There can be no question of Tamil Nadu giving up its rights over Mullaiperiyar. Its waters are not exclusively Kerala's, but an inter-State resource governed by the principles of inter-State rivers.
In the latest intensification of the Mullaiperiyar controversy, I see the media discourse not only tilted in favour of Kerala but also seeking to paint Tamil Nadu in a bad light — as an adamant State not concerned about the safety of the people in the neighbouring State. The propaganda by Kerala, which was started way back in 1979 with an article in a Malayalam newspaper, has become so institutionalised now that I see independent experts and activists voicing opinions that fail to take into account Tamil Nadu's considered standpoint.
One of the reasons for the national media overlooking Tamil Nadu's views could be lack of ‘experts', ‘intellectuals', ‘activists', ‘policy-makers' and the like — those who normally contribute erudite articles to the edit and op-ed pages of English newspapers and also appear on television debates — to articulate the State's perspective. But the most important reason is that Mullaiperiyar per se is not an emotive or political issue in Tamil Nadu, which has been treating it as a rights issue that it can solve legally. After all, justice is on the side of the right.
That does not mean that Tamil Nadu has not been responsive to the ‘concerns' that were manufactured with the sole intention of nullifying the State's right over 8000 acres of land that Tamil Nadu holds inside Kerala by virtue of an agreement between the erstwhile Maharaja of Travancore and the British Government in India in 1886. Tamil Nadu has taken several steps over the past three decades to allay the fears of the people in Kerala despite knowing very well that politicians were causing panic by propagating falsehoods.
In this context, I found it amusing when Ramaswamy R. Iyer, in two articles, one in The Hindu and another in its sister publication Frontline, stated: “Let Tamil Nadu and Kerala set up a joint committee and reach a mutual agreement. This is essentially a matter for settlement by amicable agreement, not judicial determination.” When I read his statements that neither the view of the Central Water Commission nor the judgment of the Supreme Court was acceptable, I wondered what locus standi he had to make such a suggestion.
With due respect to his views, let me provide key irrefutable facts to reject his thesis. Mr. Iyer himself should be aware of the fact that several rounds of talks have been held between the two States during the past three decades and all of them failed. The talks were held at different levels. Chief Ministers of the States have discussed the issue; Irrigation Ministers have tried to sort out the differences; Chief Secretaries have attempted to arrive at a solution; and other officials have sat across the table several times, even in the presence of the Union Water Resources Ministry. Does Mr. Iyer think that a mutual agreement is possible even now?
But what is galling is Mr. Iyer's contention that it is not a matter for judicial determination. It is the right of every citizen of this country to seek legal recourse on contentious issues and his or her duty to abide by the ruling of the courts. The fact that the Kerala government has failed to abide by the directions of the Supreme Court of India is something no one is bringing to light in the media discourse.
One example relates to the strengthening of the Mullaiperiyar dam, which needs to be done in three phases — emergency, medium-term, and long-term, as advised by the Central Water Commission. Though the medium level strengthening has been completed, Kerala did not allow Tamil Nadu to raise the water level to 142 feet as per the Supreme Court's directive. But overcoming the obstacles that Kerala threw in the way of carrying out the work was more agonising. When Tamil Nadu wanted to use small explosives to break stones, Kerala objected saying that the noise would disturb wildlife. When Tamil Nadu tried to transport the gravel in lorries, they stopped the vehicles saying the sound would scare the animals. At last, we used donkeys to transport building material.
Now Kerala is refusing to give permission for strengthening the baby dam, which is part of the irrigation system in Mullaiperiyar, and the building of the parapet walls on the main dam, which is essential if Tamil Nadu is to complete the long-term strengthening process. If Kerala's concern is the dam's safety alone, why is it preventing us physically from carrying out the strengthening work? I hope the people of Kerala, if they are really fearful of the dam bursting, would ask this of their rulers. Once the long-term strengthening is done, Tamil Nadu would be legally entitled to store water up to 152 feet. It is pertinent here to record the fact that the Kerala government has steadfastly refused to give a power connection to the small PWD maintenance office located at the dam site.
Another issue raised by Mr. Iyer and some other ‘experts' is that the 1886 agreement is seen as ‘unfair' to Kerala. But has its government ever made an issue of it openly? In the various talks I have participated in, the alleged unfairness of the agreement never cropped up. The land clearly belongs to Tamil Nadu as the agreement of 1886 is legally sound.
There can be no question of Tamil Nadu giving up its rights over Mullaiperiyar. The latest slogan, ‘Water for Tamil Nadu, Safety for Kerala,' is just a deception. The proposal for a new dam downstream, which has caught the fancy of many well-meaning people with no real knowledge of ground realities, is only a ploy to deprive Tamil Nadu of water. The most important element that is missing in this narrative is that Mullaiperiyar waters are not exclusively Kerala's, but an inter-State resource governed by the principles of inter-State rivers.
Let me explain why. First, if a new dam is constructed away — that too, downstream — from the Mullaiperiyar, Tamil Nadu will not be able to draw water and supply it to the rain-shadow districts of Theni, Dindigul, Madurai, Sivagangai, and Ramanathapuram. Secondly, environmental clearance could be an uphill task for the construction of a new structure now, given the latest laws, which might be used as a pretext by Kerala to throw up its hands after knocking off the present dam and thus achieving its goal of diverting the water to Idukki dam for power generation.
Kerala's politicians have never told their people for more than two decades that if the Mullaiperiyar is removed, then only about eight tmcft of water would flow into the Idukki dam, which can hold 73 tmcft water. When the people, who have never had an opportunity to see the dam in the thick reserve forest area, were enlightened that the Idukki dam, which is normally filled only up to half its capacity, would hold the water, the Kerala government machinery floated a theory that Idukki would not be able to withstand the sudden inflow. But even the Kerala Advocate General recently told the court that the water would easily collect in the three dams downstream, including Idukki.
Coming to the bogey of ‘tremors' becoming a common occurrence in the region, I wonder why Kerala is so cavalier about it, if its claims were true. Will not a strong earthquake pull down the Idukki dam, which is also in the same seismic region, and cause more devastation?
Another suggestion by Mr. Iyer that hurt me immensely is that Tamil Nadu should “minimise…[its] dependence on the waters of the Mullaiperiyar dam.” All those who want the dam to be decommissioned or its water level brought down to 120 feet should read the life history of Major John Pennycuick, the British humanist who was moved by the plight of the people after a series of famines that led to starvation deaths and large-scale migration from the rain-shadow region. The dam is an example of an educated man's compassion for the marginalised sections of society that eke out a living tilling the ground.
Let me conclude by stating another truth. Kerala politicians mounted the proverbial tiger on the Mullaiperiyar issue. They cannot dismount now. But we believe in justice and that explains why we never played any obstructionist role in bringing out the truth that the dam would stand firm for many more years to give livelihood to the people in Tamil Nadu.
(The author is a senior DMK leader and has been a Tamil Nadu Minister holding portfolios of the PWD and Water Resources and Law.)
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Two States and a water issue (Ramaswamy R. Iyer) - The Hindu (29 Dec 2011)
Reassure the people in Kerala on the safety of Mullaperiyar dam, and persuade the people in Tamil Nadu to accept a safe water-level behind the dam. Bring about an agreement through amicable negotiations.
This article seeks to explain the elements of the raging controversy over the Mullaperiyar dam for the information of the general reader. There are four distinct aspects to this case, and these are elucidated below.
(a) Extraordinary nature of the project: This is a project involving the eastward diversion of the waters of a west-flowing river, which has been celebrated as a gigantic feat of 19th century engineering. It was a major intervention in nature of a kind that is no longer much in favour. Was that feat of engineering necessary? Were there no other possibilities of development — less ambitious, less capital-intensive, less damaging to nature and wildlife, more local, less water-demanding — for the water-short districts in the Vaigai Basin? Such questions were probably not asked at the time. EIAs, the assessment of options, etc., are practices that came up much later. Be that as it may, the project was constructed and Periyar waters have been flowing to Tamil Nadu for over a hundred years.
(b) Sense of grievance in Kerala: Under the 1886 agreement between the former Madras Presidency and the princely State of Travancore, Travancore agreed to the diversion of Periyar waters to Madras Presidency, and to lease a piece of land (8000 acres) in its territory to Madras Presidency for building and operating the project designed for this purpose. The curious fact is that the lease was for 999 years. Whole countries and civilisations could have changed during that period! In Kerala, there is an almost universal feeling (right or wrong) that the 1886 agreement was an unfair one imposed on a reluctant Travancore by a more powerful Madras Presidency with the prestige and power of the British government behind it; and that while Madras (now Tamil Nadu) benefited substantially from the agreement, Travancore (Kerala) got little more than a negligible lease-rent for the land leased to Madras. In 1970, an increase in the lease rent was negotiated by Kerala but there was no radical revision of the totality of the agreement. In any resolution of the Mullaperiyar issue, some assuaging of Kerala's longstanding grievance will have to be an element.
(c) The dam safety question and the people's fears: Prima facie, dam safety does not seem a suitable subject for judicial determination. One wishes that the Supreme Court had told the two State governments to resolve the issue by amicable discussions, or to seek the intervention of the Central government. Alternatively, the Supreme Court could have directed the Inter-State Council, a constitutional body, to intervene and bring about an amicable settlement. Instead the learned judges decided to deal with the matter themselves, and appointed an Empowered Committee to examine and report on it. The Empowered Committee includes eminent experts but their opinion, even if the Supreme Court accepts it, may not necessarily be the final word on the subject, particularly if a different opinion is given by other equally distinguished experts outside. Under the circumstances, the sensible course would be for the two State governments, perhaps with the assistance of a joint committee of experts, to reach a reasonable agreement on the subject.
However, no expert can give an absolute guarantee of safety. The dam in this case is 116 years old, and even with all the strengthening measures, one can hardly be wholly confident about its safety under all circumstances. The recent tremors in the area might have been minor but no one can guarantee that a stronger earthquake will not occur, or that if it does the dam will withstand it; or that if there is an exceptionally heavy flood the dam will be safe. These are extreme and perhaps improbable situations but the point is that there can be no absolute unqualified guarantee of safety under all circumstances. That is true of all dams, and particularly so of ageing dams and of dams in seismically active areas.
Moreover, what the experts say may not allay the fears of the people downstream of the dam. To some extent those fears might have been accentuated by the statements of political leaders but they cannot be lightly dismissed as imaginary or paranoid. The people living in the shadow of the dam need to be reassured.
The remote contingency of a risk actually materialising may be acceptable in many cases, but unacceptable in a few. It seems to this writer that the risk in this case falls into the category of ‘unacceptable'.
Having regard to all this, it seems clear that this is a fit case for the application of the Precautionary Principle. This means that the authorities concerned must refrain from putting undue strain on the dam.
A further point is that with strengthening measures, the 116-year-old dam can perhaps be kept going for some more years but it must be presumed to be nearing the end of its useful life. Contingency plans must be prepared for the eventual phasing out of the dam. These must include alternative means of supporting economic activity and prosperity in the project-dependent areas in Tamil Nadu.
The Kerala government wants to replace the old dam by a new dam to be constructed 300 metres downstream. It is not clear that this will enable the continuance of flows to Tamil Nadu. In any case, the old dam itself was a horrendous intervention in nature, but it exists and we have to live with it; but there is no reason why the hubristic engineering of more than a century ago must now be repeated. If Kerala's objective is to escape from what it considers an unfair agreement, the proper course is to re-negotiate the old agreement, and not build a new dam.
