AWWA India’s Annual Conference & Exposition in
Hyderabad on 16-17 Nov’18
Second International Conference
‘AICE’18 – ‘Total Water Solutions’
Irrigation Sector Reforms in
Maharashtra, India
Pradeep Purandare *
Introduction:
Maharashtra is one
of the progressive, industrialized and urbanized States of India. Water
Resources Development & Management in Maharashtra has always been a point
of discussion & in fact, a sort of benchmark in India’s water sector. Maharashtra, laying emphasis on Supply Side Management,
has reached a stage of development (Box-1) which can be described as either “glass
- half full” or “glass – half empty” depending upon one’s outlook.
|
Box -1: Supply
Side Management – Maharashtra Today 1, 2
1.
Irrigation
Potential (M ha): Created 4.8, Utilised .3.2
2.
State
Level Irrigation Projects:
·
Completed:
87 major, 296 medium & 3296 minor
·
Ongoing:
78 major, 128 medium & 543
minor
3.
Present
Water Use (MCM):
Irrigation – 26180 (77%),
Domestic – 6800 (20%), Industrial (3 %) – 1020,
Total-34000 (100)
4.
Water Conflicts : Increase in numbers &
severity
|
The State constituted Maharashtra Water &
Irrigation Commission3 (MWIC) in 1996 to take a stock of the
situation & suggest the way ahead. MWIC submitted its report in 1999 &
set the ball rolling. Maharashtra adopted State Water Policy4
(SWP) in 2003 & formally initiated the Irrigation Sector Reforms (ISR) in
the State. Maharashtra Water Sector Improvement Program (MWSIP) provided a
necessary vehicle for ISR which, inter alia, includes establishment of Maharashtra
Water Resources Regulatory Authority5(MWRRA) – a first of its
kind in India. This paper makes an attempt to review
Maharashtra’s Irrigation Sector Reforms & it’s tryst with the
Demand Side Management. [Box – 2]
|
Box- 2: Demand Side Management - Irrigation Sector
Reforms in Maharashtra
1.
Maharashtra Water &
Irrigation Commission (MWIC) Report, 1999
2.
State Water Policy (SWP), 2003
3.
Maharashtra Water Sector
Improvement Programme (MWSIP),
4.
Maharashtra Water Resources
Regulatory Authority (MWRRA) Act, 2005
5.
Maharashtra Management of
Irrigation Systems by Farmers6 (MMISF)Act,2005
6.
Benchmarking & Water Auditing of Irrigation Projects
and publication of Irrigation Status Reports
|
MWIC Report, 1999:
Several important recommendations
were given by MWIC. Following two recommendations could have been the game
changer ones - (i) River sub-basin wise water resources development &
management & (ii) strengthening of Command Area Development Authorities
(CADA). MWIC identified 25 river sub basins (plan group) of five main river
basins in the State and classified those sub basins (plan groups) as highly deficit,
deficit, normal, excess &
abundant based on availability of
surface water (cum / ha). One of the important recommendations
of MWIC is that water resources development & management should be as per
the classification of plan group. For example, highly deficit river basin
should not have sugarcane & sugar factories at all. Unfortunately,
Government of Maharashtra (GOM) never officially accepted most of the
recommendations. On the contrary, GOM, in a drought year, gave permission to
new sugar factories in the highly deficit river sub basins. Similarly, Command
Area Development (CAD) concept was given the short shrift & the Agriculture
Engineers were literally thrown out of CADA.
State Water Policy:
Maharashtra
adopted State Water Policy (SWP) in 2003. SWP, in fact, not only clearly states
that Integrated, Multi-sectoral, River basin Approach & State Water Plan
are its objectives but even spells out a five-pronged strategy which comprises
of following:
(a)
Enabling environment for better &
more equitable & productive water management,
(b)
Restructuring the fundamental roles
& relationships of the State & the water users,
(c)
Creating a new institutional arrangement
for water governance,
(d)
Promoting new technology, &
(e)
Enactment of appropriate legislation.
