Polavaram dam is a classic example of dams designed and implemented only to suit the growing power of contractor politician class in India. This dam threatens to affect around 400,000 people, mostly the indigenous people of Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, and Telangana states. It is challenged by two state governments and several citizen groups and there are many cases pending in Supreme Court of India. There are allegations by memebers of ruling party and opposotion parties of large scale corruption. Tenders for the head works have been cancelled with intervention of State High Court for reasons of irregularities and fraudulent practices of the contractors. The Polavaram project is in violation of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which provides for “land for land” in command area for the affected people under irrigation projects and protection to ensure that “all benefits, including the reservation benefits available to the Scheduled Tribes and the Scheduled Castes in the affected area shall continue in the resettlement area”. Government of Andhra Pradesh is implementing this project which is in violation of the National Tribal Policy which states that “any project which displaces more than 50,000 tribal people should not be taken up”. It is an illegal project as it lacks even today the mandatory approvals including- Clearance for revised costs by the Expenditure (Finance) Committee; CEA’s clearance for power component; Approvals from Grama Sabhas in the submergence areas in Odisha and Chhattisgarh states required even in the case of construction of dykes and protection bunds; Approval of Forest Conservation Act for submergence areas in Odisha and Chhattisgarh states (dykes etc including); Techno-Economic clearance from the CWC; CWC approval for dam design and operation schedule; Planning Commission’s approval for revised costs. Unfortunately the Government of India is planning to declare this a national project in the current Parliament sessions (February 2014).

1. RIVERS, DEVELOPMENT & PEOPLE
- A CASE STUDY OF POLAVARAM DAM
14-15 November, 2011
St Ann’s Generalate, Tarnaka, Hyderabad
Bharath Bhushan Mamidi
Centre for Action Research & People’s Development

2. Polavaram Dam – Complex problem

Polavaram project is an example of large scale dams leading to conflicts of
varied nature

It has adverse implications to several sections

It is entrenched in controversies about its legitimacy and corruption
besides inter-state and intra-state conflicts

Governance: Complex issues of large dams that cannot be left to a few
contractors, engineers and politicians

Offers an example to explore the role of people in defining development
designs of the state governments

There could be diverse views

3. Polavaram dam – history of tragedy & people’s
resistance

Salient features of the dam - Government claims

Varied dimensions of Polavaram Dam- Sources of conflict
and concerns

Polavaram dam – options and approaches

Response of varied sections of society

Space for people in development & governance- Areas of
concern

4. Salient features of the dam - Government
claims
Benefits
 Irrigation of 7.20 lakh acres in East Godavari, West Godavari,
Vishakapatnam and Krishna Districts
 Diversion 80 TMC of Godavari water to Krishna Delta.
 Water supply of 23.44 TMC for industrial and drinking water purposes in
Vishakapatnam district
 Generation of 960 MW of Hydro Electric Power
 Navigation facilities, development of pisciculture and tourism
Losses
 Submergence of 276 villages in AP alone
 Displacement of 195,357 people in three states (1991 census). Half of
them are tribals. Average size of household is 4.07 persons
 Loss of 52,624 ha land (3833 ha forest land including 1740 ha in
Papikonda sanctuary) is lost due to submergence and other works

5. Polavaram Dam- Sources of conflict and
concerns









Scheduled area, R&R in tribal areas
Tribal displacement- cultural genocide
Threat to Eastern Ghats: forest, wildlife
Transparency and people’s consent- EIA Reports and Public
Hearings
Whose needs? Project sans benefits- a duplicate project
Allegations of corruption
How safe is the dam, threat of dam break
Violation of law and norms
Inter-state & Intra-state conflicts

6. Scheduled area, R&R in tribal areas

National Tribal Policy states that “any project which displaces more than 50,000 tribal
people should not be taken up”. R&R of STs should be in scheduled area

National Policy of 2003 on R&R recommends “to minimize displacement and to
identify non-displacing or least displacing alternatives”

R&R Policy 2005 of GoAP stressed “the need to minimize large-scale displacement to
the extent possible”

Hon’ble High Court of Orissa dt 22/3/2006 directed that no area situated in the territory
of Orissa be submerged

State govts cannot respond to the Polavaram project without approval of Tribal
Advisory Council (TAC) for diversion of forest and scheduled area land

Project needs clearance of National Commission for the SCs and STs

TAC in AP on 27/2/2006 has recommended relocation of the STs in schedule area only
and the R&R for them shall be land to land

Gram Sabha consent is required as per PESA Act 1996

7. Tribal displacement- cultural genocide
•
Around 3 lakh population in 400 villages of three states
•
Predominantly tribal and Dalit population
•
Cultural genocide of Koya tribe
•
Conflicts and inter-tribal strife is a serious threat in the
region that is already burning due to violence in
Dandakaranya region
•
Tribals of this region are now internally displaced people

8. Threat to Eastern Ghats: forest, wildlife

Loss of forest is not merely 3833 Ha but thousands of ha due
displacement of tribals

Tribals refuse to be relocated and resort to uphill migration
-felling 80,000 ha forest

Several villages in Chintur mandal have earmarked pockets of
forest area for relocation of their villages