(d) The concerns of people in Tamil Nadu: Whatever views one might hold on the nature of the project, the fact is that the people in the water-short Vaigai Basin areas in Tamil Nadu have been recipients of Periyar waters for over a hundred years, and must be presumed to have acquired some kind of a right of established use. The dispute regarding the safety of the dam has created a sense of uncertainty — in fact an acute anxiety — in the areas concerned in Tamil Nadu about continued flows. Thus, there are two vulnerabilities in this case: the life-security concerns of people in Kerala and the livelihood-security concerns of the people of Tamil Nadu. Both need to be addressed.
Pleas to all
Having regard to the foregoing analysis, this writer respectfully makes the following pleas to all:
To the two State governments or to the one concerned:
• tone down the rhetoric; don't take extreme, non-negotiable positions;
• don't build a new dam;
• strengthen the existing dam and operate it safely at a mutually agreed water-level; implement whatever safety measures the experts recommend;
• negotiate changes in the old agreement to remove the continuing sense of unfairness;
• reassure the people in Kerala on safety, and persuade the people in Tamil Nadu to accept a safe water-level behind the dam; bring about an agreement on this through amicable negotiations with the assistance of NGOs, eminent persons, etc;
• recognise that even with strengthening, the 116-year-old dam will not last forever, and plan for its gradual phasing out over a period of time; explore alternative ways of meeting the legitimate water needs of the affected population; minimise their dependence on waters from the Mullaperiyar dam through better water management, changes in cropping patterns, changes to forms of development that need less water, etc. (The Centre should assist Tamil Nadu in such adaptation efforts.)
To the people in both States:
• don't demonise each other;
• recognise each other's vulnerabilities;
• remember that the history has been one of inter-State cooperation and harmony; don't endanger that spirit.
To intellectuals, eminent persons, NGOs, the media, etc, in both States:
• educate public opinion;
• bring the people together; promote understanding and harmony; defuse the current tension.
This article seeks to explain the elements of the raging controversy over the Mullaperiyar dam for the information of the general reader. There are four distinct aspects to this case, and these are elucidated below.
(a) Extraordinary nature of the project: This is a project involving the eastward diversion of the waters of a west-flowing river, which has been celebrated as a gigantic feat of 19th century engineering. It was a major intervention in nature of a kind that is no longer much in favour. Was that feat of engineering necessary? Were there no other possibilities of development — less ambitious, less capital-intensive, less damaging to nature and wildlife, more local, less water-demanding — for the water-short districts in the Vaigai Basin? Such questions were probably not asked at the time. EIAs, the assessment of options, etc., are practices that came up much later. Be that as it may, the project was constructed and Periyar waters have been flowing to Tamil Nadu for over a hundred years.
(b) Sense of grievance in Kerala: Under the 1886 agreement between the former Madras Presidency and the princely State of Travancore, Travancore agreed to the diversion of Periyar waters to Madras Presidency, and to lease a piece of land (8000 acres) in its territory to Madras Presidency for building and operating the project designed for this purpose. The curious fact is that the lease was for 999 years. Whole countries and civilisations could have changed during that period! In Kerala, there is an almost universal feeling (right or wrong) that the 1886 agreement was an unfair one imposed on a reluctant Travancore by a more powerful Madras Presidency with the prestige and power of the British government behind it; and that while Madras (now Tamil Nadu) benefited substantially from the agreement, Travancore (Kerala) got little more than a negligible lease-rent for the land leased to Madras. In 1970, an increase in the lease rent was negotiated by Kerala but there was no radical revision of the totality of the agreement. In any resolution of the Mullaperiyar issue, some assuaging of Kerala's longstanding grievance will have to be an element.
(c) The dam safety question and the people's fears: Prima facie, dam safety does not seem a suitable subject for judicial determination. One wishes that the Supreme Court had told the two State governments to resolve the issue by amicable discussions, or to seek the intervention of the Central government. Alternatively, the Supreme Court could have directed the Inter-State Council, a constitutional body, to intervene and bring about an amicable settlement. Instead the learned judges decided to deal with the matter themselves, and appointed an Empowered Committee to examine and report on it. The Empowered Committee includes eminent experts but their opinion, even if the Supreme Court accepts it, may not necessarily be the final word on the subject, particularly if a different opinion is given by other equally distinguished experts outside. Under the circumstances, the sensible course would be for the two State governments, perhaps with the assistance of a joint committee of experts, to reach a reasonable agreement on the subject.
However, no expert can give an absolute guarantee of safety. The dam in this case is 116 years old, and even with all the strengthening measures, one can hardly be wholly confident about its safety under all circumstances. The recent tremors in the area might have been minor but no one can guarantee that a stronger earthquake will not occur, or that if it does the dam will withstand it; or that if there is an exceptionally heavy flood the dam will be safe. These are extreme and perhaps improbable situations but the point is that there can be no absolute unqualified guarantee of safety under all circumstances. That is true of all dams, and particularly so of ageing dams and of dams in seismically active areas.
Moreover, what the experts say may not allay the fears of the people downstream of the dam. To some extent those fears might have been accentuated by the statements of political leaders but they cannot be lightly dismissed as imaginary or paranoid. The people living in the shadow of the dam need to be reassured.
The remote contingency of a risk actually materialising may be acceptable in many cases, but unacceptable in a few. It seems to this writer that the risk in this case falls into the category of ‘unacceptable'.
Having regard to all this, it seems clear that this is a fit case for the application of the Precautionary Principle. This means that the authorities concerned must refrain from putting undue strain on the dam.
A further point is that with strengthening measures, the 116-year-old dam can perhaps be kept going for some more years but it must be presumed to be nearing the end of its useful life. Contingency plans must be prepared for the eventual phasing out of the dam. These must include alternative means of supporting economic activity and prosperity in the project-dependent areas in Tamil Nadu.
The Kerala government wants to replace the old dam by a new dam to be constructed 300 metres downstream. It is not clear that this will enable the continuance of flows to Tamil Nadu. In any case, the old dam itself was a horrendous intervention in nature, but it exists and we have to live with it; but there is no reason why the hubristic engineering of more than a century ago must now be repeated. If Kerala's objective is to escape from what it considers an unfair agreement, the proper course is to re-negotiate the old agreement, and not build a new dam.
(d) The concerns of people in Tamil Nadu: Whatever views one might hold on the nature of the project, the fact is that the people in the water-short Vaigai Basin areas in Tamil Nadu have been recipients of Periyar waters for over a hundred years, and must be presumed to have acquired some kind of a right of established use. The dispute regarding the safety of the dam has created a sense of uncertainty — in fact an acute anxiety — in the areas concerned in Tamil Nadu about continued flows. Thus, there are two vulnerabilities in this case: the life-security concerns of people in Kerala and the livelihood-security concerns of the people of Tamil Nadu. Both need to be addressed.
Pleas to all
Having regard to the foregoing analysis, this writer respectfully makes the following pleas to all:
To the two State governments or to the one concerned:
• tone down the rhetoric; don't take extreme, non-negotiable positions;
• don't build a new dam;
• strengthen the existing dam and operate it safely at a mutually agreed water-level; implement whatever safety measures the experts recommend;
• negotiate changes in the old agreement to remove the continuing sense of unfairness;
• reassure the people in Kerala on safety, and persuade the people in Tamil Nadu to accept a safe water-level behind the dam; bring about an agreement on this through amicable negotiations with the assistance of NGOs, eminent persons, etc;
• recognise that even with strengthening, the 116-year-old dam will not last forever, and plan for its gradual phasing out over a period of time; explore alternative ways of meeting the legitimate water needs of the affected population; minimise their dependence on waters from the Mullaperiyar dam through better water management, changes in cropping patterns, changes to forms of development that need less water, etc. (The Centre should assist Tamil Nadu in such adaptation efforts.)
To the people in both States:
• don't demonise each other;
• recognise each other's vulnerabilities;
• remember that the history has been one of inter-State cooperation and harmony; don't endanger that spirit.
To intellectuals, eminent persons, NGOs, the media, etc, in both States:
• educate public opinion;
• bring the people together; promote understanding and harmony; defuse the current tension.
Friday, December 30, 2011
Sir, we regret to remind - Unrelenting solid waste dumping on in river bed
29 December 2011
YJA/CORRES/12/11
Sri Tejendra Khanna
Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi
Raj Niwas
GNCT of DELHI
Sub: Sir, we regret to remind - Unrelenting solid waste dumping on in river bed
Respected Sir,
Greetings from Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan.
Sir, this is in continuation of earlier communications dated 12 November and 5 December 2011, whereby we had brought to your kind attention about solid waste (construction/building debris) being dumped in the river bed. We had hoped that your directions in the matter would have been heeded to by the relevant agencies.
But today again when we visited the site we were appalled to notice the large scale dumping going on as before. Please see the enclosed pictures from today (29.12.2011).
This also raises a moot point if this is the only site in the river bed where such dumping is taking place or other parts of the river bed in the city are also facing similar assault?
We request that DDA, MCD and PWD may kindly be asked to not only get this illegality stopped and to get this site cleared of the dumped solid waste and to restore the natural lake and the river bed, but to also report to your honour regarding other similar sites if any in the river bed.
Hoping that your honour would see merit in our submissions.
Warm regards,
Manoj Misra
Convener
Encl: As above
CC:
Smt. Jayanthi Natarajan, Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge), Ministry of Environment and Forests For your kind information and necessary action please.
Smt. Sheila Dixit, Hon'ble Chief Minister of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Vice Chairman, Delhi Development Authority – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Delhi Urban Arts Commission, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 – For your kind information please.
Chairman, Yamuna Standing Committee, Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K. Puram, New Delhi – For your kind information please.
YJA/CORRES/12/11
Sri Tejendra Khanna
Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi
Raj Niwas
GNCT of DELHI
Sub: Sir, we regret to remind - Unrelenting solid waste dumping on in river bed
Respected Sir,
Greetings from Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan.
Sir, this is in continuation of earlier communications dated 12 November and 5 December 2011, whereby we had brought to your kind attention about solid waste (construction/building debris) being dumped in the river bed. We had hoped that your directions in the matter would have been heeded to by the relevant agencies.
But today again when we visited the site we were appalled to notice the large scale dumping going on as before. Please see the enclosed pictures from today (29.12.2011).
This also raises a moot point if this is the only site in the river bed where such dumping is taking place or other parts of the river bed in the city are also facing similar assault?
We request that DDA, MCD and PWD may kindly be asked to not only get this illegality stopped and to get this site cleared of the dumped solid waste and to restore the natural lake and the river bed, but to also report to your honour regarding other similar sites if any in the river bed.
Hoping that your honour would see merit in our submissions.
Warm regards,
Manoj Misra
Convener
Encl: As above
CC:
Smt. Jayanthi Natarajan, Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge), Ministry of Environment and Forests For your kind information and necessary action please.
Smt. Sheila Dixit, Hon'ble Chief Minister of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Vice Chairman, Delhi Development Authority – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Delhi Urban Arts Commission, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 – For your kind information please.
Chairman, Yamuna Standing Committee, Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K. Puram, New Delhi – For your kind information please.
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
SC moved for review of Yamuna order (Times of India)
Neha Lalchandani, TNN | Dec 28, 2011, 06.53AM IST
NEW DELHI: The original petitioners in the case of encroachment on the Yamuna, filed in the Delhi high court in 2007, have filed a curative petition in the Supreme Court, asking it to review its decision of 2009 that once an embankment is constructed, the land enclosed by it ceases to be a flood plain.