Maharashtra
appears to have been successful in implementation of SWP if we consider
following:
·
Enactment of MMISF & MWRRA Acts in
2005;
·
Establishment of MWRRA – the
Institution, State Water Council & State Water Board in 2005
·
Preparation of MMISF Rules, 2006;
·
Registration of 1531Water Users’
Associations(WUA) under MMISF Act, 2005;
·
Promotion of micro irrigation by the
government
·
Amendment to SWP in 2011 to give second
priority to agricultural water use .instead of industrial water use.
Whether
above achievements have facilitated the implementation of Strategies (a) &
(b) mentioned above is, however, a moot point.
For arriving at some conclusion, few more details will have to be
studied.
Maharashtra
Water Sector Improvement Program
Maharashtra Water Sector
Improvement Program (MWSIP) was launched by GOM with the help of World Bank to
achieve following objectives
·
To strengthen the capacity of
Maharashtra for multi-sectoral planning, development, and sustainable
management of the water resources; and
·
To improve irrigation service delivery
and productivity of irrigated agriculture.
MWSIP, inter alia, had following two important
components:
1.
Water Sector Institutional
Restructuring and Capacity Building
·
The establishment and
operationalization of MWRRA;
·
Restructuring of the
existing Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation (MKVDC) into the a River
Basin Agency, and it’s capacity building;
·
Restructuring and capacity
building of the Water Resources Department (WRD);
·
Strengthening and capacity
building of the Water and Land Management Institute (WALMI); and
·
The establishment of an
integrated computerized information system (ICIS).
2.
Improving Irrigation Service
Delivery and Management
·
Participatory rehabilitation
and modernization of about 286 selected irrigation
schemes
covering about 670,000 ha of the Culturable Command Area (CCA)
·
Enhancing the safety of 291
dams;
·
Formation and capacity
building of Water User’s Associations in
about 286 selected irrigation schemes;
·
Implementation of improved
water management practices and instruments in six selected irrigation schemes;
·
Strengthening of agriculture
support services; and
·
Implementation of social and
environmental management plan.
MMISF Act:
MMISF Act was brought in to legally provide for
Irrigation Management Transfer (IMT). World Bank insisted for the enactment
& made it a compulsory condition for getting the loan under MWSIP. WRD,
therefore, had to succumb. It however did not comply in letter & spirit. Facts
listed below speak volumes about the actual implementation of MMSIF Act.
·
Ambiguity in Rules for WUAs at higher
level (Sec 10 to 18)
·
Non
formation of sub committees within a WUA (Sec 20)
·
Delayed or non execution of agreements
with WUAs (Sec 21& 29)
·
Insincerity in the processes such as
“joint inspection” to “handing over” (Sec 22)
·
Not providing measuring devices ( Sec
23)
·
Confusion over powers of WUAs (Sec 30)
·
Keeping lift irrigation out of purview
of the Act, (Sec 39 to 51)
·
Inordinate delays in returning part of
tariff to WUAs for carrying out maintenance & repairs and
·
Non involvement of WUAs either in water
budgeting (Sec 68) or in conflict resolution (Sec 63 & 64)
A study by SOPPECOM7
brings out certain facts. Volumetric supply being the pivotal issue, SOPPECOM’s
key findings regarding the same only are given here (Box – 3)
|
Box – 3: Key Findings regarding Volumetric Supply of
Water
— 44% WUAs are in existence from 5-6 years. And 26% WUAs
are even more than 6 years old. It is expected that they should have taken up
the management work by now. However, it is observed that has not happened.
— 48% WUAs reported absence of measuring device.
— 32% WUAs reported that their measuring device is out
of order.
— Overall 61% WUAs are not satisfied with flow
measurement arrangements
— Water account was not maintained by 42% WUAs
|
MWRRA Act:
Maharashtra established an Independent
Regulatory Authority (IRA) in water sector by enacting MWRRA Act. Regulation of
all types of water (surface & ground water) & its uses for different
purposes (drinking, domestic, industrial & irrigation) is supposed to be
done by MWRRA. Though it is necessary to critically review MWRRA, this paper
limits itself to the values & constraints
parts only.
