Dam is to be built at a short distance from this. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra.

The CEC also questioned the design of the entire project, saying: “It is to be noted that deficit of 384 MCM projected in DPR in upper Betwa basin is a result of similar commitment of all available water of Betwa basin for development of lower Betwa basin command in the earlier irrigation projects of Betwa basin.”

The CEC said that this faulty planning in the development of irrigation facilities in the lower Betwa basin at the cost of upper Betwa basin is proposed to now be rectified by substitution of water from the Ken basin.

The committee observed: “What is more, the commitment of entire water available from river Ken through KBLP phase-1 to develop Ken lower basin and upper Betwa basin in future is bound to deprive the farmers in upper Ken basin catchment area even to go in for minor irrigation projects (sic).”

The CEC thus concluded that the projection of the availability of surplus water in the Ken basin for transfer to the Betwa basin without first exhausting possibilities for the development of irrigation facilities in the upper Ken basin appears to be premature, particularly considering that an investment of thousands of crores of public funds is involved.

Apart from this, the committee also said that the catchment of the river Ken and the river Betwa on an average receive about 90 cm of rainfall only. This has a serious implication because during drought years, the availability of water in both the river basins may be much less than what has been projected in the various studies.

But the Centre has ignored all these warnings and is prepared to go ahead with the Ken-Betwa Link Project.

This story was supported by the Internews’ Earth Journalism Network.

Translated from the Hindi by Naushin Rehman.

Ignoring Damning SC Panel Report, Modi Govt Kickstarts Work on Ken-Betwa Link Project

RTI documents reveal that no emphasis was laid on discussing the CEC report on adverse ecological impacts throughout the project’s planning stage. More so, the final Supreme Court decision on the report is still awaited.

This is the first in a six-part series on the Ken-Betwa Link Project.

New Delhi: As the drought-prone Bundelkhand region, which occupies parts of the states of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, reels under a severe water crisis, the Union government has begun preparations to implement the Ken-Betwa Link Project (KBLP) which aims to direct water to the region.

Small pillars have been placed to mark the area where the proposed Daudhan dam will be built as part of the first phase of the project. Given that it has been less than four months since the tripartite memorandum of agreement (MoA) for the project was signed between the Union government and the state governments of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on March 22, 2021, it seems that the government plans to work on the KBLP at a ferocious pace.

But there is one small problem.

The Supreme Court has yet to clear the KBLP for implementation based on an expert report submitted by its Central Empowered Committee (CEC) on August 30, 2019, which examined the potential impact of the project on the people of Bundelkhand and on the environment and wildlife of the region among other issues.

The CEC report states that the implementation of the KBLP would cause widespread ecological devastation in the region and recommends that the government’s goals under this project could be achieved through cheaper alternatives or by expanding the capacities of existing projects in the region.

But although the Supreme Court has yet to hold a hearing on the CEC report, based on which the project will or will not be executed, documents accessed by The Wire under the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005, show that the Modi government has already begun to implement the KBLP, having almost completely ignored the CEC investigation and report throughout the project’s planning stage.

Environmental concerns or impediments?

The Ken-Betwa Linking Project and its possible effects on the region has been discussed since 1995 when the National Water Development Agency (NWDA), an agency of the Ministry of Jal Shakti, first released a feasibility study that claimed the Ken river could be linked to the river Betwa.

The Ken originates from the Kaimur hills of Katni district in Madhya Pradesh and joins the river Yamuna near Chilla village in Banda district of Uttar Pradesh.

However, questions were raised about the veracity of the claim and its ramifications.

After coming to power in 1999, the then prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, set up a task force to accelerate the project. Later, in 2005, Mulayam Singh Yadav, the then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh and Babulal Gaur, the then chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, signed a tripartite memorandum of understanding along with the Union government on a possible water-sharing arrangement between the two states in the future.

Also read: Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh Sign Agreement With Centre For Ken-Betwa River Interlinking

Five years later, in April 2010, the NWDA prepared a detailed project report (DPR) for Phase-I of the KBLP, which was based on the claim that the Ken carries surplus water. Since the government has not released the data from its study on the Ken, experts cannot verify this claim.

In any case, Jairam Ramesh, the environment minister in the then Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government, refused to grant approval to the project at the time, stating that implementing it would lead to widespread environmental destruction.