The group, led by waterman Rajindra Singh and Manoj Mishra, has stated in the petition that the concerned bench should take into account the floods of 2010 and the Shunglu Committee report on the CWG to reverse its order on the legality of the Commonwealth Games Village and address the larger issue of encroachment on the flood plain. "A petition against the games village had been filed in the HC for protection of the river and the flood plain. We had relied upon DDA's master plan, NEERI reports, the Ministry of Environment and Forests rulings and other expert reports to say that the village was an encroachment on the flood plain and that it was ecologically sensitive area that should be protected," said Mishra.
The HC's November 2008 judgment was challenged in a special leave petition in the SC which, in an order issued on July 30, 2009, set aside the HC order saying that the land on the north of the embankment, on which the games village had come up, was no longer river bed by virtue of being enclosed by the embankment. A review was filed against this order which was dismissed in December 2009.
Petitioners say that post the dismissal of the review petition in the SC, two significant developments took place which they have used to support their latest petition. "In the flooding of 2010, the land south and east of the embankment was flooded. Even the basements of the games village were flooded despite the presence of the embankment. This proves that the entire stretch of land is river bed. The order did not make any mention of the DMRC quarters that also came up west of Akshardham that were also affected by the flood waters," said Mishra.
The Akshardham temple was used as a precedent in the earlier order, justifying the construction of the games village which we feel was unjustified , he added.
He also said that in the Shunglu Committee report on the CWG, submitted in 2011, a case had been made against the village stating that no alternative sites were considered for the Commonwealth Games Village "because of an implicit desire to construct next to the Akshardham and at no other site."
NEW DELHI: The original petitioners in the case of encroachment on the Yamuna, filed in the Delhi high court in 2007, have filed a curative petition in the Supreme Court, asking it to review its decision of 2009 that once an embankment is constructed, the land enclosed by it ceases to be a flood plain.
The group, led by waterman Rajindra Singh and Manoj Mishra, has stated in the petition that the concerned bench should take into account the floods of 2010 and the Shunglu Committee report on the CWG to reverse its order on the legality of the Commonwealth Games Village and address the larger issue of encroachment on the flood plain. "A petition against the games village had been filed in the HC for protection of the river and the flood plain. We had relied upon DDA's master plan, NEERI reports, the Ministry of Environment and Forests rulings and other expert reports to say that the village was an encroachment on the flood plain and that it was ecologically sensitive area that should be protected," said Mishra.
The HC's November 2008 judgment was challenged in a special leave petition in the SC which, in an order issued on July 30, 2009, set aside the HC order saying that the land on the north of the embankment, on which the games village had come up, was no longer river bed by virtue of being enclosed by the embankment. A review was filed against this order which was dismissed in December 2009.
Petitioners say that post the dismissal of the review petition in the SC, two significant developments took place which they have used to support their latest petition. "In the flooding of 2010, the land south and east of the embankment was flooded. Even the basements of the games village were flooded despite the presence of the embankment. This proves that the entire stretch of land is river bed. The order did not make any mention of the DMRC quarters that also came up west of Akshardham that were also affected by the flood waters," said Mishra.
The Akshardham temple was used as a precedent in the earlier order, justifying the construction of the games village which we feel was unjustified , he added.
He also said that in the Shunglu Committee report on the CWG, submitted in 2011, a case had been made against the village stating that no alternative sites were considered for the Commonwealth Games Village "because of an implicit desire to construct next to the Akshardham and at no other site."
Monday, December 26, 2011
Towards a clean Yamuna (The Hindu 23 December 2011)
Chief Minister opens work on interceptor sewers in Nangloi
Delhi's dream of a clean Yamuna got a step closer to realisation on Thursday when work for laying interceptor sewers was inaugurated in the presence of Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit at Nihal Vihar under the Nangloi segment of the Delhi Assembly.
Speaking on the occasion, Ms. Dikshit described it “as a historic moment” which will go a long way in reviving the glory of the Yamuna. Referring to the interceptor sewer proposal, she said the work has been finalised in consultation with the Planning Commission and Engineers India Limited has been appointed as project management consultant for implementation of the project which will cost Rs.1,978 crore.
The cost includes 11 years operations and maintenance of the entire system of interceptor sewer apart from the capital cost.
Work on the sewers will begin on Friday and is expected to be complete by 2014. Ms. Diskhit, who is also the chairperson of the Delhi Jal Board that has been mandated to carry out the work, said with the interceptors in place, the river will become pollution-free within the next couple of years and its quality will improve from 41 ppm to 12 ppm.
She said the quality will further improve downstream and the treated effluent will be utilised for non potable purposes, and sewage from areas with no sewer connections will be trapped and prevented form entering the Yamuna.
Pointing out that dumping solid waste and garbage, entry of untreated waste water, addition of industrial effluent, litter, plastic and polythene add to the pollution in the river, Ms. Dikshit exhorted all stake-holders to work in tandem and ensure completion of their responsibilities assigned under the interceptor sewer project.
The MCD is supposed to prevent dumping of garbage in drains and the river besides desilting and fencing of drains, the Irrigation and Flood Control Department has been assigned to de-silt and channelise drains, the DDA has also been asked to ensure that the riverbank is free of squatters and the DSIIDC will have to ensure the treatment of all industrial effluent through its CETPs before discharge, while the Delhi Pollution Control Committee is supposed to monitor various water quality parameters in the river, the Chief Minister pointed out.
She said the new sewer treatment plants will be put up after the existing capacity of STPs is fully utilised. The work has been awarded to three different agencies for completing it in a time-bound manner.
Sewers of 59 km length, 20 to 60 feet depth and sizes ranging from 24 mm to 600 mm diameter will be laid along the three major drains to intercept sewage flowing from subsidiary small drains and convey it to the nearest STP to ensure that only treated sewage is discharged.
Delhi's dream of a clean Yamuna got a step closer to realisation on Thursday when work for laying interceptor sewers was inaugurated in the presence of Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit at Nihal Vihar under the Nangloi segment of the Delhi Assembly.
Speaking on the occasion, Ms. Dikshit described it “as a historic moment” which will go a long way in reviving the glory of the Yamuna. Referring to the interceptor sewer proposal, she said the work has been finalised in consultation with the Planning Commission and Engineers India Limited has been appointed as project management consultant for implementation of the project which will cost Rs.1,978 crore.
The cost includes 11 years operations and maintenance of the entire system of interceptor sewer apart from the capital cost.
Work on the sewers will begin on Friday and is expected to be complete by 2014. Ms. Diskhit, who is also the chairperson of the Delhi Jal Board that has been mandated to carry out the work, said with the interceptors in place, the river will become pollution-free within the next couple of years and its quality will improve from 41 ppm to 12 ppm.
She said the quality will further improve downstream and the treated effluent will be utilised for non potable purposes, and sewage from areas with no sewer connections will be trapped and prevented form entering the Yamuna.
Pointing out that dumping solid waste and garbage, entry of untreated waste water, addition of industrial effluent, litter, plastic and polythene add to the pollution in the river, Ms. Dikshit exhorted all stake-holders to work in tandem and ensure completion of their responsibilities assigned under the interceptor sewer project.
The MCD is supposed to prevent dumping of garbage in drains and the river besides desilting and fencing of drains, the Irrigation and Flood Control Department has been assigned to de-silt and channelise drains, the DDA has also been asked to ensure that the riverbank is free of squatters and the DSIIDC will have to ensure the treatment of all industrial effluent through its CETPs before discharge, while the Delhi Pollution Control Committee is supposed to monitor various water quality parameters in the river, the Chief Minister pointed out.
She said the new sewer treatment plants will be put up after the existing capacity of STPs is fully utilised. The work has been awarded to three different agencies for completing it in a time-bound manner.
Sewers of 59 km length, 20 to 60 feet depth and sizes ranging from 24 mm to 600 mm diameter will be laid along the three major drains to intercept sewage flowing from subsidiary small drains and convey it to the nearest STP to ensure that only treated sewage is discharged.