Values:
• Determination
of Surface Water Entitlements.
• Determination of bulk water tariffs for agriculture, industry and drinking water.
• Determination of bulk water tariffs for agriculture, industry and drinking water.
• Hearing and disposal of petitions
relating equitable distribution of water at river basin level
• Coordination with WRD for preparation of basin-wise State Water Plans
• Introduction of drip / sprinkler irrigation in areas receiving canal water for perennial crops
• Bringing out technical manuals, guidelines and regulations with respect to the above functions.
Constraints:
Water Governance:
The MWRRA Act, 2005 has following important provisions
for developing a Water Governance structure in the State.
|
S.N.
|
Section
|
Provision
|
Purpose
|
|
1
|
2 (1) (u)
|
Definition of River basin Agency (RBAs)
|
To establish RBAs to give the Water Entitlements
|
|
2
|
14
|
Permission of RBA
|
To authorize the water use in the State
|
|
3
|
15
|
State Water Board
|
To prepare a draft Integrated State Water Plan
(ISWP)
|
|
4
|
16
|
State Water Council
|
To approve the draft ISWP submitted by the State
Water Board.
|
|
5
|
11 (f)
|
(For MWRRA) to review & clear water resources
projects proposed at the sub basin & river basin level to ensure that a
proposal is in conformity with Integrated State Water Plan.....
|
To develop & manage water resources in the State
in systematic, systemic & river basinwise manner as per the State Water
Policy & MWRRA Act.
|
|
6
|
13
|
Powers of Authority & Dispute Resolution Officer
|
To resolve water conflicts
|
|
7
|
22
|
Disputes & Appeals
|
To resolve water conflicts
|
But the actual implementation of MWRRA, 2005
has been very frustrating for reasons beyond MWRRA’s control. Government has not done many things which it
should have done on priority basis long back.
Following are the details
No Rules of MWRRA, 2005:
Preparing Rules of
the Act is the responsibility of WRD under Sec 30. However, there was
reluctance at WRD level to prepare the Rules of MWRRA Act. Rules were prepared
after 7 years from the enactment of the Act & that too only after an order
to that effect by the High Court. Those Rules were found to be contradictory to
the provisions of the Act & government had to withdraw the same. The end
result is MWRRA Act does not have Rules!
Of course, this has not happened
for the first time. There is a trend. WRD
has also not prepared Rules for
·
Maharashtra Irrigation Act-1976,
·
Irrigation Development Corporation Acts-
1996, 1998 (total 5 in number)
·
Maharashtra Groundwater (Development
& Management) Act, 2009.
No true River Basin
Agencies:
Sub-basin wise water plans are
supposed to be prepared by the RBAs. However, there are no
“true” RBAs. MWRRA Act has taken a short cut. As per Section 2 (2) (u),
existing Irrigation Development Corporations (IDC) are only the RBAs. But IDCs
cannot be the RBAs in the truest sense of the term. Conversion of IDCs into
RBAs is a must because of the differences between IDCs & RBAs.
|
Irrigation Development Corporations
|
River Basin Agencies
|
|
Mono-disciplinary (only Civil Engineers)
Emphasis on
-
Project-wise development (i.e. only construction),
- Surface
water,
- Irrigation & Hydropower
- Water
Management with W R D)
|
Inter-disciplinary ( representation to all categories of water users)
Emphasis on
- Integrated
river basin/ sub basin- wise
development & management
- Surface & ground water
- Irrigation & Non-Irrigation
- Permission to water use & issuance of
water entitlements u/s 14
|
Actually, RBA is an accepted principle! State Water
Policy envisages RBAs. MWRRA Act provides for RBAs. Mahrashtra Krisna River
Basin agency (MKRBA) bill8 has already been prepared by WRD
but the same is not being processed. GR on Restructuring9 of
WRD laid emphasis on RBAs. SIT10 (Chitale committee)
recommends RBAs. ISWP & RBAs
together form the strategy of Reforms. Suresh Kumar Committee (31 Jan
2016) has also recommended conversion of IDCs into RBAs. State Government has
filed an affidavit saying that final decision will be taken in this regard by 31
March 2016. After almost two & half years that decision is still
awaited.
