Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar i
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Foreword
This report is the output of assignment “Social Impact Assessment Study of Land Acquisition for Water Pipeline Corridor of Ultra Mega Power Project” going to be established in Bhedabahal in Sundargarh district. This Study was conducted by Institute of Rural Development and Management Studies (IRDMS), Bhubaneswar during 2015.
IRDMS is a social sector development organisation involved in different research and analysis activities besides the implementation of different socio‐economic development projects in the State of Odisha. As a professional organisation, we always try out best, within resources available, to justify each and every research findings through several cross checks and never hide or compromise any facts.
The present study has been conducted in a scientific manner following appropriate designs and methods and using appropriate research tools. All attempts have been made at all stages to present the facts without any intentional biasedness or favour to any one, so as to explore the possibility of executing the project without creating any significant adverse impact on local community.
We are grateful to Director, NCDS and Prof. R.K. Meher, State SIA Coordinator for entrusting the study to us. We are especially grateful to Prof. R.K. Meher for his keen interest in the study and valuable suggestions and guidance received in all meetings he conducted to review the progress of assignment. His suggestions helped us in doing meticulous planning and conducting household surveys and FGD at community level to prepare this SIA report relating to acquisition of private land in Sundargarh district for the water pipeline corridor of 4000 MW UMPP.
IRDMS expresses its sincere thanks to the District Administration, particularly the ADM Sundargarh, Nodal Officers of SIA Study, LAO and Tahasildar, Sundargarh Tahasil and the grassroots officials of the line departments for extending all cooperation required for the study.
Last but not the least, we are thankful to the cooperation of the affected community including all the respondents, key community leaders, PRI members and others who spared their valuable time and provided necessary assistance and support to our Research Team in the collection of primary data required for the study.
Brahmananda Rout Secreatry, IRDMS Bhubaneswar July, 2016
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar ii
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Disclaimer
The report has been prepared with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of contract with State SIA Unit, NCDS, incorporating our general rules of business and taking account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. We disclaim any responsibility to NCDS and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the study.
IRDMS
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar iii
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...... 1
Chapter-1: Introduction 7 Chapter-2: SIA Scoping & Planning, Team Composition, Approach & Methodology 11 Chapter-3: Applicable Legislations and Policies 25 Chapter-4: Profile of the Study Area 37 Chapter-5: Land Assessment 52 Chapter-6: Socio-Economic and Cultural Profile of the Project-affected Area 67 Chapter-7: Public Cunsultation and Participation 103 Chapter-8: Assessment of Social Impacts 114 Chapter-9: Social Impact Management Plan (SIMP) 121
Annexures: Annexure-1: NOTIFICATION ...... 136 Annexure-2: Land Status of Six Affected Villages ...... 139
Annexure-3: Homestead Land ...... 139 Annexure-4: Entitlement Matrix Village: Bhasma ...... 140 Village: Deuli ...... 145 Village: Kaintara ...... 147 Village: Kudabaga ...... 152 Village: Kundukela ...... 154 Village: Podbahal ...... 157 Annexure-5: MAPS ...... 159
Photographs of Survey Activities in Study Villages ...... 170
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar iv
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
LIST OF TABLES
Table‐3.1: Entitlement Matrix ...... 32 Table 4.1: Administrative Set‐up of Sundargarh District ...... 38 Table 4.2: District Population as per 2011 Census...... 38 Table 4.3: Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes ...... 39 Population of Sundargarh District, 2011 Table‐4.4: Land Utilisation Patterns in Sundargarh District ...... 39 Table 4.5: Agricultural Indicators of Sundargarh District ...... 40 Table 4.5: Population of the Affected Villages ...... 43 Table 4.6: SC and ST Population of the Affected Vllages ...... 43 Table 4.7: Literacy Rate of the Affected Villages ...... 44 Table‐5.1 : Bare Minimum Land Proposed for Acquisition ...... 54 Table‐5.2: Total Land Holdings ...... 55 Table‐5.3: Use of Land (in acres) ...... 56 Table‐5.4: Status of Ownership ...... 57 Table‐5.5: Total Affected Land and Families ...... 58 Table‐5.6: Village‐Bhasma ...... 58 Table 5.7: Village‐Deuli ...... 60 Table‐5.8: Affected Migrant and Non‐respondents from Deuli Village ...... 61 Table 5.9: Village‐ Kaintara ...... 62 Table‐5.10: Affected Migrant and Non‐respondents from Kaintara village ...... 63 Table‐5.11: Village‐Kudabaga ...... 63 Table‐5.12: Affected Migrant and Non‐respondents from Kudabaga Village ...... 64 Table‐5.13: Village‐Kundukela ...... 65 Table‐5.14: Village‐Podbahal ...... 66 Table‐6.1: Number of Affected Families with Male and Female Proportion ...... 67 Table‐6.2: Type of families ...... 68 Table‐6.3: Age‐wise Dstribution of Affected Population ...... 70 Table‐6.4: Social Category ...... 73 Table‐6.5: Religion ...... 74