But on July 8, 2016, two years after the Modi government came to power, the project was granted its techno-economic clearance, which was followed in quick succession by the wildlife clearance on August 23, 2016, the environmental clearance on August 25, 2017, clearance from the Ministry of Tribal Affairs in January 2017 and first-level forest clearance from the environment ministry on May 25, 2017, the last with certain conditions attached.

The proposed Daudhan dam will submerge an area of around 9,000 hectares of land, of which 5,803 hectares lies within the Panna Tiger Reserve. A total of 6,017 hectares of forest land will have to be cleared, of which 4,141 hectares are within the sensitive core of the tiger reserve. In all, an area equivalent to 8,427 football fields will have to be deforested.

A board for the Ken-Betwa link project outside Panna Tiger Reserve. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra/The Wire

According to the report of a sub-committee of the Forest Advisory Committee, at least 23 lakh trees will need to be cut down for the implementation of Ken-Betwa Link Project. This is about 1,078 times more than the number of trees that were uprooted in Mumbai’s Aarey Colony in 2019 to build car sheds for the Mumbai Metro, which had led to protests both within the city and elsewhere in the country.

But when The Wire inspected more than 2,000 documents related to the KBLP accessed under RTI, no reference to any detailed consideration of the CEC’s findings could be seen.

No ministerial or secretary-level meeting of the Ministry of Jal Shakti had laid emphasis on discussing the CEC report or conducting an independent study of its cautionary aspects regarding the Ken-Betwa Link Project. Instead, the discussions between ministers and officials on the project remained limited to negotiations over water-sharing between Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.

The CEC report did find a mention in the minutes of one meeting: that of the Special Committee on Interlinking of Rivers which expedites the work of all river linking projects across the country. But the members of the special committee gave a clean chit to the government’s assessment of the project in an arbitrary manner.

In fact, to judge by the KBLP-related documents acquired by The Wire, many of the people working on the project appear to view environmental and ecological concerns as impediments to development.

No mention of CEC report

For example, the minutes of an April 23, 2018, secretary-level meeting on the KBLP, which was held while the CEC gathered information for its report on the project, show that the discussion between the officials of the Union and state governments revolved around water-sharing between Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh and concerns regarding the conditions imposed by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) on deforestation. There was no mention of the CEC investigation.

This same attitude to environmental issues is visible in the October 2018 presentation given by M.K Srinivas, the former director general of the NWDA, who used the Ken-Betwa Link Project as a case study and implied that the need for environmental clearances was a ‘hurdle’ placed in the way of water-related projects.

The place where the Daudhan dam is to be built on the Ken river. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra/The Wire

Water-based projects need techno-economic clearances, environmental clearances, wildlife clearances, forest clearances and investment clearances from the ministries or agencies concerned, as well as a clearance from the Ministry of Tribal Affairs before they can be implemented. These provisions are in place to ensure that water development projects are sustainable, do not harm the environment and ecology and are not ruinously expensive.

However, in his presentation, Srinivas implied that the clearances required for the KBLP were impediments placed in the way of ‘developmental’ work. He used the same disparaging tone when he referred to the petitions challenging the project in court and the investigation of the KBLP by the CEC.

Also read: Ken-Betwa River Linking Project May be Economically Unviable, Says SC Committee

Even after the CEC report was submitted on August 30, 2019, no meeting between Union and state officials on the KBLP mentioned its findings.

Twenty days after the CEC’s report was submitted, in a meeting chaired by the secretary of the Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation (now called the Ministry of Jal Shakti), the attendees only discussed water-sharing between Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. The minutes of the meeting hold no reference to the CEC report.

Since 2017, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh have been locking horns over water-sharing in the non-monsoon period. Uttar Pradesh demanded 935 million cubic metres of water (MCM) from the project in the non-monsoon season (October to May), while Madhya Pradesh offered only 700 MCM.

One cubic metre of water equals 1,000 litres while one MCM contains one billion litres.

To resolve the dispute, it was decided that officials of the Ministry of Jal Shakti would survey the situation on the ground and assess the amount of water required for each state.

In the same meeting, Upendra Prasad Singh, the then secretary of the Jal Shakti ministry, expressed his concern over the conditions imposed by the MoEFCC while granting first-level forest clearance to the project and insisted that these conditions should be relaxed. But there was no mention of the CEC report in the meeting.

