It had been four years since the Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board has taken up the Yaragol scheme. The plan envisages construction of dam to Markandeya river near Yaragol in Bangarpet taluk. If implemented, it would provide drinking water to Kolar, Bangarpet and Malur taluk centres apart from 45 villages.
However, the proposal to construct dam is mired in official correspondence between the Board, district administration and the Forest Department. The government gave administrative approval for the project on August 22, 2007. The laying of pipe line has already been completed.
Proposal not submitted
The Water Supply Board has so far not submitted a full-fledged proposal seeking Forest land for dam. Amid furnishing incomplete information to the Forest Department, the Board has already floated tenders for construction of the dam. Forest Department sources told Deccan Herald that the Board has not replied to its repeated letters seeking information on the forest land that would be utilised after the completion of the project.
The correspondence between the Water Supply Board and the Forest Department began on April 3, 2006. Several letters have been exchanged since the Assistant Executive Engineer of Betamangala sub-division sought information from Bangarpet Range Forest Officer (RFO) on the areas that would be submerged for the project.
‘Wrong information’
The RFO, Bangarpet, in a letter dated October 22, 2007 addressed to the AEE, Betamangala sub-division has said that except a part of survey number 52 where the dam is proposed to be constructed, the rest of the land in Balamande and Palamadagu have been notified as forest land by then Mysore government in 1898 itself. However, it had not been noted as such in revenue records even after 118 years. The RFO has also stated that the AEE has furnished ‘wrong information’ to the higher authority “in confusion.”
On the other hand, the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Kolar division, in a letter dated February 19, addressed to the Board has stated that a proposal should be submitted to the Union government to take up construction of the dam in Forest land. Any deviation would amount to violation of Wildlife Protection Act and contempt of Supreme Court directives.
Assistance offered
Again, on March 23, the Board has been informed of the delay in submitting the proposal and asked to furnish the information in the format annexed, in ten sets, at the earliest. Furthermore, in a letter dated April 30, the Department, noting the delay in official correspondence, has offered the Board to extent full assistance to its staff who could be deputed in preparing the proposal.
The Board seems to have adopted a different path. Instead of taking steps to submit the proposal, in a letter dated May 14 addressed to Deputy Conservator of Forests, has said the Deputy Commissioner has confirmed that there was no any forest area in the project site. It has also ‘advised’ the Department to sort out dispute on the extent with the district administration by conducting a joint survey with Revenue Department.
The Department sources, however said, they would forward the proposal as and when submitted. They also cautioned that it would be violation of law to take up the work in forest area without obtaining prior permission from the Union government. The sources also said it would be futile to engage in official correspondence, without addressing the core issue.
DH News Service