Eastern Ghats faces a disaster –loss to forest cover, wildlife,
survival of forest dependent people

9. Lack of transparency & people’s
consent
•
Two neighbouring states are not consulted
•
People threatened of displacement in 3 states are not informed
•
EIA Reports of 1985, 1990, 2005 are not shared with affected people
•
Bulky volumes in English for Adivasi people
•
EIA reports hiding dam safety reports of NIH
•
Manufactured consent, state repression

10. Project sans benefits- a duplicate project
Chagalnadu LIS
35,000
Torrigedda Pumping Scheme
23,000
Existing Yeleru ayacut
70,000
Tadipudi & Pushkaram LIS ayacut 186,000 + 206,000 acres
392,000
TOTAL EXISTING AYACUT
520,000
Land lost to Polavaram reservoir
120,000
Land lost for excavation of canals
35,000
Land lost to industrialization & urbanization
30,000
LAND LOST DUE TO THE PROJECT
185,000
Proposed Irrigation by Polavaram Project- Notional
720,000
Less : existing ayacut 520,000 acres, and
land lost to the project 185,000 acres
705,000
Net benefits under Polavaram Project
15,000

11. Misuse of public money- allegations of corruption

Cost of the project : increased from Rs 9072 crores in 2005 to
Rs 16000 crores in 2010

Dam full of Corruption – allegations by both ruling and
opposition parties. Congress leaders K Keshav Rao, MP and P
Shankar Rao Textiles Minister, TDP party demands for
enquiries

TDP, TRS demand cancellation of tenders and enquiry

Is the dam value for money

12. Is the dam a ticking time bomb?

Prof Sivaji Rao, Shri T Hanumantha Rao, and NIH
Roorkee reports warn of dam break possibilities

Estimates of NIH indicate that around 4 million lives
are at threat due to dam break

EIA Report 2005 did not disclose key information
pertaining to dam break analysis

13. Brazen violation of law & norms – a case of fence
eating the crop
Polavaram project lacks key approvals of several Ministries
mandatory for undertaking the project
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Clearance for revised costs by the Expenditure (Finance) Committee
Clearance from CEA for power component
Approvals from Grama Sabhas in the submersion areas in Orissa and
Chattisgarh states required even in the case of construction of dykes
and protection bunds.
Approval of Forest Conservation Act for submersion areas in Orissa
and Chattisgarh states (dykes etc including)
Techno-Economic clearance from the CWC
CWC approval for dam design and operation schedule
Approval for revised costs from the Planning Commission
etc

14. Inter-state conflicts
Inter-state objections because of

Polavaram project is in breach of Bachawat Award, should be re-examined

Design of the dam & its operation schedule is to be decided by CWC in
consultation with Orissa & Chhattisgarh

Final order of the Bachawat award says submergence in Cgarh and Odisha
should not exceed FRL 150 ft due to all effects including back water effect

Joint surveys regarding submergence, EIA and related studies on wildlife as
per AP- Cgarh agreement of 12/6/2006, were not conducted

Consent of Gram Sabha of Schedule V area is required for submergence

No public hearings conducted in Odisha and Chhattisgarh states

30 km long embankments at a cost of Rs 393 crore in Odisha and similar dykes
in Cgarh also require land acquisition, Public Hearing, etc

15. Intra-state conflicts
•
Submergence area is predominantly in Telangana region
without any benefits of irrigation
•
Irrigation benefits to Andhra region
•
Coastal Andhra region agitating for national status for the
project
•
Uttara Andhra leaders demand separate state question to be
postponed till completion of Polavaram Dam

16. Polavaram dam – Options & approaches
Damn the dam- No to dam
• Gram Sabha resolution from several villages
• Appeals, post card campaign
• Protests at Public Hearing, Dharnas against land acquisition
Alternative designs
• No displacement alternatives by experts: Shri T
Hanumantha Rao and Shri M Dharma Rao
• Central Empowered Committee constituted by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court stressed the need for Second Thought to
examine alternative designs (15/11/2006)

17. Responses of varied sections of society
NGOs, networks: Agitation, awareness, mobilization, Legal battles
• Critique, field studies by from mid 80s: CEC, Aranyika, G-BAG,
SAKTI, SAMATA, GRAMYA etc
• Networks of NGOs
Political parties
• Pro-Polavaram parties- Chiranjeevi of PRP/Cong, Congress party,
• Pro-Polavaram but with lesser height – CPM
• Pro-Polavaram but anti-corruption- TDP
• Anti-Polavaram partly - TRS
State governments (Odisha & Chhattisgarh)- V Schedule, back waters effect,
Bachawat award, dykes

18. Space for people in development & governanceAreas of concern

Water wars- Babli Dam (AP-Maharashtra), Almatti (APKarnataka), Cauveri (TN, Karnataka, Kerala), Mullai Periyar
(TN-Kerala), etc

What is the role of government of India- CWC, Bachawat
Award

Law, development and people: Enforceability of law &
awards

How to strengthen people’s resistance against destructive
projects

19. Thanks
M Bharath Bhushan,
Centre for Action Research & People’s Development
mbbhushan@gmail.com