Preparedness of Odisha on Inter-State River Water
Early this month, the resolution of the Union Cabinet to constitute a special purpose vehicle- Polavaram Project Authority (PPA)- caught the Odisha government napping. Instead, the news has attracted cautious criticism from the state government. With General election in full swing and Telengana Statehood is commencing- it is beyond obvious that political parties, , leader of oppositions including incumbent State and Union governments would left no stone unturned to gain political mileage of blame game. It is less important to read between the lines on the timing of PPA. Moreover, it is pertinent to understand the efficiency of the Odisha government in its resolute preparedness for existing inter-state river water disputes and emerging disputes due to water shortage and climate change.
The Union government's compulsion to form PPA is logical due to Telangana State's formation. To resolve any inter-state water dispute, the Union government may resort to conflict resolution through the 1956 Act and to means of dialogue and negotiation platforms. The PPA is not a Constitutional body unless approved by Parliament, which is remote in the present scenario. Assessing the thorny road ahead after June 2, when Telangana became the 29th State, the Union government pressed to keep the project under the Ministry of Water Resource (MoWR) as a national project. Has the Union government discussed with riparian States like Chhattisgarh and Odisha, which already put objections against the project in the Supreme Court, to form this PPA? It is highly frustrating as a Federal Unit that the Union government wouldn't inform or solicit consent from State governments, especially Odisha. This is one of the worst examples of Union-State relations under UPA-II.=
The PPA aims to expedite the Polavaram project hurdles from various ministries at the Union, generate investment, and process the project. However, the PPA must not be the approving authority. Either the apex court or mutually beneficially agreed riparian states shall approve the project. This is where a transboundary environmental impact assessment should be mandatory, which India has been flouting so far. In 2009, at the request of the Andhra Pradesh government, the project became a central project following MoWR guidelines. The Andhra government submitted a revised budget of INR 16010.45 Crores, including the agreed budget for protective embankments in Chhattisgarh and Odisha, amounting to INR 621.64 Crores. However, in 2012, the Prime Minister's Office directed the Planning Commission to withhold any financial clearance until the Supreme Court's verdict on the Odisha Government's filed case against the project. No verdict or stay-order against the construction of the Polavaram project or against declaring it a National Project has been pronounced by the Supreme Court so far. Shall PPA represent the Union government in pending cases related to Polavaram in Apex Court? It's a legal matter that legal luminaries engaged in such cases since 2007 would take care of.
On May 5, the Odisha Government responded through the media that it would resort to the apex court on the rationality of the PPA after 'reading' the Union Cabinet resolution. It should be noted that the Supreme Court appointed an inspection panel in 2011 to find out if the construction of the project was carried out in terms of the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal (GWDT) Award in 1980. The Panel concluded that the project has not violated GWDT so far.
In Principle, the viability of the project has been cleared, but clearances from Ministries and a verdict from the apex court are awaiting. What is Odisha's action plan? What can the Odisha government best do beyond resorting to the apex court? Yes, the easy part is to wait and watch and be reactive occasionally, like appealing to the Supreme Court.
Interestingly, It's not the quantity of water sharing between the riparian states but the dam's height and submergence of areas in Odisha due to floods that have been the bone of contentions. One aspect is still unanswered: Do the riparian states oppose the project in the interest of the people of their state, or oppose it to oppose it as Andhra Pradesh is going fast or resorting to vote bank politics? Has Odisha any plan to mitigate those problems of submerging vast forest areas and drowning portions of Malkanagiri district? There is no need for a white paper on this project now. The state government must ensure the exact people who will be displaced and forest areas that will be submerged proactively to substantiate its argument in Courts and the public domain. The Environmental Impact Assessment could have taken the same motto as the Odisha government in the villages, which would have been submerged with or without informing the AP government. Has the leadership in Odisha taken the initiative to negotiate with Andhra Pradesh or other riparian states on this project?
The Indira Sagar (Polavaram) multipurpose project is located on the river Godavari near Ramayyapet village of Polavaram Mandal in the West Godavari district in Andhra Pradesh. The Andhra Pradesh government started this project in October 2004. Since, it has gone to rough weather with non-compliance of environmental assessment, proper survey, non abiding existing laws and large scale displacement and submergence of forest and inhabitants. Without protective barriers, four villages and 648.05 hectares of land will be submerged in Odisha. In contrast, in Chhattisgarh, eight villages and 795.59 hectares of land will be submerged as per the AP government submission in February 2014. Can this be refuted or substantiated by the Odisha government?
Further, be it utilisation of its share of water in case of interstate rivers or utilisation of its waters, Odisha should proceed with a well-cut-out implementable plan given the present scenario of rehabilitation issues, forest and environment concerns and place the plan before the Union government and neighbouring States pro-actively. Odisha may also revisit all the interstate agreements, drawn or not drawn, to plan for the future. This will undoubtedly pave the way for the settlement of water disputes and the comprehensive development of the water sector in the state. Andhra Pradesh has already spilt the beans by going ahead with the Polavaram Project for the larger interest of the people of Andhra Pradesh, as argued, even within a very hostile and harmful environment. Andhra probably understands the principle of acceptance that such huge investments, once made, have to be realised, if necessary, by twisting the arms of Acts and Rules.
Perhaps the Department of Water Resource (DoWR) and the Chief Minister of Odisha have been shying away from face-to-face negotiation with neighbouring states on the Polavaram Vanshadhara or Mahanadi Rivers. Since 1946, the leaders of Odisha have successfully negotiated outcomes on inter-state water with other neighbouring states. Odisha will have increasing inter-state river disputes with neighbouring states as we move forward. The government must find a long-term approach within its DoWR to deal with such skirmishes in the near future.
Inept inertia shall not protect Odisha's interests.