State Water Board & Council:
State Water Board & State Water Council has
been legally constituted way back in 2005 to respectively prepare & approve
the Integrated State Water Plan (ISWP). State Water Board & State Water
Council convened their first meetings respectively after 8 years & 10 years
from the date of their constitutions.
No ISWP:
ISWP which was to be prepared within one year
from the enactment of the Act is still not in place even after 13 years. MWRRA
as per its own Act is supposed to take decisions with reference to ISWP. But
MWRRA illegally cleared 191 projects without ISWP. A Public Interest Litigation
has been filed by this author to ensure the preparation of ISWP. Details of PIL
are given in Annex -1.
Amendment to MWRRA, 2011:
MWRRA Act has been amended in 2011 to
retrospectively protect non transparent decisions of High Power Committee
regarding transfer of water from irrigation to non-irrigation. Powers of MWRRA
in respect of sectoral water allocation have already been withdrawn by the said
amendment. Effective area under water entitlement thus has been drastically
reduced. Annex – 2 gives details of the said amendment.
Powers not used
Though MWRRA has “powers as are vested in a civil court,
under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908”, it could hardly exercise its following powers as a quasi
judicial authority.
(1)
Powers
of Authority and Dispute Resolution Officer u/s 13:
(2)
Disputes
& Appeals u/s 22:
(3)
Punishment
for non-compliance of orders u/s 26
(4)
Offences
by companies u/s 27
(5)
Compounding
of offences u/s 28
(6)
Cognizance
of offences u/s 29.
Opportunity lost:
As a result, MWRRA could not do anything
in respect of following in last 11 years
(1)
State Water Entitlement data base [11
(s)]
(2)
Hydro-meteorological information data base
[11(t)]
(3)
Irrigation Status Report [11 (v)]
(4)
Preservation of water quality [12(5)]
(5)
Private LIS [12(6)(d), (e)]
(6)
Water to drought prone areas [12 (10)
(a)]
(7)
Restrictions on digging wells [14(3)]
Understanding the problem:
MWRRA
is working literally in vacuum; thanks to the absence of Rules, RBAs, and ISWP.
Moreover, MWRRA is
totally dependent on Water Resources Department (WRD) for its very existence for
reasons listed below
·
WRD
has a decisive role in the appointments of the Secretary, Members, and Chairman
of MWRRA.
·
MWRRA gets its funds from WRD.
·
MWRRA has to perform all of its activities
through WRD only.
Reality
check:
Being
closely associated with WRD, MWRRA,WALMI
& WUAs for a significant period of time & actively involved in the committees that drafted various Acts,
Rules, Agreements, Manuals & training material regarding Irrigation Sector
Reforms, the author sincerely feels that
it’s time Maharashtra should address the Water Management, Governance
& Regulation (WMGR) issues & check whether the irrigation system in
Maharashtra is compatible & amenable with the demands of WMGR11. Maharashtra at present simply does not have a physical system which will enable volumetric supply of water to WUAs
based on entitlement & measurement of water.
Compatible
Physical System:
Irrigation projects in Maharashtra have been
designed only for flow irrigation considering supply of water to individual
farmers. Their original planning did not provide for Lift Irrigation,
Non-Irrigation [domestic & industrial water supply] & WUAs. However,
they are now expected to simultaneously achieve multiple & at times, even
conflicting objectives. The
Overall
Project Efficiency (OPE) assumed in the design of these projects normally
ranges between 41 to 48% only! It is needless to say that the actual OPE is
hardly 20 to 25% because of host of constraints. The point is too much is being
expected from the system which is not designed for the same.