Nearly a year after the CEC submitted its report, another meeting was held on September 3, 2020, between the two state governments and the NWDA. The meeting was chaired by the secretary of the Jal Shakti ministry and attended by 23 top officials from the Union and state governments, but none of them expressed any interest in discussing the recommendations and warnings issued by the CEC in its report. Once again, the dialogue remained confined to the allocation of water between the states and a demand for the relaxation of the conditions imposed by the MoEFCC.

Soon after, on September 22, 2020, another meeting took place, this time between Tulsi Ram Silawat and Mahendra Singh, the water ministers of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh respectively, and headed by Gajendra Singh Shekhawat, the Jal Shakti minister. The agenda of this meeting was to finalise the agreement on the river-linking project.

At the start of the meeting, the reason behind the Modi government’s determination to implement the project was made clear when Shekhawat said: “The Ken-Betwa link project was a dream envisioned by our former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to resolve the water problem in the drought-hit Bundelkhand region.”

The proposed KBLP is far from being the first scheme to provide water to the parched region: earlier governments had introduced several schemes to resolve the water scarcity. But as well-intentioned as these schemes have been, most of the people of Bundelkhand still have to travel long distances to access water.

In this meeting, Shekhawat requested the water ministers and officers of MP and UP to not to raise ‘petty’ issues such as water-sharing in the non-monsoon period and distribution of hydropower at every meeting, because discussions on these topics tended to create hindrances in the implementation of the project.

Even in this ministerial meeting, the CEC report was not discussed at all, as revealed by the minutes of the meeting. Instead, the discussion on the draft memorandum of agreement was finally closed and preparations began for the final draft of the MoA for the Ken-Betwa Link Project. This was signed on March 22, 2021, by Gajendra Singh Shekhawat, the Union Jal Shakti minister, Yogi Adityanath, the Uttar Pradesh chief minister and Shivraj Singh Chouhan, the Madhya Pradesh chief minister.

According to the MoA, Madhya Pradesh will receive 1,834 MCM of water while Uttar Pradesh will get 750 MCM of water during the non-monsoon or lean season.

‘KBLP the best option’

When The Wire asked Bhopal Singh, the director general of the NWDA, whether the Supreme Court’s CEC report was considered before the MoA on the KBLP was signed, he said that the report had been discussed in a meeting of the Special Committee on Interlinking of Rivers and a consensus had been reached that the KBLP was still the best way to address Bundelkhand’s water scarcity issue.

“The Special Committee was of the opinion that while preparing the DPR of the Ken-Betwa Link Project, all the available alternatives or options were examined and the Ken-Betwa Link Project was the best option to meet the irrigation needs of the command area and provide relief to the drought-prone Bundelkhand region. The CEC may be informed accordingly,” Bhopal Singh told The Wire.

However, the minutes of this meeting, which was held on February 26, 2020 and chaired by Rattan Lal Katariya, the former Jal Shakti minister of state, contain no details of how the committee formed this ‘opinion’. There is no mention of any independent research, analysis or study of the CEC report before the decision was made.

This was the 17th meeting of the Special Committee on Interlinking of Rivers which had been set up in 2014 on the direction of the Supreme Court and which mostly has politicians, administration officials and a few government experts on its panel.

A total of 67 members participated in this meeting, of which 64 were from various departments of the Union government and the two state governments. The remaining three were special invitees – a former chairman of the Central Water Commission, a former professor from the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, and a former secretary of the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage.

Bhopal Singh told The Wire that a reply was sent to the CEC for its consideration on July 24, 2020, by the NWDA on behalf of the government.

The CEC report

Environmental experts accuse the Modi government of high-handedness and of discrediting democratic institutions by not taking seriously the Supreme Court’s crucial CEC report on this ‘catastrophic’ project and striking the deal between the states without waiting for the apex court’s final verdict.

Manoj Misra, a river activist leading the Yamuna Jiye Abhiyan, had challenged the wildlife clearance granted to the KBLP in the Supreme Court in 2017, following which the Supreme Court had sought the CEC’s opinion on the matter.

After studying the matter for about two years, the committee submitted its report on August 30, 2019. The report elaborately discusses the violation of rules in granting wildlife clearance, the impact of deforestation on the Panna Tiger Reserve and its biodiversity, the probable increase in the cost of the project, the ecological loss and so on. All the details in the report have been supported with facts and figures.

