Here we give an account of the magnitude of the rehabilitation problem and briefly describe the plan for rehabilitation as offered by the project on the basis of the report of the State Committee on the Socio-economic Impact of the project (1987). On the basis of our investigations, we then discuss the perception of the people towards the resettlement plan and the problems and deficiencies the programme may face of suffer from. Based on this appraisal our suggestions for modification in the programme are given in the last chapter.

Magnitude of displacement

According to a survey conducted in 1985 by M.P.E.B., 1748 families in 33 villages (28 in whole and 5 in part) are required to be resettled. 37% of these families are landless. The proportion of tribals and scheduled casts in the affected population is 79% (70.75% S.T. and 8.35% S.C.).
Policy and principles of resettlement and rehabilitation

The programme of rehabilitation of oustees of Bodhghat project (prepared under the guidelines of the Government of M.P. in 1985) has been revised on the basis of consultation with Central government and the State Government. The present programme (December, 1987) incorporates all the benevolent features of the Narmada Sagar Project and the statutory requirements of the Madhya Pradesh Pariyojna Ke Karan Visthapit Vyakti (Punhsthapam) Adhiniyam, 1985.

 Its salient features are as follows:
 

1. Reasonable compensation for the land, trees, houses and other immobile properties.
    

2. Free of cost two hectares of developed land suitable for agriculture, and an abadi plot of 500 sq.m. to each family treating the adult son and head of individual families with in a joint family as separate families.
    

3. Additional land is allotable with a ceiling of 8 hectares oer family on payment, of which 50% cost will be paid from the compensation payable to him.

4. Hamlet (Para) will be a single unit for resettlement.
    

5. Landless person and small and marginal farmers will be given an amount or grant-in-aid at the rate of Rs. 500 per month for a period of one year.
    

6. Free transportation of displaced families and their belongings (including objects of religious importance).
    

7. Cash grant as per norms of Indira Awas yojna for those who prefer to construct a house according to their choice.
    

8. Guarantee to provide regular employment to one member of the displaced family.
    

9. Provision of civic amenities and infrastructural facilities like water, electricity, road, school, panchayat house-cum-community hall, thanagudi (village rest house), cattle stand, Deogudi (place of worship), threshing ground, cremation/burial ground, pond, dispensary and the services of a Gram Sewak to guide them in improved method of cultivation at the resettlement site.
    

10. Vocational education and training and free hostel accommodation for the children of displaced families. Fisheries training centre, vocational training and rehabilitation centre at Barsur for providing gainful employment to the displaced persons.

We were given to understand that so far 7138 hectares of non-forest government land, recorded as revenue land has been identified in the Tehsils od Dantewada, Bijapur and Narainpur in South Bastar. These lands in chunks of varying sizes are dispersed in 57 villages. Hamlet (Para) will be considered as a unit for resettlement. The projects authority is also ensuring by soil sampling and analysis that the soil quality is suitable for sustained cultivation. Nistar facilities will be available in new settlement area.

It would be seen that the rehabilitation programme appears to be quite comprehensive. It offers compensation for loss of land and other immovable properties and provides for employment and vocational training besides a cash grant in lieu of displacement.
While the measures offered prima facie seem reasonable but their implementation with the involvement of people is not all that easy. We discuss this in the light of the facilities being provided at the model resettlement village.

Model resettlement village

Establishment of a model resettlement village (area: 81.173 hectare) in Pharasmadhur village (Dantewada Tehsil) is in progress. Thirty families from two villages (Hitameta and Sadar} are proposed to be settled here.

A tube well (with hand pump) has been bored. Construction of community hall and school was progressing when we visited the spot in May 1989. Within the village, demarcation of agriculture plots and abadi plots had been done. However, there was no evidence that these measures were underway with the consent of the affected people. Certainly, there was no participation of the affected people in these operations. Because of this deficiency, despite all the good' intentions on the part of the M.P.E.B., the effort appears more in the way of convincing the visitors who may come to assess the reasonableness of the rehabilitation programme. There was no evidence that the people who are to be resettled and those that already live in the area are conviced of the merits of the programme, as would be seen from what follows.

Response of the people

In the study area people are ignorant about resettlement programme which is generally opposed. The programmes and policies have not been communicated to the people in the submergence area, including the two villages (Hitameta and Sadar} selected for model resettlement at Pharasmadhur. In addition to Pharasmadhur, there are two more existing villages near the rehabilitation site. The site itself is a near flat area with loamy soil with scattered trees, mainly mahua and grass. Investigations revealed that the people of Pharasmadhur and other two nearby villages depend upon the area of the model village site for pasturing their livestock and for collection of mahua. The landless also cultivate in this area.

Pharasmadhur has 30 households (2 hamlets) of Gond tribes one third of whom are landless. People in Pharasmadhur are Gonds, but of different clans to those of Gonds of submergence area. They do not come in their marriageable clans. The dialect is Gondi but a little different to that spoken in the submergence area. These may, however, not be major problems because the distance between the existing villages and the resettlement site is only 20 km. Interview of' the inhabitants of Pharasmadhur indicated that they do not have any tangible income from forest products nor do they derive any reckonable quantities of forest food. Availability of wood also is a problem. This is because the condition of nearby forest in terms of availability of minor forest products, forest food and fuelwood is not very rich. Resettlement site however has a large number of mahua trees which may attract the tribals.
Para mukhya (head of the hamlet) of Pharasmadhur suggested that sharing of the grazing land, fuelwood and nistari rights with and the losing of mahua trees to the oustees are the expected problems. Further the landless earlier used to cultivate on the rehabilitation site, which they will not be able to do.
If seen critically it is to be mentioned that while the project is striving to offer a very reasonable package for rehabiliation, the plan suffers from two major shortcomings:-

(i) Noninvolvement of the people in the programme -both the oustees as well as the people already living near the rehabiliation site.

Alternative development measures (ecodevelopment) as an area specific package which aims at enhancement of per unit area productivity of agricultural land as well as the commons (pasture and forests), including adoption of sustainable and economically more beneficial utilization practices e.g. crop alternatives (horticulture, sericulture" agricultural cash crops), lift irrigation 'support, better dry farming techniques, better animal husbandary and cattle breeds etc.