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar v
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.6: Marital Status ...... 74 Table 6.7: Literacy Level of Affected Population ...... 77 Table‐6.8: Dwelling Condition ...... 80 Table‐6.9: Availability Status of Patta ...... 80 Table‐6.10: Separate Place for Domestic Animals ...... 81 Table‐6.11: Bathroom in the House ...... 81 Table‐6.12: Toilet within or adjacent to House (Sanitation Facility) ...... 82 Table‐6.13: Washing Place within the House ...... 83 Table‐6.14: Households having Electricity Connection ...... 84 Table‐6.15: Source of Drinking Water...... 85 Table‐6.16: Illness ParticularsFamily Member during last 12 Months of Survey ...... 86 Table‐6.17: Treatment Particulars and Preferences ...... 87 Table‐6.18: Nearest Formal Medical Facility ...... 88 Table‐6.19: Households Suffering from Chronic Disease Requiring Regular Treatment ...... 88 Table‐6.20: Incidence of Death during Last One Year of Survey ...... 89 Table‐6.21: Birth Particulars during Last One Year ...... 89 Table‐6.22: Immunization Staus of New Born Children ...... 90 Table‐6.23: Annual Income of the Households ...... 91 Table‐6.24: Main Occupation Profile ...... 92 Table‐6.25: Durable Household Assets ...... 94 Table‐6.26: Durable Household Assets ...... 95 Table‐6.27: Live Stock Assets ...... 95 Table‐6.28: Loan and Indebtedness ...... 96 Table‐6.29: Source of Loan ...... 97 Table‐6.30: Expenditure Pattern (Food) ...... 98 Table‐6.31: Expenditure Pattern (Non‐Food) ...... 99 Table‐6.32: Vulnerability Status of Affected Families ...... 100 Table‐6.33: Income Particulars of the Women ...... 101 Table‐6.34: Women Participation at Community Level ...... 102 Table‐8.1: Summary of Impacts likely to accrue during ...... 118 Project Operation Phase of Main Plant
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar vi
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
LIST OF CHARTS
Chart‐5.1: Project Affected Area ...... 53
Chart‐5.2: Willingness to Lose Assets ...... 54
Chart‐6.1: Village‐wise percentage of Affected Families ...... 67
Chart‐6.2: Sex Ratio ...... 68
Chart‐6.3: Type of Families ...... 69
Chart‐6.4: Age‐wise population of Affected Villages ...... 71
Chart‐6.5: Percentage of Social Categorisation of Affected Persons ...... 73
Chart‐6.6: Literacy Rate in the Affected Area ...... 79
Chart‐6.7: Household Level Sanitation Facility ...... 83
Chart‐6.8: Household Level Electricity Facility ...... 84
Chart‐6.9: Household Level Drinking Water Facility ...... 85
Chart‐6.10: Illness Oarticulars of Family Member during Last 12 months ...... 86
Chart‐6.11: Indebtedness Profile of Affected Families ...... 96
Chart‐6.12: Particulars of Loans and Sources ...... 97
Chart‐6.13: Percenage of Vulnerable Households in Affected Villages ...... 100
Chart‐6.14: Village‐wise Average Annual Income of Women ...... 101 in the Affected Households (in Rs.)
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar vii
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
ABBREVIATION
BOO Build, Own and Operate BPL Below Poverty Line CBWE Central Board of Workers’ Education CEA Central Electricity Authority CHC Community Health Centre CPR Common Property Resources CPSE Central Public Sector Enterprise FGD Focused Group Discussion GDP Gross Domestic Product GP Gram Panchayat
GRC Grievance Redressal Committee HH Household ICB International Competitive Bidding IDCO Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation, Odisha IRDMS Institute of Rural Development and Management Studies, Bhubaneswar LA Land Acquisition LAO Land Acquisition Officer MGNREGA Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guaranty Act MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest MPP Mega Power Projects MW Mega Watt NCDS Nabakrushna Choudhury Centre for Development Studies, Bhubaneswar NFSA National Food Security Act NGO Non‐Government Organisation NTFP Non‐Timber Forest Produce NTPC National Thermal Power Corporation OBC Other Backward Classes OIPL Odisha Infra Power Limited PAA Project Affected Area PAF Project Affected Families PAP Project Affected Persons PFCCL Power Finance Corporation Consulting Limited PFCL Power Finance Corporation Limited PHC Primary Health Centre PPP Public Private Partnership PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal QPR Quarterly Progress Report R&R Resettlement & Rehabilitation RAP Resettlement Action Plan RCH Reproductive Child Health RDM Revenue and Disaster Management RTFCTLARR Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Resettlement and Rehabilitation Act, 2013 SC Scheduled Caste SHG Self Help Group SIA Social Impact Assessment SIAU Social Impact Assessment Unit SIMP Social Impact Management Plan SPCB State Pollution Control Board SPV Special Purpose Vehicle ST Scheduled Tribe ToR Terms of Reference UMPP Ultra Mega Power Project
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar viii
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Executive Summary
I. Background
For the Ultra Mega Power Project (UMPP) to be set up in Sundargarh Tahasil of the Sundargarh district, it has been planned to lay out one water pipeline corridor to meet the water consumption need of the project. Under this water pipeline corridor it is planned to lay a pipeline from Hirakud reservoir to the project site at Bhedabahal village in Sundargarh. For this Water Pipeline Corridor sizeable amount of private land needs to be acquired.