Defunct HR &
CR
Cross bund
A
typical irrigation project in Maharashtra comprises of Reservoir, Main Canals,
Distributaries, Minors & field channels. Main System of the irrigation projects means main canals &
distributaries i.e. up to the head of minor if there is a WUA on minor. It is
at present up-stream controlled, manually operated, mostly open channel system
without any arrangement for operation of Head Regulators & Cross Regulators
based on Real Time data. Head Regulator
(HR) and Cross Regulator (CR) Gates at strategic locations in canals &
DISNET are of vital importance to control & regulate water supply. But HR & CR Gates at present are
cumbersome to operate. Their manual operation limits the flexibility of canal
operation. In absence of real time data regarding water levels & discharge,
gate operation becomes ad-hoc. Engineering control over water does not come
into practice. Volumetric supply becomes
impossible. Timely & predictable water supply remains on paper. Inordinate
delays & grossly inadequate water supply inevitably lead to water
conflicts. The point is unless the Main System is modernised there would
not be any significant improvement in WMGR. In order to modernise Main System
following needs to be done
·
Provide
motorized HR & CR gates
·
Special Gates
M & R Mobile Units may be created
·
Gradually replace
conventional HR gates by Distributors & conventional CR gates in main
canal by automatic gates & that in
distributaries by Duckbill or Diagonal weirs
·
Introduce Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
(SCADA) on main canals of major projects to start with.
·
Switch over to
indirect measurement of water. Introduce modern technology in existing old
projects at the time their rehabilitation & in ongoing projects before
their completion.
·
Make modern
technology mandatory for all future projects.
·
Industrial
production of HR & CR gates, duckbill weirs, measuring devices & water
meters and provision, installation, maintenance, repairs, calibration,
automatic data
collection, etc could be a huge business opportunity
Duckbill Weir Distributor
In every walk of life technology has made wonders.
Introduction of modern technology in Management of Irrigation Projects is also
long overdue & very much awaited.
*****
*
Former
Associate Professor, WALMI, Aurangabad,
Former Expert - Member, Marathwada
(Statutory) Development Board ,
Former Expert –Member, Committee for
Integrated State Water Plan
REFERENCES:
1.
GOM, WRD, “Irrigation Status Report
2015-16”, 2018
2
MWRRA, “Criteria for Distribution
of Surface Water Entitlements by River Basin Agencies for Domestic &
Industrial Uses”, Sept 2017
3. GOM,
WRD, “Maharashtra Water & Irrigation Commission Report, 1999
4.
GOM, WRD, “ Maharashtra State Water
Policy”, 2003
5.
GOM,WRD, “MWRRA Act,2005”
6.
GOM,WRD, “MMISF Act, 2005
7.
SOPPECOM, Pune, “Situational Analysis of Water Users Associations in Maharashtra - A
rapid assessment”, Report of a joint study by a network of grassroots
organizations in Maharashtra, April 2012
8.
GOM,WRD, “Maharashtra Krishna River
Basin Agency Bill”, 2004
9.
GOM, WRD, ”Restructuring of WRD & its Organisations”, GR 19.11.
2010
10. GOM,WRD,
“ Report of Special Investigation Team (Chitale Committee),March 2014
11.
Pradeep Purandare, “Making irrigation
systems compatible & amenable to modern concepts” Round
Table on Institutional and Policy Reforms to Accelerate Agriculture Growth in
Maharashtra 1st September 2018
12. Pradeep
Purandare, “Canal Irrigation in Maharashtra: Present Status”; Dams, Rivers
& People, July-Aug 2012
Annex
– 1
PIL
124 / 2014
Integrated
State Water Plan
Maharashtra
Water Resources Regulatory Authority Act, 2005 was enacted to create River
Basin Agencies (RBAs), State Water Board (SWB), State Water Council (SWC) &
Maharashtra Water Resources
Regulatory Authority (MWRRA). The Act gives powers to MWRRA
vide Section 11(f) to sanction projects only if they are in conformity with Integrated State
Water Plan(ISWP).The main objective of ISWP is to develop
& manage water resources in the State in systematic, systemic & river
basin-wise manner.