Many animals are found in Panna Tiger Reserve which are on the verge of extinction. Photo: Dheeraj Mishra/The Wire

In its report, the CEC claimed that the submergence of 6,017 hectares of forest land envisaged by the Ken-Betwa Linking Project would result in a total loss of 10,500 hectares of wildlife habitat because it would cut off the core critical tiger habitat of the Panna Tiger Reserve from the rest of the National Park.

The forest land that the KBLP proposes to submerge is a unique ecosystem of morphological significance with a unique and rich biodiversity in the region which cannot be recreated, the committee observed.

The CEC said that in granting the wildlife clearance to the KBLP, the Standing Committee of the National Board of Wildlife (SC NBWL) had considered the impact of the project only in terms of tiger habitat and had not taken into account the entire flora and fauna and unique ecosystem of the region, ignoring the fact that the project is located within the core of the national park.

The very objective of the declaration of this unique ecosystem with special morphological significance and unique biodiversity as a national park was to ensure the operation of the laws of nature, including natural evolution unhindered by human intervention, the CEC report said. Implementing the KBLP would defeat this objective and result in the complete breakdown of the evolutionary processes of millions of years, the report observed.

The report also said that the approval of the SC NBWL for the diversion of 6,017 hectares of wildlife habitat for the Ken-Betwa Link Project Phase-1 had not been proved to be necessary for the improvement and better management of the wildlife therein as provided in Section 35(6) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

Also read: Environment Ministry Defers Clearance To Ken-Betwa Interlinking Project Dam

Section 35 (6) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 states that the destruction or removal of any wildlife, the destruction, damaging or diversion of the habitat of any wild animal and the diversion, stopping or enhancement of the flow of water into or outside a national park or sanctuary, can only be permitted if it is found to be necessary for the improvement and better management of wildlife.

The CEC added that the proposed measures to mitigate the effects of such a drastic change in the wildlife habitat are extremely inadequate and cannot recreate this kind of unique ecosystem at the Panna Tiger Reserve.

The CEC categorically rejected the contention of the NWDA, the SC NBWL and the MoEFCC that the project will have a positive impact on the tiger population. It asserted that the large flood plains that will be vacated by the villagers when they are relocated will remain under water even during summer, since they are located below the 240 metres dead storage level.

The CEC report stated: “Impact of the project on the downstream Gharial Sanctuary and the vulture nesting sites has not been examined and no mitigative measures in this regard are forth coming in the recommendation of the SC NBWL.”

Even the committee constituted by the SC NBWL to look into the impact of the proposed KBLP had made a scathing remark about the project: “No developmental project should destroy the ecology of [a] remnant [of a] fragile eco system and an important tiger habitat in the country. In an ideal situation, it would be best to avoid such projects in such wilderness areas with protected area status and specifically when it runs the risk of providing justification or unhealthy precedence for more such developmental project within the protected areas that will not be in the interest of wildlife and the overall well-being of the society in the long term.”

Claims and counter-claims

The government claims that a total of 9.04 lakh hectares of land will be irrigated owing to the KBLP. However, the CEC said that there are 11 major/medium and 171 minor irrigation projects already in place in the Ken basin and the goal of the KBLP can be met simply by expanding the capacity of these ongoing projects.

The CEC also said that the profit from this project estimated by the government is factually erroneous and expressed concern over the government’s failure to deliberate upon other much better alternatives to attain the proposed benefits of the KBLP.

The report quoted the response of an official of the NWDA to a query made by the CEC on the scope of utilising more efficient technologies relating to irrigation, such as employing micro irrigation system and suitable crop planning suited to the agro-climatic condition prevalent in the arid command area. The NWDA official admitted that micro/drip irrigation saves water and fertilisers and informed the CEC that the micro/drip irrigation system is suitable for crops including grapes, banana, pomegranate, orange, citrus and mango.

Expressing surprise over the agency’s response, the CEC report said: “This statement of NWDA only goes to confirm that the alternatives to mega Hydel Project have not been examined by the project proponent (sic).”

The Ken-Betwa Link Project is to be implemented in two phases. In the first phase, a 77-metre high and 2,031-metre long dam will be constructed at Daudhan village, located near the Ken river.

In addition, a 221-km long Ken-Betwa link canal will be built through which water from the Ken will flow into the Betwa basin.

The Modi government claims that the project will help to irrigate 6.53 lakh hectares of land in Madhya Pradesh and 2.51 lakh hectares in Uttar Pradesh and give 62 lakh people access to drinking water.