पालम ड्रेन की सफाई करेगा बैक्टीरिया (Navbharat Times 22 December 2011)
पूनम पाण्डे॥ नई दिल्ली: पालम ड्रेन की सफाई अब बैक्टीरिया करेंगे। इससे ड्रेन का पानी इस हद तक साफ हो जाएगा कि उसे सिंचाई के लिए इस्तेमाल किया जा सकता है। पालम ड्रेन आगे जाकर नजफगढ़ ड्रेन में गिरती है और नजफगढ़ ड्रेन यमुना में। डीडीए ने इसके लिए टेंडर निकाले हैं। इंटैक की निगरानी में यह काम होगा।
बायो रेमिडिएशन टेक्निक के जरिए पालम ड्रेन की सफाई होगी। इंटैक के अधिकारी ने बताया कि इसमें पानी में धीरे-धीरे बैक्टीरिया छोड़े जाते हैं। यह बैक्टीरिया पानी की सफाई करते हैं। एक सोर्स से बैक्टीरिया लगातार पानी में मिलते हैं और नाले के साथ ही आगे बढ़ते जाते हैं। इस तरह बैक्टीरिया की संख्या भी बढ़ती जाती है और पानी साफ होता है। इंटैक इस तरह का पायलट प्रोजेक्ट कुशक नाला पर कर चुका है, जो काफी सफल रहा। इंटैक ने पहले बायो रेमिडिएशन के जरिए नालों की सफाई करने का प्रपोजल दिल्ली जल बोर्ड को दिया था। लेकिन इस पर कुछ हुआ नहीं। अब डीडीए ने पालम ड्रेन साफ करने के लिए इस तरीके को अपनाया है।
इंटैक अधिकारी ने बताया कि यह 3 से 5 साल तक का प्रोजेक्ट होगा। बैक्टीरिया के जरिए ड्रेन का पानी साफ होगा और चाहें तो इसे सिंचाई के लिए इस्तेमाल किया जा सकता है। इस तरीके से नाले की सफाई करना पारंपरिक तरीके से काफी सस्ता बैठता है। जैसे पालम ड्रेन की सफाई बायो रेमिडिएशन से करने और पारंपरिक तरीके से करने में लागत में करीब 6 गुना का अंतर आएगा। बायो रेमिडिएशन तरीका 6 गुना सस्ता पड़ेगा। जैसे इस तरीके में कैपिटल कॉस्ट करीब 12 करोड़ रुपये आएगी। इसमें नालों के किनारे सुधारे जाएंगे और आसपास की गंदगी साफ की जाएगी। ऑपरेशंस और मेंटिनेंस का खर्च करीब 3 करोड़ रुपये आएगा। अगर पारंपरिक तरीके से नाला साफ करना चाहे तो कैपिटल कॉस्ट 75 करोड़ रुपये आएगी और जमीन की लागत अलग से। जिस जमीन पर ट्रीटमेंट प्लांट बनाया जाएगा। ऑपरेशंस और मेंटेनेंस का खर्च करीब 9 करोड़ रुपये होगा साथ ही बहुत ज्यादा बिजली भी खर्च होगी। साल में कम से कम 10 मिलियन किलोवॉट बिजली इस्तेमाल होगी। पारंपरिक तरीके में नाले को ट्रीटमेंट प्लांट में ले जाकर साफ किया जाता है और फिर ट्रीटेड पानी बाहर आ जाता है।
दिल्ली जल बोर्ड यमुना को साफ करने के लिए पारंपरिक तरीका ही इस्तेमाल कर रहा है। वह इंटरसेप्टर प्रोजेक्ट पर काम कर रहा है। इसके तहत यमुना में गिरने वाले नालों को रोककर उन्हें सीवेज ट्रीटमेंट प्लांट ले जाया जाएगा। यहां ट्रीट होने के बाद इन नालों को फिर बड़े नालों में छोड़ा जाएगा और तब नालों से जो पानी यमुना में गिरता है वह ट्रीटेड होगा। अगर नालों की सफाई बायो रेेमिडिएशन तरीके से की जाती तो यह काफी सस्ता पड़ता। पानी दोनों तरीके से लगभग बराबर ही साफ होगा। जल बोर्ड मान रहा है कि इंटरसेप्टर प्रोजेक्ट से यमुना पूरी तरह साफ नहीं होगी और यमुना का पानी नहाने लायक नहीं होगा। यह बस सिंचाई के लायक ही होगा। इंटैक के मुताबिक बैक्टीरिया से पालम ड्रेन को साफ करने के बाद उसका पानी भी सिंचाई के लायक हो जाए गा।
बायो रेमिडिएशन टेक्निक के जरिए पालम ड्रेन की सफाई होगी। इंटैक के अधिकारी ने बताया कि इसमें पानी में धीरे-धीरे बैक्टीरिया छोड़े जाते हैं। यह बैक्टीरिया पानी की सफाई करते हैं। एक सोर्स से बैक्टीरिया लगातार पानी में मिलते हैं और नाले के साथ ही आगे बढ़ते जाते हैं। इस तरह बैक्टीरिया की संख्या भी बढ़ती जाती है और पानी साफ होता है। इंटैक इस तरह का पायलट प्रोजेक्ट कुशक नाला पर कर चुका है, जो काफी सफल रहा। इंटैक ने पहले बायो रेमिडिएशन के जरिए नालों की सफाई करने का प्रपोजल दिल्ली जल बोर्ड को दिया था। लेकिन इस पर कुछ हुआ नहीं। अब डीडीए ने पालम ड्रेन साफ करने के लिए इस तरीके को अपनाया है।
इंटैक अधिकारी ने बताया कि यह 3 से 5 साल तक का प्रोजेक्ट होगा। बैक्टीरिया के जरिए ड्रेन का पानी साफ होगा और चाहें तो इसे सिंचाई के लिए इस्तेमाल किया जा सकता है। इस तरीके से नाले की सफाई करना पारंपरिक तरीके से काफी सस्ता बैठता है। जैसे पालम ड्रेन की सफाई बायो रेमिडिएशन से करने और पारंपरिक तरीके से करने में लागत में करीब 6 गुना का अंतर आएगा। बायो रेमिडिएशन तरीका 6 गुना सस्ता पड़ेगा। जैसे इस तरीके में कैपिटल कॉस्ट करीब 12 करोड़ रुपये आएगी। इसमें नालों के किनारे सुधारे जाएंगे और आसपास की गंदगी साफ की जाएगी। ऑपरेशंस और मेंटिनेंस का खर्च करीब 3 करोड़ रुपये आएगा। अगर पारंपरिक तरीके से नाला साफ करना चाहे तो कैपिटल कॉस्ट 75 करोड़ रुपये आएगी और जमीन की लागत अलग से। जिस जमीन पर ट्रीटमेंट प्लांट बनाया जाएगा। ऑपरेशंस और मेंटेनेंस का खर्च करीब 9 करोड़ रुपये होगा साथ ही बहुत ज्यादा बिजली भी खर्च होगी। साल में कम से कम 10 मिलियन किलोवॉट बिजली इस्तेमाल होगी। पारंपरिक तरीके में नाले को ट्रीटमेंट प्लांट में ले जाकर साफ किया जाता है और फिर ट्रीटेड पानी बाहर आ जाता है।
दिल्ली जल बोर्ड यमुना को साफ करने के लिए पारंपरिक तरीका ही इस्तेमाल कर रहा है। वह इंटरसेप्टर प्रोजेक्ट पर काम कर रहा है। इसके तहत यमुना में गिरने वाले नालों को रोककर उन्हें सीवेज ट्रीटमेंट प्लांट ले जाया जाएगा। यहां ट्रीट होने के बाद इन नालों को फिर बड़े नालों में छोड़ा जाएगा और तब नालों से जो पानी यमुना में गिरता है वह ट्रीटेड होगा। अगर नालों की सफाई बायो रेेमिडिएशन तरीके से की जाती तो यह काफी सस्ता पड़ता। पानी दोनों तरीके से लगभग बराबर ही साफ होगा। जल बोर्ड मान रहा है कि इंटरसेप्टर प्रोजेक्ट से यमुना पूरी तरह साफ नहीं होगी और यमुना का पानी नहाने लायक नहीं होगा। यह बस सिंचाई के लायक ही होगा। इंटैक के मुताबिक बैक्टीरिया से पालम ड्रेन को साफ करने के बाद उसका पानी भी सिंचाई के लायक हो जाए गा।
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
यमुना किनारे सुनाई देगा पक्षियों का कलरव (Dainik Jagran 22 December 2011)
नई दिल्ली वह दिन दूर नहीं जब दिल्ली अपने पुराने समय में लौटेगी। यमुना के किनारे पक्षियों का कलरव गूंजेगा, भंवरों और मधु मक्खियों की गुंजन सुनाई देगी और इधर-उधर रंग-बिरंगी तितलियों का मंडराना देख सकेंगे। इसे यमुना बायोडायवर्सिटी पार्क में दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय के वैज्ञानिक अंजाम देने जा रहे हैं। प्रयोग के तौर पर पहले फेज में बाहरी दिल्ली में 157 एकड़ में जिस बायोडायवर्सिटी पार्क को विकसित किया गया है वह प्रयोग सफल रहा है। इससे प्रभावित होकर उपराज्यपाल तेजेंद्र खन्ना ने इस योजना के दूसरे फेज में 300 एकड़ में शीघ्रता से काम करने के डीडीए और डीयू के अधिकारियों को निर्देश दिए हैं। यमुना डायवर्सिटी पार्क की योजना पर 2003 से काम शुरू किया गया था। यह कार्य डीडीए व दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय के सेंटर फार इन्वायरमेंटल मैनेजमेंट आफ डिगरेटेड इको सिस्टम्स एक साथ मिल कर रहे हैं। इसके हेड डीयू के प्रोफेसर व देश के जाने माने इकोलोजिस्ट प्रो.सी आर बाबू हैं। उनके नेतृत्व में 7 वैज्ञानिकों की टीम व डीडीए अधिकारी योजना पर काम कर रहे हैं। योजना के तहत 457 एकड़ क्षेत्र में वैज्ञानिक आधार पर हरियाली विकसित की जानी है। इसमें पशु पक्षियों, जीव जंतुओं को जीवन भी मिल सके। पहले चरण में 157 एकड़ में बाहरी दिल्ली में कोरेनेशन पार्क के पास बायोडायवर्सिटी पार्क विकसित किया गया। इसमें 1.8 किमी में कृत्रिम झील विकसित की है। इसे भी पेड़-पौधे व मछलियों से सज्जित किया गया। इस पर काम कर रहे डीयू के कीट वैज्ञानिक मोहम्मद फैसल कहते हैं कि झील में अब प्रति वर्ष यहां पर 3 हजार से लेकर 5 हजार साइबेरियन पक्षी पहुंचते हैं। पूरे एनसीआर में यह ऐसी झील है जहां पर यूरोप से प्रति वर्ष 30 से लेकर 40 तक रेड क्रिस्टल आती हैं। अब हैं यहां 190 प्रजाति के पक्षी हैं। पहले यहां मात्र 2 प्रजाति की तितलियां थीं और अब 55 प्रजाति की तितलियां व इल्ली हैं।
गंगा सफाई में यूपी ने खड़े किए हाथ (Dainik Jagran 22 December 2011)
गंगा को वर्ष 2020 तक निर्मल करने का लक्ष्य फिलहाल पूरा होता नहीं दिख रहा है। उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार के पास गंगा नदी की सफाई के लिए पर्याप्त धन नहीं है, इसलिए सरकार नदी सफाई से जुड़ी तमाम योजनाओं पर वह केवल दस फीसदी अंशदान ही दे पाएगी। नदी सफाई योजनाओं पर शेष 90 फीसद खर्च केंद्र सरकार को वहन करना पड़ेगा। नए पेंच के बाद गंगा सफाई से जुड़ी योजनाओं पर विराम लगता दिख रहा है। यह फैसला बुधवार को राज्य गंगा नदी संरक्षण प्राधिकरण की बैठक में लिया गया। लोक निर्माण मंत्री नसीमुद्दीन सिद्दीकी की अध्यक्षता में हुई बैठक में तय हुआ कि केंद्र सरकार के पर्यावरण एवं वन मंत्रालय को फैसले से अवगत करा दिया जाए। राष्ट्रीय नदी गंगा को प्रदूषण मुक्त करने के लिए प्रधानमंत्री की अध्यक्षता में गठित राष्ट्रीय गंगा नदी संरक्षण प्राधिकरण में यह तय किया गया था कि राज्य सरकार विभिन्न योजनाओं पर आने वाले खर्च का 30 फीसदी नदी सफाई पर वहन करेगी, जबकि 70 फीसदी अंश केंद्र का होगा। इसके तहत सात परियोजनाएं स्वीकृत भी की जा चुकी हैं जिन पर काम भी शुरू किया जा चुका है। इनमें मुरादाबाद, कन्नौज, गढ़मुक्तेश्वर व इलाहाबाद सहित वाराणसी की दो योजनाएं शामिल हैं। अब राज्य सरकार को यह कदम महंगा पड़ रहा है। कदम पीछे खींचते हुए उसने 30 फीसदी के स्थान पर दस फीसदी योगदान की हामी भरी है और गेंद केंद्र के पाले में डाल दी है। इसे देखते हुए गंगा को निर्मल करने की कोशिशों को फिलहाल झटका लग सकता है। पॉलीथीन प्रदूषण पर अंकुश न लगाने पर नसीमुद्दीन ने अधिकारियों को फटकार लगाई। उन्होंने नगर आयुक्त व जिलाधिकारियों को जिम्मेदारी याद दिलाते हुए कानून को प्रभावी तरीके से लागू कराने के निर्देश दिए।
Monday, December 19, 2011
यमुना नहर को साफ रखने के लिए जुड़ता गया कारवां (Dainik Bhaskar Yamunanagar 19 December 2011)
यह था यमुना एक्शन प्लान
कोल इंडिया से सेवा निवृत्त आदित्य ने उठाया यमुना नहर को साफ करने का बीड़ा
यमुना एक्शन प्लान के तहत 17.1 बिलियन यान खर्च कर भी जो काम अधूरा रहा, जिस काम को सरकार और कोई एनजीओ नहीं कर पाई। उस काम को अकेला आदमी पूरा करने में लगा है।