However, CAG Report (No.3 of 2014) on Management of
Irrigation Projects in Maharashtra revealed that MWRRA has accorded sanction to
189 projects in the period 2007-13 even in the absence of Integrated State
Water Plan. This serious & brazen violation of MWRRA Act, 2005 prompted the
petitioner to file this PIL.
The petitioner, in the larger interests of the State,
its people & their water rights, requested the Hon. High Court to kindly
issue following directions to the Government of Maharashtra & MWRRA:
1. Present a time bound roadmap
for operationalizing River Basin Agencies, State Water Board & State Water
Council.
2. Prepare the Integrated State
Water Plan within three months.
3. Fix responsibility &
take suitable action on all the individuals who have been responsible for the
inordinate delay in operationalizing River Basin Agencies, State Water Board
& State Water Council and preparing the Integrated State Water Plan.
Honourable High Court took serious cognizance of the
PIL & issued following important orders of far reaching implications
1.
State not to grant any Administrative
Approval in respect of any new project until finalisation of ISWP & without
observing the procedure prescribed under the Act (13 July 2015)
2.
Administrative approval given by the
State Government for the irrigation projects during the years 2007 to 2013 is
outside the scope of MWRRA Act 2005. The State Government to conduct enquiry of
these projects. (18 Dec 2015)
3.
The State Government shall take steps
forthwith for implementation of the directives issued by the Hon. Chief
Minister & the President of the State Water Council on 19.11.2015
The Govt, therefore,
appointed Panase Committee to conduct the enquiry of 189 projects & Bakshi
Committee to prepare Godavari Integrated Water Plan and guidelines for
preparation of such water plans for Krishna, Tapi, Narmada & West Flowing
Rivers.
Panse Committee has reportedly submitted its report
to Govt on 11th Aug 2016. Since the committee was constituted as per
the court order, it is expected that Govt should submit report of Panse
Committee along with Action Take Report (ATR) to the High Court and also make
it available in public domain. This, however, has not been done so far.
Petitioner was a member
of Bakshi Committee whose report has already been accepted by the Govt.
Finalization of Godavari Integrated Water Plan & guidelines for other
basins prepared by this committee has helped overcome the legal impasse &
has now paved the way for preparing an Integrated State Water Plan.
The revised roadmap for preparation of State Water
Plan was submitted to the Court by the government. As per this roadmap, the
process of submission of ISWP by State Water Board to State Water Council was
to be completed by 30.09.2016.
The government has not adhered to its own promise.
The fact remains that there is no ISWP even after 13 years.
Annex-2
MWRRA
(Amendment & Continuance) Act, 2011 & its implications
|
Amendments
|
Implications
|
|
Sec 1(2): This section shall be deemed to have come
into force on the 17th Sept 2010 & sections 2 to 6 shall be
deemed to have come into force on the 8th June 2005.
|
Sectoral allocation was a part of powers, functions
& duties of MWRRA as per section 11 of MWRRA Act, 2005. But High Power
Committee (HPC) illegally continued to take decisions regarding sectoral
allocation even after the MWRRA Act came in force. This happened from 2005 to
2011 & MWRRA did not take any objection. Amendment done in 2011 formally
withdrew MWRRA’s powers of sectoral allocation & gave the same to the
govt. The amendment legalised all the decisions of HPC with retrospective
effect.
|
|
Sec 2: Definitions of following two terms added
(k-1) High Power Committee
(u-1) Sectoral allocation
|
|
|
Sec 3: Substituted following for clause (a) of
section 11
“(a) to determine the criteria for the distribution
of Entitlements by the RBAs, within each Category of Use, on such terms &
conditions as may be prescribed, after sectoral allocation is made under 16A
|
Sec 16A gives powers to govt (i.e. Cabinet of
Ministers instead of HPC) to do the sectoral allocation.