Map showing construction locations along with names of structures under Ken-Betwa Link Project.

However, although it is claimed that the project will resolve Bundelkhand’s water scarcity problem, the fact is that the KBLP will cater to only to ten of the 13 districts of Bundelkhand, while some districts that will benefit from the project are not in Bundelkhand. How the other three districts of Bundelkhand will deal with water scarcity is not mentioned, showing the contradictory nature of this project.

According to the documents accessed by The Wire, Damoh, Chhatarpur, Panna, Tikamgarh, Datia and Sagar in Madhya Pradesh and Banda, Jhansi, Lalitpur and Mahoba in Uttar Pradesh may benefit from the first phase of the project. These ten districts are part of the Bundelkhand region.

But the second phase of the KBLP, which involves the construction of the Lower Orr Dam, the Kotha barrage and the Bina complex multipurpose project, will cater to districts beyond Bundelkhand, such as the Shivpuri, Vidisha and Raisen districts of Madhya Pradesh.

Environmental activist Manoj Misra, who challenged the KBLP in the Supreme Court, claims that the real purpose of the project is to bring water to the upstream of the Betwa basin which is outside Bundelkhand.

“Most people do not understand that the real purpose of the Ken-Betwa Link Project is to provide water to districts like Vidisha and Raisen, which fall outside Bundelkhand. This is mentioned in the DPR itself. The areas of Bundelkhand where the project aims to supply water are already within the irrigation target through various earlier projects. This [the KBLP] is only a substitution project. When the dams are built upstream of the Betwa basin in the second phase of the project, the lower basin will face a water shortage and Daudhan dam will compensate for it. This whole exercise has nothing to do with Bundelkhand,” Misra said.

Misra added: “The law does not allow any ministry to grant this sort of wildlife clearance. The law clearly states that only such activities can be allowed in a national park that are in the interests of the wildlife. The CEC report also confirms this. The project will cause a fragmentation of the region which will ruin every effort to mitigate its effects.”

The Supreme Court’s final decision on the Ken-Betwa Linking Project based on the CEC report is still awaited. As of now, the matter has not been listed for hearing.

This story was supported by Internews’ Earth Journalism Network.

Translated from Hindi by Naushin Rehman.

The Roots of a Growing Adivasi Resistance in Gujarat

A district-level committee in Dang district has rejected all individual forest rights claims pending before it since 2016 on the ground of insufficient evidence, the discontentment against which has reached a tipping point.

Sounds of “Jai Adivasi” reverberated across Ahwa taluk in Dang, Gujarat, as over 5,000 people from the district gathered to celebrate Adivasi Diwas, or the 36th International Day of the World’s Indigenous People, on August 9, recognised by the UN to mark the day of the first meeting of the working group on indigenous populations. As an assertion of Adivasi identity, the gathered people sang songs of jungle zameen (forest land). Ironically, on the eve of this celebration, a district-level committee (DLC) constituted under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA), had rejected all individual forest rights claims of two villages in the district citing insufficient evidence in both cases.

The object of the FRA is to “provide for a framework for recording the forest rights (of scheduled rribes and other traditional forest dwellers) so vested and the nature of evidence required for such recognition and vesting in respect of forest land.” The law also seeks to redress the historical injustice to forest-dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest-dwellers during the colonial period.

Rule 13 (1) of the Forest Rights Rules of 2012 lays down nine pieces of evidence required to be submitted, along with the individual forest rights claims, for the claim to be approved. “We had submitted affidavits of the statement of elders of our village along with copies of our ration cards and voter identity cards. During the hearing, they skimmed through our documents and said that we did not have sufficient proof because voter ID and ration card cannot be considered valid proof under the law,” said Somabhai Barde.

The claims of 26 individuals from Neempada were rejected on the same grounds. Rule 13 (1)(b) explicitly lists
“government authorised documents such as voter identity card, ration card, passport, house tax receipts and domicile certificates” to be valid proof. But despite the law, these claims were rejected.

A sub-divisional level committee (SDLC) issued a standard order in 2016 rejecting pending individual forest rights claims en masse, stating only one piece of evidence had been submitted: statement of elders. Twenty-eight claimants of Nirgundmal, whose claims had been heard following an order by the Gujarat high court in February 2018 and rejected due to lack of evidence, have been served an eviction notice.