यमुना नहर में अंगद की पांव तरह जमीं गंदगी को साफ करने का बीड़ा उठाया है कोल इंडिया से डीजीएस पद से सेवानिवृत्त आदित्य ने और काफी हद तक वो इसे साफ करने में सफल भी हो रहे हैं। उन्होंने इस दिशा में ध्यान देना शुरू किया। यमुना की सफाई के लिए वे किसी संगठन, सरकार या एनजीओ के पास नहीं गए। बस खुद ही जुट गए। जितना कर सकते थे, किया। शुरुआत में दिक्कत आई। हर रोज दो सेशन में यमुना नहर के घाट की सफाई शुरू की। गंदगी जमा कराना। उसे सुखना फिर जलाना। अब उनकी दिनचर्या का हिस्सा बना हुआ है।
लोग भी हो रहे जागरूक : आदित्य यहां की सफाई तो करते हैं, इसके साथ ही गंदगी डालने वालों से बातचीत भी करते हैं। उन्हें बताते हैं कि यहां श्रद्धालु स्नान करने आते हैं। पूजा करते हैं। ऐसे में यहां गंदगी होगी तो कैसा लगेगा।
बस यह चंद शब्द ही लोगों को यहां गंदगी न डालने के प्रति प्रेरित करने के लिए काफी है। आदित्य ने बताया कि वास्तव में यहां लोग बड़ी मात्रा में पूजा सामग्री डालते हैं। स्नान के बाद कपड़े भी यहां छोड़ जाते हैं। इस वजह से यहां गंदगी भरा माहौल हो जाता है। यह पानी दिल्ली और दक्षिण हरियाणा में पीने के लिए प्रयोग किया जाता है। उनका मानना है कि लोग अब जागरूक होने लगे हैं।
नहर है आस्था की प्रतीक: उल्लेखनीय है कि हथनीकुंड बैराज पर यमुना नदी का पानी पश्चिमी यमुना नहर में डाल दिया जाता है। ऐसे में यमुना नदी यमुनानगर में सूखी है। लोग अपने धार्मिक अनुष्ठान भी नहर किनारे ही करने लगे हैं। इसलिए यह नहर ही आस्था की प्रतीक है।
आदित्य के अनुसार शुरूआत में तो लोग उनकी बात सुनने के लिए तैयार नहीं थे। लेकिन जब वे लगातार इस सफाई के काम में लगे रहे तो लोगों ने भी इसमें रूचि लेने लगे। अब उनकी योजना है कि स्कूली बच्चों व प्रशासन को साथ जोड़ा जाए। आदित्य के मुताबिक यदि यमुना किनारे कुछ डस्टबिन रख दिए जाए तो यह समस्या काफी हद तक दूर हो सकती है। अब लोग मानने लगे कि यमुना में सामग्री डालना सही नहीं हैं।
आदित्य मूलत : इंदौर से हैं। यमुनानगर उनका ससुराल है। इस वजह से उनका नगर में आना जाना लगा रहता था। यमुना की खूबसूरती ने उन्हें इंदौर छोड़ विवश कर दिया। लेकिन जब नहर के हालात देखे तो वे काफी दुखित हुए। यहीं से उन्होंने इसके जीर्णोद्धार के लिए काम करना शुरू किया। शुरुआत में इधर उधर हाथ पांव मारने के बावजूद भी कोई बात नहीं बनी। फिर खुद ही ठान लिया। सुबह साढ़े छह बजे से नौ बजे तक और शाम को साढ़े छह से आठ बजे तक दोनों पहर वे घाट पर जाते हैं। जितनी भी गंदगी मिलती है। साफ करते हैं।
निदेशालय राष्ट्रीय नदी सरंक्षण, पर्यावरण मंत्रालय भारत सरकार ने जापान के सहयोग से यमुना एक्शन प्लान चलाया था। जापान बैंक और इंटरनेशनल ने 17.7 बिलियन येन की मदद दी थी। यमुना एक्शन प्लान का उद्देश्य था कि नहर व नदी को प्रदूषण मुक्त किया जाए। यह काम 2000 तक पूरा हो जाना था। समय पर काम पूरा न होने की वजह से यह काम फरवरी 2003 तक पूरा हुआ। काम पूरा हो गया, लेकिन गंदगी अभी भी बरकरार है। इसकी वजह यह है कि लोगों में अभी इसके प्रति जागरुकता का अभाव बना हुआ है। फिलहाल लोगों में ण्क शुरूआत हुई है जो हर लिहाज से बेहतर माना जा रहा है।
कोल इंडिया से सेवा निवृत्त आदित्य ने उठाया यमुना नहर को साफ करने का बीड़ा
यमुना एक्शन प्लान के तहत 17.1 बिलियन यान खर्च कर भी जो काम अधूरा रहा, जिस काम को सरकार और कोई एनजीओ नहीं कर पाई। उस काम को अकेला आदमी पूरा करने में लगा है।
यमुना नहर में अंगद की पांव तरह जमीं गंदगी को साफ करने का बीड़ा उठाया है कोल इंडिया से डीजीएस पद से सेवानिवृत्त आदित्य ने और काफी हद तक वो इसे साफ करने में सफल भी हो रहे हैं। उन्होंने इस दिशा में ध्यान देना शुरू किया। यमुना की सफाई के लिए वे किसी संगठन, सरकार या एनजीओ के पास नहीं गए। बस खुद ही जुट गए। जितना कर सकते थे, किया। शुरुआत में दिक्कत आई। हर रोज दो सेशन में यमुना नहर के घाट की सफाई शुरू की। गंदगी जमा कराना। उसे सुखना फिर जलाना। अब उनकी दिनचर्या का हिस्सा बना हुआ है।
लोग भी हो रहे जागरूक : आदित्य यहां की सफाई तो करते हैं, इसके साथ ही गंदगी डालने वालों से बातचीत भी करते हैं। उन्हें बताते हैं कि यहां श्रद्धालु स्नान करने आते हैं। पूजा करते हैं। ऐसे में यहां गंदगी होगी तो कैसा लगेगा।
बस यह चंद शब्द ही लोगों को यहां गंदगी न डालने के प्रति प्रेरित करने के लिए काफी है। आदित्य ने बताया कि वास्तव में यहां लोग बड़ी मात्रा में पूजा सामग्री डालते हैं। स्नान के बाद कपड़े भी यहां छोड़ जाते हैं। इस वजह से यहां गंदगी भरा माहौल हो जाता है। यह पानी दिल्ली और दक्षिण हरियाणा में पीने के लिए प्रयोग किया जाता है। उनका मानना है कि लोग अब जागरूक होने लगे हैं।
नहर है आस्था की प्रतीक: उल्लेखनीय है कि हथनीकुंड बैराज पर यमुना नदी का पानी पश्चिमी यमुना नहर में डाल दिया जाता है। ऐसे में यमुना नदी यमुनानगर में सूखी है। लोग अपने धार्मिक अनुष्ठान भी नहर किनारे ही करने लगे हैं। इसलिए यह नहर ही आस्था की प्रतीक है।
आदित्य के अनुसार शुरूआत में तो लोग उनकी बात सुनने के लिए तैयार नहीं थे। लेकिन जब वे लगातार इस सफाई के काम में लगे रहे तो लोगों ने भी इसमें रूचि लेने लगे। अब उनकी योजना है कि स्कूली बच्चों व प्रशासन को साथ जोड़ा जाए। आदित्य के मुताबिक यदि यमुना किनारे कुछ डस्टबिन रख दिए जाए तो यह समस्या काफी हद तक दूर हो सकती है। अब लोग मानने लगे कि यमुना में सामग्री डालना सही नहीं हैं।
आदित्य मूलत : इंदौर से हैं। यमुनानगर उनका ससुराल है। इस वजह से उनका नगर में आना जाना लगा रहता था। यमुना की खूबसूरती ने उन्हें इंदौर छोड़ विवश कर दिया। लेकिन जब नहर के हालात देखे तो वे काफी दुखित हुए। यहीं से उन्होंने इसके जीर्णोद्धार के लिए काम करना शुरू किया। शुरुआत में इधर उधर हाथ पांव मारने के बावजूद भी कोई बात नहीं बनी। फिर खुद ही ठान लिया। सुबह साढ़े छह बजे से नौ बजे तक और शाम को साढ़े छह से आठ बजे तक दोनों पहर वे घाट पर जाते हैं। जितनी भी गंदगी मिलती है। साफ करते हैं।
निदेशालय राष्ट्रीय नदी सरंक्षण, पर्यावरण मंत्रालय भारत सरकार ने जापान के सहयोग से यमुना एक्शन प्लान चलाया था। जापान बैंक और इंटरनेशनल ने 17.7 बिलियन येन की मदद दी थी। यमुना एक्शन प्लान का उद्देश्य था कि नहर व नदी को प्रदूषण मुक्त किया जाए। यह काम 2000 तक पूरा हो जाना था। समय पर काम पूरा न होने की वजह से यह काम फरवरी 2003 तक पूरा हुआ। काम पूरा हो गया, लेकिन गंदगी अभी भी बरकरार है। इसकी वजह यह है कि लोगों में अभी इसके प्रति जागरुकता का अभाव बना हुआ है। फिलहाल लोगों में ण्क शुरूआत हुई है जो हर लिहाज से बेहतर माना जा रहा है।
Friday, December 16, 2011
Please make public the DDA plans for the BD parks in river Yamuna flood plains in the city
14 December 2011
YJA/CORRES/12/11
Sri G.S. Patnaik,
Vice Chairman
Delhi Development Authority
New Delhi
Sub: Please make public the DDA plans for the BD parks in river Yamuna flood plains in the city
Dear Sir,
Greetings from Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan, a consortium of civil society groups and concerned individuals, who have come together since 2007 with an aim to promote the restoration of river Yamuna as an ecosystem in its own right.
We at YJA have thus learnt with happiness about the setting up of 'Delhi Biodiversity Foundation' by the DDA under the chairmanship of the Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi.
Now while the avowed goals (as seen at the DDA website) of the Biodiversity Parks planned both on the river Yamuna and the Delhi ridge are laudable and welcome, we are concerned on the manner in which the first of the currently planned biodiversity parks named as the "Golden Jubilee Park", immediately south of the Old Railway Bridge in the river bed is coming up as while it could be called as a Public Park, it certainly by no stretch of imagination can be called as a 'Biodiversity Park', meeting the goals as mentioned before (pictorial report is enclosed).
Accordingly kindly permit us to request your good self for the following:
a) The present plans (with full details) for the 4 BD parks in the river bed namely at Bhilaswa, Kudsia Ghat, Golden Jubilee Park and north of DND flyway be made public on the DDA website and this fact be advertised suitably.
b) Since it is about the future of the river's flood plains and these BD parks are being planned in public interest and trust, let the concerned officials of the DDA arrange for a public presentation and debate on these plans at a suitable place (say IIC, IHC or INTACH etc) so that a wide consensus on them could emerge in the city as any such public interest activity should ideally have.
c) All necessary approvals (statutory or otherwise) received by the DDA for such plans say from the DUAC or from an environmental angle may be made public suo moto at the DDA web site under Section 4 of the RTI Act.
We hope that your goodself would find merit in our humble request.
Warm regards,
Manoj Misra
Convener
CC:
Sri Tejender Khanna, Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Smt Sheila Dixit, Hon'ble Chief Minister of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi - For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Delhi Urban Arts Commission, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Yamuna Standing Committee, Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K. Puram, New Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
YJA/CORRES/12/11
Sri G.S. Patnaik,
Vice Chairman
Delhi Development Authority
New Delhi
Sub: Please make public the DDA plans for the BD parks in river Yamuna flood plains in the city
Dear Sir,
Greetings from Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan, a consortium of civil society groups and concerned individuals, who have come together since 2007 with an aim to promote the restoration of river Yamuna as an ecosystem in its own right.