MWRRA can now only determine criteria ‘as may be
prescribed’. This prescription is possible only through Rules. And govt (read
WRD) has not prepared the Rules. So, nothing has been prescribed. MWRRA thus
cannot even determine the criteria. The end result is govt continues to do sectoral
allocation & MWRRA has no role to play & no duty to perform in
respect of Entitlement – it’s main stay!
|
|
16 A: (1) Notwithstanding
anything contained in section 11 or any other provisions of this Act or in any other law for
the time being in force, the State
Government shall determine the sectoral allocation:
Provided that, sectoral
allocation so determined shall ordinarily be reviewed at such intervals of
not less than three years :
Provided further that, after publication of the
Maharashtra Water Resources Regulatory
Authority (Amendment and Continuance) Act, 2011, in the Official Gazette, the State Cabinet shall determine the sectoral allocation.
(2) After the sectoral
allocation, as provided in sub-section (1) is determined, the Authority shall
determine the criteria for the distribution of Entitlements
under clause (a) of section 11."
|
Pl see comments already made at Sr. No. 3
|
|
31A. Notwithstanding anything
contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force,
the term "Entitlement" shall
apply only to such areas
where compliance of all relevant provisions including
delineation under the Maharashtra Management of Irrigation Systems
by Farmers Act, 2005 is made.
Explanation.—In respect of the
areas where the Maharashtra Management of Irrigation Systems by Farmers Act,
2005, has not become
applicable, section 78 of that Act shall apply and be effective.
|
MMISF Act has been made applicable to only those 286
projects which have been selected under Maharashtra Water Sector Improvement
Program (MWSIP). The said Act is also applicable to the ongoing projects by
default. As a result of this amendment the area under Entitlement has been
drastically reduced.
Moreover, the amendment considers entitlement for
agriculture / irrigation only. It is silent about entitlement for domestic
& industrial purposes.
.
|
|
31B. Notwithstanding anything
contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in
force, or in any order, judgement or decree of any court, tribunal or
authority, any person or Water User Entity to whom a permission,
allocation, sanction, authorization or Entitlement of water has been granted by the High
Power Committee or the River Basin Agency
or the State Government, prior to the 17th September 2b 10, being the date of commencement of section 1 of the
Maharashtra Water Resources Regulatory Authority Amendment and Continuance) Act, 2011, shall be deemed to have been granted, in accordance with the provisions of this Act and accordingly the same shall continue and no such person or Water User Entity shall be required to obtain fresh permission, allocation, sanction, authorization or Entitlement to draw water. |
The process of preparing ISWP has revealed that in most of the river
sub basins there is an over commitment i.e. the storage capacity of
sanctioned projects is significantly more than the availability of water.
That means now there is no water available for the “new entrants”- people
& areas which aspire, & rightly so, to get water. Secondly, the
demand for water has been increasing rapidly due to urbanization,
industrialization & changes in standard of living. The way out can be of
two types. First, to improve water use efficiencies and reuse & recycle
water. Second, to revise water use standards & redistribute available
water equitably & judicially in all sectors. The first solution has
obvious limitations & would address only a part of the problem. It is the
second solution which has got tremendous potential. But the amendments 31A,
31B & 31C virtually declare that redistribution
of water is a closed chapter.
ISWP is required as a reference frame for
(a)
Clearance of
new projects / projects with significant changes in the scope
(b)
Conflict
resolution
Both (a) & (b) would need redistribution of water.
.
|
|
31C. Notwithstanding anything
contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being
in force, a permission, allocation, sanction, authorization or Entitlement of water, granted by the High
Power Committee or the
River Basin Agency or the State Government prior to the 17th September 2010, being the date of
commencement of section 1 of the Maharashtra Water Resources
Regulatory Authority (Amendment
and Continuance) Act, 2011, shall be
valid and shall be deemed always to have
been valid and accordingly no suit, prosecution or any other legal
proceedings shall lie, challenging such permission, allocation, sanction,
authorization or Entitlement to draw water, before any court, tribunal or other authority and no such suit, prosecution or
other legal proceedings shall lie or continue on the ground that any permission, allocation, sanction, authorization
or Entitlement, as required under
this Act, has not been obtained. ".
|
No comments:
Post a Comment