Rule 13 (3) lays down that “the gram sabha, the sub-divisional level committee and the district-level committee shall consider more than one of the above-mentioned evidences in determining the forest rights.” This has been corroborated by guidelines issued the by Ministry of Tribal Affairs in 2012 stating that “the sub-divisional level committee or the district-level committee should not reject any claim accompanied by any two forms of evidences, specified in Rule 13, and recommended by the gram sabha, without giving reasons in writing and should not insist upon any particular form of evidence for consideration of a claim.”

This was reiterated by a Gujarat high court judgment delivered in 2013. Despite the law being clear on this point, claims are being rejected by the DLC (see here and here) citing this ground in clear violation of the Act.

Currently, the DLC is hearing all individual forest rights claims pending before it since 2016, rejecting all claims on the same ground, and issuing eviction notices to all such claimants. The simmering discontentment among the people has now reached a tipping point.

Adivasis march in Ahwa led by musicians on the pavri. Credit: Nikita Sonavane

The Adivasis of Dang, who make up 98% of the population across 311 villages, gathered in full force, rallying to the district headquarters of Ahwa carrying posters of “Nadi ne vahva do, nadi kinare rehva do” (;let the river continue to flow, let us live by the river’). Women dressed in the traditional Dangi sarees sang songs of ‘Jaga ho jaga adivasi jaga’ to tunes of the pavri as they marched along the streets of Ahwa to reiterate their rights over the forest and other natural resources and to assert their constitutionally backed rights and autonomy to govern themselves.

The Bhil, Konkana (Kunvi) and Varli comprise the three main tribal groups in Dang. There are other ethnic tribes identified as particularly vulnerable tribal groups (PVTGS) also residing in the district: Kotwalia, Kathodi and Kolcha. The FRA aims to strengthen the conservation regime of the forests while ensuring livelihood and food security of the forest-dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers. However, with their rights not recognised under the FRA, and lack of other livelihood options due to scarcity of fertile land, water and forest, a majority of the population migrates following monsoon to other parts of Gujarat and Maharashtra.

The threat of mass displacement also looms large on Dang given the proposed interstate Par-Tapi-Narmada link project spearheaded by the National Water Development Agency (NWDA). It involves the construction of three dams – Gira, Dabdar and Kelwan – in the district. Several members of the community spoke eloquently about the need for Adivasis to unite and exercise rights guaranteed to them under Schedule V of the Constitution. “The need of the hour is for Dangi women to assume leadership roles in matters of local governance, and not let their husbands act as their proxies despite being elected to leadership positions,” said Saluben Morish, the first Bhil woman in the district to complete a PhD, in an address to the gathering.

Amidst cries to struggle and safeguard their Adivasi identity, the crowd marched to the district collector’s office to register their protest with him about the FRA’s violation as well as the NWDA project. “We want to make it known [to the state] that we are not going to give up without a fight,” said Saruben Bagul.

The author would like thank Ramesh Dhoom and Jayshree Deshmukh for their contributions.

Nikita Sonavane is a research fellow at the Centre for Social Justice, Ahmedabad. He work revolves around the Forest Rights Act and the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act in the Scheduled Areas of Gujarat.

Interlinking of Rivers, Which Could Solve Drought Problems, Faces Trouble in BJP’s Home Turf

Are major faultlines within the BJP leadership coming in the way of the implementation of the grand inter-linking of rivers (ILR) project?

The interlinking of rivers project is facing some hurdles in BJP-ruled states. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Are major faultlines within the BJP leadership coming in the way of the implementation of the grand interlinking of rivers (ILR) project? While misconceptions and genuine doubts persist over the feasibility of the project and its impact on the lives of those it would impact directly or indirectly, Union Water Resources Minister Uma Bharti’s fervent appeal to the states, including those ruled by the BJP, to expedite the clearances of the ILR projects indicated that getting it off the ground is proving to be a major challenge.

The need for the project has never been felt more than it is now as parts of the country are dealing with severe droughts, coupled with one of the hottest summers in over a century. The proponents of the ILR scheme argue that since the country receives rain only for three months in a year, there is a need to store water adequately for the rest of the year.

It is also ironic that while about 40 million hectares of the country’s area experiences periodic flood, with about 1500 human lives and one lakh cattle lost to it every year, the country is not able to divert or store much of this water. On the other hand, about a third of the total population resides in areas that are drought prone, spread over nearly 108 million hectares.