We at YJA have thus learnt with happiness about the setting up of 'Delhi Biodiversity Foundation' by the DDA under the chairmanship of the Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi.
Now while the avowed goals (as seen at the DDA website) of the Biodiversity Parks planned both on the river Yamuna and the Delhi ridge are laudable and welcome, we are concerned on the manner in which the first of the currently planned biodiversity parks named as the "Golden Jubilee Park", immediately south of the Old Railway Bridge in the river bed is coming up as while it could be called as a Public Park, it certainly by no stretch of imagination can be called as a 'Biodiversity Park', meeting the goals as mentioned before (pictorial report is enclosed).
Accordingly kindly permit us to request your good self for the following:
a) The present plans (with full details) for the 4 BD parks in the river bed namely at Bhilaswa, Kudsia Ghat, Golden Jubilee Park and north of DND flyway be made public on the DDA website and this fact be advertised suitably.
b) Since it is about the future of the river's flood plains and these BD parks are being planned in public interest and trust, let the concerned officials of the DDA arrange for a public presentation and debate on these plans at a suitable place (say IIC, IHC or INTACH etc) so that a wide consensus on them could emerge in the city as any such public interest activity should ideally have.
c) All necessary approvals (statutory or otherwise) received by the DDA for such plans say from the DUAC or from an environmental angle may be made public suo moto at the DDA web site under Section 4 of the RTI Act.
We hope that your goodself would find merit in our humble request.
Warm regards,
Manoj Misra
Convener
CC:
Sri Tejender Khanna, Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Smt Sheila Dixit, Hon'ble Chief Minister of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi - For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Delhi Urban Arts Commission, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Yamuna Standing Committee, Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K. Puram, New Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Monday, December 12, 2011
कुदरती खेती यानी तिनके से क्रांति की कवायद (Dainik Bhaskar 12 December 2011)
बिजाई, खाद और कीटनाशक का सारा खर्च खत्म, मध्य प्रदेश के किसान कुदरती खेती के जरिए खेती कर कमा रहे हैं मुनाफा भास्कर न्यूज त्न यमुनानगर
खेती का यह तरीका जड़ की ओर लौटने जैसा तो है। पर इसमें किसान की समृद्धि का राज छुपा है। कम से कम वह कुदरती खेती कर कर्ज से जंजाल से तो निजात पा ही सकता है। हरित क्रांति के नाम पर जमीन को जो जख्म मिले। कुदरती खेती इन जख्मों पर मरहम की तरह है। विशेषज्ञ इसे वक्त की जरू तर बता रहे हैं। क्योंकि इनका मानना है तभी किसान कर्ज के जंजाल से निजात पा सकता है। इसी विषय को लेकर पीस इंस्टीट्यूट चेरिटेबल ट्रस्ट की ओर से कनालसी गांव में दो दिवसीय कुदरती खेती पर सेमिनार आयोजित किया। शनिवार को इस कार्यक्रम का शुभारंभ किया गया। कार्यक्रम में पीस के निदेशक मनोज मिश्रा ने बताया कि कुदरती खेती वास्तव में हमारी विरासत है। यह अलग बात है कि वक्त के साथ हम इसे भूल गए। इसी तरीके से जापान के जीव वैज्ञानिक मासानोबू फुकुओका ने कृषि की। जो बेहद सफल रही।
मध्य प्रदेश के किसान कर रहे सफलतापूर्वक खेती : मध्य प्रदेश के ओसंगाबाद के किसान राजू टाइट्स कुदरती खेती कई साल से कर रहे हैं। कार्यक्रम में उन्होंने जब अपनी प्रस्तुति दी तो यहां के लोगो को एक बार तो उनकी बात पर यकीन ही नहीं हुआ। किसान पूछ बैठे। क्या यह संभव है। बिलकुल। मैं आपके सामने उदाहरण हूं। उन्होंने अपनी प्रस्तुति में फोटो और अन्य दस्तावेज लेकर आए।
क्या है कुदरती खेती : इसमें खेत की बुहाई नहीं होती। पेड़ पौधे व फसल को उसकी प्राकृतिक अवस्था में रहने दिया जाता है। यहां तक की पेड़ की शाखा की कटाई भी नहीं की जाती। बस सब कुछ वैसा ही रखा रहने दिया जाता है। जैसा वह होता है। बीज हाथ से रोपे जाते हैं। कई बार जमीन में हल्का खड्ढा खोद कर इसमें बीज लगा दिया जाता है।
कैसे काम होता है : मनोज मिश्रा के अनुसार जब हम बुहाई करते हैं तो बहुत से जीवाणु बरसात के पानी के साथ बह जाते हैं। यहीं वास्तव में खेत की जान है। जब हम कुदरती खेती करते हैं तो जीवाणु स्वयं सक्रिय हो जाते हैं। वे ही सारा काम प्राकृतिक तरीके से करते हैं। बस यहीं इस खेती की सफलता का राज है।
संभव है : विशेषज्ञों के अनुसार यह संभव है। कुछ आदिवासी कबीले भी इसी तरह से खेती कर रहे हैं। मनोज मिश्रा के अनुसार ट्रैक्टर से जब खेत की बुहाई होती है तो जमीन की प्राकृतिक संरचना टूटती है। वास्तव में जमीन का अपना एक चक्र है। जो जीवाणु, हरीखाद व केंचुओं पर निर्भर है। यह सब कुछ स्वयं ही होता रहता है।
80 प्रतिशत तक खर्च कम : किसान फसल की कुल लागत का चालीस प्रतिशत तक तो बुहाई पर लगा देता है। इसके बाद खाद और कीटनाशक बचते हैं। राजू टाइट्स के अनुसार किसान का काफी पैसा तो खरपतवार को खत्म करने में ही लग जाता है। कुदरती खेती में खरपतवार के साथ किसान की दोस्ती की बात करते है। खरपतवार ही फसल बढ़ाने में मदद करता है। क्योंकि इसकी छाया में जीवाणु खूब पनपते हैं।
उत्पादन पर अधिक असर नहीं : मनोज मिश्रा के अनुसार एक दो साल हो सकता है कुछ उत्पादन पर असर पड़े। लेकिन कुछ समय के बाद उत्पादन ठीक हो जाता है। इतना ही नहीं इस तरीके से तैयार फसल की गुणवत्ता भी कुदरती होती है। जो सेहत व स्वास्थ्य के लिए बहुत ही लाभदायक साबित होती है।
कुदरती खेती के सेमिनार को संबोधित करते विशेषज्ञ राजू टाइटस
एक तिनके से आई क्रांति ने लाया बदलाव
राजू टाइट्स ने अपनी बातचीत में बताया कि वास्तव में उनके हाथ मासानोबू फुकुओका की किताब का हिंदी वर्जन हाथ लग गया। एक तिनके से आई क्रांति पढ़ कर वे कुदरती खेती में लग गए। इस वक्त वे सफलतापूर्वक खेती कर रहे है। उनका कहना है कि यह खेती हर किसान को करनी चाहिए। इससे कृषि का 70 से 80 प्रतिशत तक खर्च बचाया जा सकता है।
विधि
खेती का यह तरीका जड़ की ओर लौटने जैसा तो है। पर इसमें किसान की समृद्धि का राज छुपा है। कम से कम वह कुदरती खेती कर कर्ज से जंजाल से तो निजात पा ही सकता है। हरित क्रांति के नाम पर जमीन को जो जख्म मिले। कुदरती खेती इन जख्मों पर मरहम की तरह है। विशेषज्ञ इसे वक्त की जरू तर बता रहे हैं। क्योंकि इनका मानना है तभी किसान कर्ज के जंजाल से निजात पा सकता है। इसी विषय को लेकर पीस इंस्टीट्यूट चेरिटेबल ट्रस्ट की ओर से कनालसी गांव में दो दिवसीय कुदरती खेती पर सेमिनार आयोजित किया। शनिवार को इस कार्यक्रम का शुभारंभ किया गया। कार्यक्रम में पीस के निदेशक मनोज मिश्रा ने बताया कि कुदरती खेती वास्तव में हमारी विरासत है। यह अलग बात है कि वक्त के साथ हम इसे भूल गए। इसी तरीके से जापान के जीव वैज्ञानिक मासानोबू फुकुओका ने कृषि की। जो बेहद सफल रही।
मध्य प्रदेश के किसान कर रहे सफलतापूर्वक खेती : मध्य प्रदेश के ओसंगाबाद के किसान राजू टाइट्स कुदरती खेती कई साल से कर रहे हैं। कार्यक्रम में उन्होंने जब अपनी प्रस्तुति दी तो यहां के लोगो को एक बार तो उनकी बात पर यकीन ही नहीं हुआ। किसान पूछ बैठे। क्या यह संभव है। बिलकुल। मैं आपके सामने उदाहरण हूं। उन्होंने अपनी प्रस्तुति में फोटो और अन्य दस्तावेज लेकर आए।
क्या है कुदरती खेती : इसमें खेत की बुहाई नहीं होती। पेड़ पौधे व फसल को उसकी प्राकृतिक अवस्था में रहने दिया जाता है। यहां तक की पेड़ की शाखा की कटाई भी नहीं की जाती। बस सब कुछ वैसा ही रखा रहने दिया जाता है। जैसा वह होता है। बीज हाथ से रोपे जाते हैं। कई बार जमीन में हल्का खड्ढा खोद कर इसमें बीज लगा दिया जाता है।
कैसे काम होता है : मनोज मिश्रा के अनुसार जब हम बुहाई करते हैं तो बहुत से जीवाणु बरसात के पानी के साथ बह जाते हैं। यहीं वास्तव में खेत की जान है। जब हम कुदरती खेती करते हैं तो जीवाणु स्वयं सक्रिय हो जाते हैं। वे ही सारा काम प्राकृतिक तरीके से करते हैं। बस यहीं इस खेती की सफलता का राज है।
संभव है : विशेषज्ञों के अनुसार यह संभव है। कुछ आदिवासी कबीले भी इसी तरह से खेती कर रहे हैं। मनोज मिश्रा के अनुसार ट्रैक्टर से जब खेत की बुहाई होती है तो जमीन की प्राकृतिक संरचना टूटती है। वास्तव में जमीन का अपना एक चक्र है। जो जीवाणु, हरीखाद व केंचुओं पर निर्भर है। यह सब कुछ स्वयं ही होता रहता है।
80 प्रतिशत तक खर्च कम : किसान फसल की कुल लागत का चालीस प्रतिशत तक तो बुहाई पर लगा देता है। इसके बाद खाद और कीटनाशक बचते हैं। राजू टाइट्स के अनुसार किसान का काफी पैसा तो खरपतवार को खत्म करने में ही लग जाता है। कुदरती खेती में खरपतवार के साथ किसान की दोस्ती की बात करते है। खरपतवार ही फसल बढ़ाने में मदद करता है। क्योंकि इसकी छाया में जीवाणु खूब पनपते हैं।
उत्पादन पर अधिक असर नहीं : मनोज मिश्रा के अनुसार एक दो साल हो सकता है कुछ उत्पादन पर असर पड़े। लेकिन कुछ समय के बाद उत्पादन ठीक हो जाता है। इतना ही नहीं इस तरीके से तैयार फसल की गुणवत्ता भी कुदरती होती है। जो सेहत व स्वास्थ्य के लिए बहुत ही लाभदायक साबित होती है।
कुदरती खेती के सेमिनार को संबोधित करते विशेषज्ञ राजू टाइटस
एक तिनके से आई क्रांति ने लाया बदलाव
राजू टाइट्स ने अपनी बातचीत में बताया कि वास्तव में उनके हाथ मासानोबू फुकुओका की किताब का हिंदी वर्जन हाथ लग गया। एक तिनके से आई क्रांति पढ़ कर वे कुदरती खेती में लग गए। इस वक्त वे सफलतापूर्वक खेती कर रहे है। उनका कहना है कि यह खेती हर किसान को करनी चाहिए। इससे कृषि का 70 से 80 प्रतिशत तक खर्च बचाया जा सकता है।
विधि
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Assault on the river bed continues unabated - an Update and another appeal
6 December 2011
YJA/CORRES/12/2011
Sri Tejendra Khanna
Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi
& Chairperson of the Yamuna River Development Authority (YRDA)
Raj Niwas
DELHI
Sub: Assault on the river bed continues unabated - an Update and another appeal
Respected Sir,
Greetings. This is in continuation of our appeal made earlier in the matter to your honour dated 12 November 2011.
