22 May 2002

SUPREME COURT NOTICE ON NARMADA DAM CONSTRUCTION

From Jal Khambata

NEW DELHI: The Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) on Wednesday got a shot in arm from the Maharashtra Government somersault, endorsing its stand and helping it to secure a Supreme Court notice to the Union Government for stopping the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam on the Narmada that was resumed last Friday.

The Supreme Court refused to grant an ex-parte stay but ordered issue of "dasti" (by hand) notices to the standing counsels of the Union Government, the state governments of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh returnable on May 30. The Court also made it clear that it will give time to respondents to file replies if they appear and ask for it.

The Maharashtra Government appeared through counsel S C Birla who suo motto pleaded that the construction should not go ahead until the resettlement and rehabilitation of the oustees up to 95 metres is "fully completed." Stating that the State Government supports the NBA stand in this regard, counsel also referred to a task force set up by his government for resettlement of some 1500 persons to be affected from submergence of the forest land.

The Narmada Control Authority (NCA) had last Friday permitted the Sardar Sarovar Nigam Limited (SSNL) to construct further five metres to raise the dam's height from 90 to 95 metres while the NBA challenged it through a fresh civil writ petition on the ground that the "pari pasu" resettlement of the affected oustees was not completed before allowing the construction and their land and property will submerge unless the Court intervenes.

The vacation Bench of Mr Justice N Santosh Hegde and Mr Justice S N Variava proposed the next hearing on the NBA petition on June 6 but it agreed to advance the next date of hearing to May 30 on NBA counsel Shanti Bhushan's plea that time was essence as otherwise much construction will be already over.

The Government will otherwise come and plead that the construction cannot be stopped half way lest it is washed out by the impending monsoon, Shanti Bhushan stressed. He also cited documents that were not taken into cognizance by the NCA at its meeting on May 17 while permitting the increase in the dam's height. NBA leader Medha Patkar was also in the Court.

At one stage, the judges were reluctant to entertain NBA's petition as they said the petitioner should better approach the Grievance Redressal Authorities (GRAs) set up in three states under the chairmanship of retired judges as per an earlier direction of the Supreme Court. Shanti Bhushan, however, pleaded that these authorities did not have the power to stay the construction process for raising the height.

Since it was the first preliminary hearing for admission of the new PIL (Public Interest Litigation) of NBA which had earlier lost its case to trash the dam, no respondent except for the Maharashtra Government appeared since their appearance was not required at this stage. The NBA was, in fact, trying to procure an ex-parte stay by not serving notices on the parties. Its counsel had secured early hearing by making a special mention before the vacation Bench on Monday.

The NBA's case was that the Narmada Control Authority had violated the Supreme Court's judgment of October 2000 on its earlier petition that stipulates further construction of the dam in stages of five meres only after ensuring the environmental clearance and full rehabilitation of the dam oustees.

Shanti Bhushan said the NCA permission also violated the Narmada Tribunal Award, as okayed by the Apex Court, that the height should be raised only six months after the affected persons have been rehabilitated.

His attempt to refer to a report about the shoddy rehabilitation carried out by the Madhya Pradesh Government was, however, shot down by the Court, bluntly telling him not to refer to the report that came before the October 2000 judgment.

"We cannot go behind the judgment. There is no point relying on a report which was given before the pronouncement of the judgment, neither the press reports will help," the Court said. END