It was in light of this dichotomy that the Supreme Court had on February 27, 2012, directed the Centre and concerned states governments to implement the ambitious ILR project in a timely manner, and had also asked the Centre to appoint a high-powered committee for the planning and implementation of the project.

The project was, however, not devoid of shortcomings. Many experts feared that diverting water would lead to newer problems, deprive the Adivasi and other tribal communities of their land holdings and may even cause flooding and soil erosion problems.

Some like Eklavya Prasad of Megh Pyne Abhiyan, which has been working in the field of drinking water and sanitation in flood-prone north Bihar where the ILR is expected to first cover the districts of Khagaria, Samastipur and Begusarai, questioned how can one expect much from it when the Kosi canal system built by the British was not able to prevent misery from floods.

But the Centre is moving ahead as the gains or the reduction in pain due to the ILR far outweighs any negative consequences. Far too many lives are being lost each year to floods and droughts and the economic cost of these too is prohibitive.

Realising that the misconceptions and political opposition is holding the project back, at the ninth meeting of the special committee for ILR, Bharti said the drought had necessitated the need for the removal of the misgivings and the quick implementation of the ILR. The interlinking of rivers can prove effective in dealing with such situations, she said.

“Inter-linking of rivers will not affect flow of sweet water in the rivers. We are not stopping the flow of sweet water of the rivers, but will only be transferring the extra water of these rivers which comes during monsoon and floods to those rivers which have less water. This will not affect the flow of water of any river in the country,” she assured.

Many states like Odisha have raised doubts about the project. Referring to it, Bharti said there were many misconceptions about the Mahanadi-Godavari link in Odisha. “People used to believe that Mahanadi does not have sufficient water and even then its water is being transferred to Godavari. But when it was explained to them that first extra water will be brought to Mahanadi through Subern Rekha-Mahanadi link, it helped in removing their misconceptions about the Mahanadi-Godavari link,” she said.

Similarly, referring to the Ken-Batwa link as the first project to go onstream, Bharti expressed the hope that work on the first phase will start within three months. However, she urged the government of Madhya Pradesh to provide necessary forest clearance at the earliest so that work on the first phase of the project could begin soon. That she had to make the appeal showed that Shivraj Singh Chauhan, who had succeeded Bharti as the chief minister of the state, has not facilitated her dream project in any way.

That the water resources minister has also not received adequate support from the other BJP-ruled states of Gujarat and Maharashtra became clear when Bharti urged these governments to provide their clearance to the Daman Ganga-Pinjal and Par-Tapi-Narmada link projects.

The Daman Ganga-Pinjal link would enhance the supply of water to Mumbai. From Pinjal dam, this link would carry 3,741 million litres per day of water. Now compare this with each of the two water trains that were sent to Maharashtra recently. They carried just 2.5 million litres of water each. The link would supply nearly 1500 train-loads of water daily..

Bharti said she would discuss the two projects with Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis in Mumbai on May 3. The minister acknowledged that as issues pertaining to tribal areas are coming in the way, she would visit the affected areas and sit with officials of both states to resolve them.

Director General of National Water Development Agency (NWDA) Masood Husain said the National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, has submitted the draft report on a water balance study of the Mahandi-Gadavari link project to the Odisha government and after obtaining its views will submit a final report to the special committee.

Status of intra-state link projects

Husain also provided the status of the intra-state link projects. He said 46 proposals for such links have been received from nine states, namely Maharashtra, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Odisha, Bihar, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Chhattisgarh. “The pre-feasibility report (PFRs) of 35 intra-state links have been completed. The DPR of two intra-state links for Burhi Gandak-Ganga and Kosi-Mechi received from Bihar are under consideration with Central Water Commission.”

However, the delay at the end of the Central Water Commission was highlighted by the representative of the Bihar government who charged that the proposals has been pending with the Commission for over two years.

For the ILR programme, which seeks to ensure greater equity in the distribution of water by enhancing its availability in drought-prone and rainfed area through interlinking of rivers, 14 links have been identified under the Himalayan rivers component and 16 links under peninsular rivers component for inter-basin transfer of water. These links have been identified on the basis of field surveys, investigation and detailed studies.

Twenty one months have passed since the union cabinet approved the constitution of a special committee on the ILR to expedite the projects, but progress has been slow. And if Bharti is to be believed, the BJP’s own state governments can remove many of the obstacles coming in the way of the project.