Permit us to please submit an update in form of yet another pictorial report from the said site. As is clear from this update that action if any taken either by the DDA or any other authority has had little impact since the dumping of construction waste continues at the site unabated and the water body in question continues to be in the process of getting dumped over despite its very real biodiversity values.
May we request and suggest that your honour in your capacity as the Chairman of the PM appointed Yamuna River Development Authority, YRDA to kindly detail a sub committee of the TAG (Technical Advisory Group) to make a site visit and submit its report to your honour for an urgent action in the matter.
Sir, needless for us is to add that we at the YJA would be glad to assist the said committee in whatever manner it may find useful.
With warm regards,
Manoj Misra
Convener
CC:
Smt. Jayanthi Natarajan, Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge), Ministry of Environment and Forests For your kind information and necessary action please.
Smt. Sheila Dixit, Hon'ble Chief Minister of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Vice Chairman, Delhi Development Authority – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Delhi Urban Arts Commission, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 – For your kind information please.
Chairman, Yamuna Standing Committee, Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K. Puram, New Delhi – For your kind information please.
YJA/CORRES/12/2011
Sri Tejendra Khanna
Hon'ble Lt Governor of Delhi
& Chairperson of the Yamuna River Development Authority (YRDA)
Raj Niwas
DELHI
Sub: Assault on the river bed continues unabated - an Update and another appeal
Respected Sir,
Greetings. This is in continuation of our appeal made earlier in the matter to your honour dated 12 November 2011.
Permit us to please submit an update in form of yet another pictorial report from the said site. As is clear from this update that action if any taken either by the DDA or any other authority has had little impact since the dumping of construction waste continues at the site unabated and the water body in question continues to be in the process of getting dumped over despite its very real biodiversity values.
May we request and suggest that your honour in your capacity as the Chairman of the PM appointed Yamuna River Development Authority, YRDA to kindly detail a sub committee of the TAG (Technical Advisory Group) to make a site visit and submit its report to your honour for an urgent action in the matter.
Sir, needless for us is to add that we at the YJA would be glad to assist the said committee in whatever manner it may find useful.
With warm regards,
Manoj Misra
Convener
CC:
Smt. Jayanthi Natarajan, Hon’ble Minister of State (Independent Charge), Ministry of Environment and Forests For your kind information and necessary action please.
Smt. Sheila Dixit, Hon'ble Chief Minister of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Vice Chairman, Delhi Development Authority – For your kind information and necessary action please.
Chairman, Delhi Urban Arts Commission, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003 – For your kind information please.
Chairman, Yamuna Standing Committee, Central Water Commission, Sewa Bhawan, R.K. Puram, New Delhi – For your kind information please.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Nod for Jal Board project to outsource water distribution (The Hindu 29 November 2011)
The Delhi Jal Board's ambitious plan to outsource water distribution and revenue collection on a pilot basis in three areas based on a public-private partnership basis has been accorded administrative approval. At a Jal Board meeting chaired by Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit on Monday the pilot project was given the go-ahead.
The project has a twin purpose: to reduce revenue losses and to improve distribution of water. “Taking a cue from privatisation of power and the subsequent improvement in supply and services, we have decided to carry out an exercise in three areas of the city where operations and management will be outsourced. The aim is to bring in improvement in the city's water supply and raise the bar vis-à-vis services offered by the Jal Board. The project is also expected to plug the leaks in the system and help us reduce losses on account of non-revenue water,” said DJB Chief Executive Officer Ramesh Negi.
The project, which faced opposition on the grounds that it would pave the way for “privatisation of the water sector”, has the approval of the Planning Commission as well.
The pilot project will take off at Malviya Nagar Underground Reservoir command area, Nangloi Water Treatment Plant and Vasant Vihar with their adjoining areas. “We will extensively study the outcome of these projects, and on the basis of the feedback decide if it can be replicated to other areas,” said Mr. Negi.
The Board also approved the proposal of upgrading and improving water supply system in Mehrauli Township at an estimated cost of Rs.145 crore which includes operation and maintenance for a 12-year period.
Approval was also granted for modernisation of the plant and setting up of SCADA system at Bhagirathi Water Treatment Plant and its major booster pumping stations and underground reservoirs at an estimated cost of Rs.271.80 crore with a maintenance period of 10 years.
To improve the water distribution system through tankers, the Jal Board has accorded approval to replace around 250 water tankers, which are around 13 years old, at an estimated cost of Rs.87,48,58,100 with a maintenance period of 10 years. The DJB currently supplies drinking water to areas with no piped connections through 1,000 water tankers.
The Jal Board also gave administrative approval to the estimate for operation and maintenance of the 11-MGD recycling plant at Wazirabad and the 16-MGD recycling WTP at Haiderpur Water Works for a period of 5 years at a cost of approximately Rs.37,63,37,855.
With the objective of replacing defective meters and metering of un-metered connections, the Jal Board has given administrative approval to the revised estimate of Rs.364.50 crore for supply, installation and a 7-year maintenance of 8 lakh domestic water meters.
The Jal Board also approved the replacement of the water mains and reviewed several welfare schemes for its employees.
• Pilot project to take off at Malviya Nagar, Nangloi Water Treatment Plant and Vasant Vihar
• Will be based on public-private partnership; project also has Planning Commission approval
The project has a twin purpose: to reduce revenue losses and to improve distribution of water. “Taking a cue from privatisation of power and the subsequent improvement in supply and services, we have decided to carry out an exercise in three areas of the city where operations and management will be outsourced. The aim is to bring in improvement in the city's water supply and raise the bar vis-à-vis services offered by the Jal Board. The project is also expected to plug the leaks in the system and help us reduce losses on account of non-revenue water,” said DJB Chief Executive Officer Ramesh Negi.
The project, which faced opposition on the grounds that it would pave the way for “privatisation of the water sector”, has the approval of the Planning Commission as well.
The pilot project will take off at Malviya Nagar Underground Reservoir command area, Nangloi Water Treatment Plant and Vasant Vihar with their adjoining areas. “We will extensively study the outcome of these projects, and on the basis of the feedback decide if it can be replicated to other areas,” said Mr. Negi.
The Board also approved the proposal of upgrading and improving water supply system in Mehrauli Township at an estimated cost of Rs.145 crore which includes operation and maintenance for a 12-year period.
Approval was also granted for modernisation of the plant and setting up of SCADA system at Bhagirathi Water Treatment Plant and its major booster pumping stations and underground reservoirs at an estimated cost of Rs.271.80 crore with a maintenance period of 10 years.
To improve the water distribution system through tankers, the Jal Board has accorded approval to replace around 250 water tankers, which are around 13 years old, at an estimated cost of Rs.87,48,58,100 with a maintenance period of 10 years. The DJB currently supplies drinking water to areas with no piped connections through 1,000 water tankers.
The Jal Board also gave administrative approval to the estimate for operation and maintenance of the 11-MGD recycling plant at Wazirabad and the 16-MGD recycling WTP at Haiderpur Water Works for a period of 5 years at a cost of approximately Rs.37,63,37,855.
With the objective of replacing defective meters and metering of un-metered connections, the Jal Board has given administrative approval to the revised estimate of Rs.364.50 crore for supply, installation and a 7-year maintenance of 8 lakh domestic water meters.
The Jal Board also approved the replacement of the water mains and reviewed several welfare schemes for its employees.
• Pilot project to take off at Malviya Nagar, Nangloi Water Treatment Plant and Vasant Vihar
• Will be based on public-private partnership; project also has Planning Commission approval
Kerala to Centre: same quantum of water to Tamil Nadu, new dam with our own funds (The Hindu 29 November 2011)
The Kerala government on Monday gave an undertaking to the Centre that it would continue to provide the same quantum of water to Tamil Nadu, as is being given now, if a new dam was constructed in the place of the existing 116-year old Mullai Periyar dam in the Idukki district. Besides, the State would construct the dam from its own funds.
This assurance in writing, as sought by Union Water Resources Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal from Kerala a few days ago, was jointly given by State Water Resources Minister P.J. Joseph and Revenue Minister Thiruvanchoor Radhakrishnan here, as authorised by the Oomen Chandy's cabinet.
Mr. Bansal had earlier clearly told Kerala Chief Minister Oomen Chandy that the Centre would try to mediate and convene a bilateral meeting between the governments of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, if Kerala gave such a written assurance.
Meanwhile, talking to The Hindu, Mr. Joseph said Mr. Bansal had promised to discuss with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh the fresh development and see what could be done next. The Minister said the team also met Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram and discussed the issue. The two Ministers would meet Dr. Singh on Tuesday and take up the issue again, he said.
Earlier in the day, MPs from Kerala, cutting across party lines, took up the issue in both Houses of Parliament and stalled the proceedings seeking the Centre's immediate intervention.
This assurance in writing, as sought by Union Water Resources Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal from Kerala a few days ago, was jointly given by State Water Resources Minister P.J. Joseph and Revenue Minister Thiruvanchoor Radhakrishnan here, as authorised by the Oomen Chandy's cabinet.
Mr. Bansal had earlier clearly told Kerala Chief Minister Oomen Chandy that the Centre would try to mediate and convene a bilateral meeting between the governments of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, if Kerala gave such a written assurance.
Meanwhile, talking to The Hindu, Mr. Joseph said Mr. Bansal had promised to discuss with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh the fresh development and see what could be done next. The Minister said the team also met Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram and discussed the issue. The two Ministers would meet Dr. Singh on Tuesday and take up the issue again, he said.
Earlier in the day, MPs from Kerala, cutting across party lines, took up the issue in both Houses of Parliament and stalled the proceedings seeking the Centre's immediate intervention.
Widespread protests over Mullaperiyar dam in Kerala (The Hindu 29 November 2011)
Hartal demanding decommissioning of reservoir total in Idukki district
Kerala saw widespread protests over the Mullaperiyar dam issue on Monday, with people agitating for its decommissioning in five districts and the State capital.
In places like Karinkulam Chappathu in Idukki district, the protests almost took the form of a grass-root level movement with people from different parts of the district joining the stir.
Roads were clogged, though the organisers of the protest — the Mullaperiyar Action Council — did not plan a blockade. CPI leader E.S. Bijimol continued her hunger strike for the second day while P. C. George, MLA, joined the fast on Tuesday.
Traffic held up: The hartal called by the United Democratic Front and the Left Democratic Front was total in most parts of the district. Protesters blocked vehicles at Kumili on the border with Tamil Nadu, resulting in the traffic being held up for hours. However, the protesters allowed vehicles of Sabarimala pilgrims and emergency services to pass through, though pilgrims were often forced to wait for some time.
At Vallakadavu, just eight kilometres downstream of the Mullaperiyar dam, children of the locality joined the fast. Children in this area are a scared lot, with every noise being mistaken for rushing waters.
In Thodupuzha, advocates boycotted the courts. Schools and colleges remained closed. Students took out a protest march at Cheruthoni over the twin demands for decommissioning the existing Mullaperiyar dam and lowering the water level in the dam to 120 feet pending the decommissioning. The protesters demanded urgent Central intervention.
Union Ministers from the State A. K. Antony, Vayalar Ravi and E. Ahamed drew flak from the protesters for their inaction. The Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha took out a march to the residence of the Defence Minister A.K. Antony here.
The Kerala Congress (Mani) group organised dharnas in Ernakulam, Pathanamthitta, Idukki and Alappuzha. The party's Idukki member of the Assembly Roshy Augustine sat on a hunger strike before the Accountant General's Office here.
Water level rises Meanwhile, water level in the Mullaperiyar reservoir crossed the 136 feet stipulated by Kerala. Water is flowing down through all the open spillways. The district administration opened control rooms to monitor the situation and assist people in case of an emergency.
Kerala saw widespread protests over the Mullaperiyar dam issue on Monday, with people agitating for its decommissioning in five districts and the State capital.
In places like Karinkulam Chappathu in Idukki district, the protests almost took the form of a grass-root level movement with people from different parts of the district joining the stir.
Roads were clogged, though the organisers of the protest — the Mullaperiyar Action Council — did not plan a blockade. CPI leader E.S. Bijimol continued her hunger strike for the second day while P. C. George, MLA, joined the fast on Tuesday.
Traffic held up: The hartal called by the United Democratic Front and the Left Democratic Front was total in most parts of the district. Protesters blocked vehicles at Kumili on the border with Tamil Nadu, resulting in the traffic being held up for hours. However, the protesters allowed vehicles of Sabarimala pilgrims and emergency services to pass through, though pilgrims were often forced to wait for some time.
At Vallakadavu, just eight kilometres downstream of the Mullaperiyar dam, children of the locality joined the fast. Children in this area are a scared lot, with every noise being mistaken for rushing waters.
In Thodupuzha, advocates boycotted the courts. Schools and colleges remained closed. Students took out a protest march at Cheruthoni over the twin demands for decommissioning the existing Mullaperiyar dam and lowering the water level in the dam to 120 feet pending the decommissioning. The protesters demanded urgent Central intervention.
Union Ministers from the State A. K. Antony, Vayalar Ravi and E. Ahamed drew flak from the protesters for their inaction. The Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha took out a march to the residence of the Defence Minister A.K. Antony here.
The Kerala Congress (Mani) group organised dharnas in Ernakulam, Pathanamthitta, Idukki and Alappuzha. The party's Idukki member of the Assembly Roshy Augustine sat on a hunger strike before the Accountant General's Office here.
Water level rises Meanwhile, water level in the Mullaperiyar reservoir crossed the 136 feet stipulated by Kerala. Water is flowing down through all the open spillways. The district administration opened control rooms to monitor the situation and assist people in case of an emergency.
S Delhi water project on PPP model (Times of India 29 November 2011)
NEW DELHI: In its first step towards partial privatization of water management, Delhi Jal Board (DJB) received clearance for starting a pilot project on public-private partnership model for water distribution in Malviya Nagar, Vasant Kunj and Nangloi.
Officials said the project would entail appointment of private companies through a bidding process. This, they hope, would improve efficiency of the water distribution network and reduce non-revenue water. The companies would also be responsible for operation and maintenance of the underground reservoirs in the areas and collect revenue for the board.
In a board meeting held on Monday, approval was also given to water supply upgrade and improvement project at Mehrauli at an estimated cost of Rs 145 crore. Approval was also granted for setting up of the SCADA system at the Bhagirathi water treatment plant and its major booster pumping stations and UGRs.
To improve water distribution through tankers, the Board also decided to replace around 250 water tankers that are more than 13 years old. The Board gave approval to the estimate for operation and maintenance of the 11 MGD recycling plant at Wazirabad and the 16 MGD recycling water treatment plant at Haiderpur Water Works for a period of five years at a cost of over Rs 37 crore.
Approval was also accorded to a revision in a proposal worth Rs 364.5 crore for supply, installation and a seven-year maintenance contract of eight lakh domestic water meters. A project to replace water mains was also passed in the meeting. These would include the 1,100 mm dia PSC west Delhi water main by MS pipe from Wazirpur depot to Shakkurpur Village along the Ring Road and Shakurpur Pushta to PWD office in Punjabi Bagh; 1,000 mm and 1,500 mm dia PSC water pipelines emanating from Haiderpur in stretches near Prashant Vihar, Delhi Cantt Booster Pumping Station, Mongolpuri, Meera Bagh and Cariappa Marg .
Officials said the project would entail appointment of private companies through a bidding process. This, they hope, would improve efficiency of the water distribution network and reduce non-revenue water. The companies would also be responsible for operation and maintenance of the underground reservoirs in the areas and collect revenue for the board.
In a board meeting held on Monday, approval was also given to water supply upgrade and improvement project at Mehrauli at an estimated cost of Rs 145 crore. Approval was also granted for setting up of the SCADA system at the Bhagirathi water treatment plant and its major booster pumping stations and UGRs.
To improve water distribution through tankers, the Board also decided to replace around 250 water tankers that are more than 13 years old. The Board gave approval to the estimate for operation and maintenance of the 11 MGD recycling plant at Wazirabad and the 16 MGD recycling water treatment plant at Haiderpur Water Works for a period of five years at a cost of over Rs 37 crore.
Approval was also accorded to a revision in a proposal worth Rs 364.5 crore for supply, installation and a seven-year maintenance contract of eight lakh domestic water meters. A project to replace water mains was also passed in the meeting. These would include the 1,100 mm dia PSC west Delhi water main by MS pipe from Wazirpur depot to Shakkurpur Village along the Ring Road and Shakurpur Pushta to PWD office in Punjabi Bagh; 1,000 mm and 1,500 mm dia PSC water pipelines emanating from Haiderpur in stretches near Prashant Vihar, Delhi Cantt Booster Pumping Station, Mongolpuri, Meera Bagh and Cariappa Marg .
There's need and also greed (Times of India 29 November 2011)
According to Gautama Buddha tanha or desire and craving is the cause of human suffering. Once we are free of desire for worldly objects, we are free from suffering and we attain the state of nirvana. Hence it is greed, not need, that we have to do away with. The more we have, the more we want. Greed is a never-ending cycle.
How to make the distinction between need and greed? Economists explain the distinction between the two in terms of 'needs' and 'preferences' or 'desire satisfaction'. The distinction between 'preference' and 'need' is that the former is intentional and the latter is extensional. The need, for example, is to quench our thirst; the preference is whether we use bottled water or drink straight from the tap.
The need of a person is something which depends on his factual material, mental, physical and social condition. It also depends upon the available objects which are perceived as possessing the capacities to contribute to his survival and well-being. Whether a person prefers one object to another depends upon the nature of the person's beliefs about the objects.
While the concept of need is a threshold concept, the concept of preference is not. Need is a threshold concept because having more or less than one's needs would harm one's survival. Need is that without which the individual cannot survive. For example, a person needs a certain amount of water, food or shelter to lead his life and maintain social relations.
Moreover, while the objects required for 'preference' or 'desire satisfaction' may have several alternative substitutes, needs are objective and specific and do not admit any substitute. For example, it is admitted by everyone that there is no substitute for good health, good friends and good environment. They are specific to the needs for the well-being of all individuals.
Desires and preferences can be artificial or superfluous. For example, the desires for accessories are artificial. They are market-governed and even market-determined. Desires can be natural or non-natural. It would be instructive here to listen to a conversation between Alexander and an Indian thinker, Dandamis.
Alexander was greatly struck by the austerity of life and majesty of the Indian thinker. The Indian told Alexander that natural desires are quenched easily: thirst by water, hunger by food. But the craving for possession is an artificial one; it goes on unceasingly and is never fully satisfied.
The sage explained the criterion for making a distinction between a natural or real and a non-natural or contrived desire. A natural desire is fulfilled the moment you get what you sought. For example "If you drink the water you thirst for, your desire ceases. Similarly, if you are feeling hungry, you receive the food you seek, your hunger comes to an end. If, then, man's appetite for gold were on the same natural level, no doubt his cupidity would cease as soon as he obtained what he wished for. But this is not the case. On the contrary, it always comes back, a passion is never satiated, and the craving remains because it does not proceed from an inclination implanted by nature."
The criterion of distinction between need and greed is: Natural desires are our needs, therefore they are those which come to an end or are satiated when one fulfils them. Artificial desires are greed, as they are those which can never be satiated.
The writer teaches philosophy at Delhi University.
How to make the distinction between need and greed? Economists explain the distinction between the two in terms of 'needs' and 'preferences' or 'desire satisfaction'. The distinction between 'preference' and 'need' is that the former is intentional and the latter is extensional. The need, for example, is to quench our thirst; the preference is whether we use bottled water or drink straight from the tap.
The need of a person is something which depends on his factual material, mental, physical and social condition. It also depends upon the available objects which are perceived as possessing the capacities to contribute to his survival and well-being. Whether a person prefers one object to another depends upon the nature of the person's beliefs about the objects.
While the concept of need is a threshold concept, the concept of preference is not. Need is a threshold concept because having more or less than one's needs would harm one's survival. Need is that without which the individual cannot survive. For example, a person needs a certain amount of water, food or shelter to lead his life and maintain social relations.
Moreover, while the objects required for 'preference' or 'desire satisfaction' may have several alternative substitutes, needs are objective and specific and do not admit any substitute. For example, it is admitted by everyone that there is no substitute for good health, good friends and good environment. They are specific to the needs for the well-being of all individuals.
Desires and preferences can be artificial or superfluous. For example, the desires for accessories are artificial. They are market-governed and even market-determined. Desires can be natural or non-natural. It would be instructive here to listen to a conversation between Alexander and an Indian thinker, Dandamis.
Alexander was greatly struck by the austerity of life and majesty of the Indian thinker. The Indian told Alexander that natural desires are quenched easily: thirst by water, hunger by food. But the craving for possession is an artificial one; it goes on unceasingly and is never fully satisfied.
The sage explained the criterion for making a distinction between a natural or real and a non-natural or contrived desire. A natural desire is fulfilled the moment you get what you sought. For example "If you drink the water you thirst for, your desire ceases. Similarly, if you are feeling hungry, you receive the food you seek, your hunger comes to an end. If, then, man's appetite for gold were on the same natural level, no doubt his cupidity would cease as soon as he obtained what he wished for. But this is not the case. On the contrary, it always comes back, a passion is never satiated, and the craving remains because it does not proceed from an inclination implanted by nature."
The criterion of distinction between need and greed is: Natural desires are our needs, therefore they are those which come to an end or are satiated when one fulfils them. Artificial desires are greed, as they are those which can never be satiated.
The writer teaches philosophy at Delhi University.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