In this context, according to Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, this study was conducted to ascertain the impact of acquisition of 24.59 acres of land on the 125 families of the six affected villages i.e. Bhasma, Kaintara, Deuli, Kundukela, Kudabaga and Podbahal of Sundargarh Tahasil for the upcoming water pipeline corridor of Ultra Mega Power Project.
Among the affected households, some may lose substantial portion of their landholdings, while some others may be very marginally get affected. Whatever the case may be for fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition and to find out the likely social impact of such land acquisition in those six villages, it was necessary to conduct a survey of the direct and indirectly affected families.
II. Objectives of SIA Study The major objectives of this social impact assessment study are: i) To assess whether proposed land acquisition in affected six villages serves public prupose. ii) To estimate the number of affected families, magnitude of loss of land assets based on the actual holdings of the families and the number of families among them likely to be displaced physically or occupationally due to acquisition of land. iii) Extent of lands‐ public and private, houses settlements and other common properties likely to be affected by the proposed acquisition. iv) To examine whether the extent of land proposed for acquisition is the bare minimum necessity for the commissioning of the proposed project. v) To find out whether an alternative site has been considered for the purpose where there is least displacement problem, but the site itself is not suitable for the project.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 1
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
vi) To study the social impacts of the project by covering both direct land loser households as well as the indirectly affected households due to loss of common property resources (CPRs), socio‐economic infrastructures, etc and the impact of these costs on the overall costs of the projectd vis‐à‐vis the benefits of the project. vii) To suggest remedial intervention measures by designing appropriate policies and programmes through designing of a Social Impact Management Plan or mitigation plan.
III. SIA Study Methods All the land losing households in the six villages of Sundargarh Tahasil of Sundargarh district comprising 125 households having ownership rights over the proposed 24.59 acres of land were studied through canvassing of a suitably designed structured interview schedule by using census method. The Interview schedule was canvassed by the trained Field Investigator to the head of the household and in his/her absence same was done with the help of a knowledgeable member of the household and it was duly filled in by the Field Investigator by following interactive method. Apart from that 5.00 per cent of the non‐loser households of land or house subject to minimum of 10 households from each of the affected village in the aforesaid six villages were also studied to find out its impact on indirectly affected families in the wake of loss of the aforesaid private land, public land and other common property resources. SIA Study was conducted through FGDs, PRAs in the six villages covering different sections of the village society. Chapter‐2 of this report illustrates the planning and methodology of the study in detail. Applicable Legislations and policies for rehabilitation and resettlement of the affected households and various provisions for affected and non‐affected households are discussed in detail in chapter‐3. Various other details regarding the profile of the affected area, study findings are discussed in details in different chapters of this report. Study findings are being summarised here for general perception and understanding of the study report.
IV. SIA Study Findings Identification of the affected families: The SIA study covered a total of 125 affected households. These families are RoR holders of their lands and cultivating the same for generations.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 2
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Acquisition of private lands: The 125 affected families will lose a total of 24.59 acres of land out of 820.78 acres possessed by them. Only 3% of the total land possessed by the affected households will be acquired under the project. Out of 125 households 122 are title holders, 2 have customary rights and 1 household is an encroacher. Out of 24.59 acres of land owners of 20.01 acres are residents, owners of 1.77 acres have migrated out from their native village and of the rest 2.81 acres the owners have not responded. It is found out from the SIA survey that land will be acquired from six affected villages of Sundargarh tahasil as per the followings: i) Bhasma‐ 8.96 acres, ii) Deuli‐ 5.94 acres, iii) Kaintara‐ 3.74 acres iv) Kudabaga‐ 3.03 acres, v) Kundukela‐ 1.52 acres and, vi) Podbahal‐ 1.40 acres. Socio‐Economic and Cultural Profile of the Affected Villages: The total population of the affected 125 households of six villages is 672, out of which 374 are males and 298 are females. The sex ratio is found to be very low, which is 797 in the affected households as compared to 978 females per 1000 males at the all‐Odisha level according to 2011 Census. Of the total 125 affected households, the highest number of 46 (36.8%) households will be affected in Bhasma village and the lowest number of 7 (5.6%) households will be affected in Podbahal village. Household structure shows that 49 (39.20%) of the affected households are joint families and the rest 76 (60.80%) of them reside in nuclear families. In the affected six villages, majority of the affected households (55.65%) are from OBC category, 16.13 per cent are Scheduled Castes and the rest 20.16 per cent are of Scheduled Tribe category. All the affected households are Hindus by religion. Educational Level: In comparison of State and District the literacy rate in the six affected villages is quite high at approx 86% with 13.41% Intermediate, 5.08% graduates, 2.92% Post Graduates, 3.08% Technical Degree holders, 1.84% Technical Diploma holders, 0.47% ITI and 1.70% are professional degree holders. There is decline at the graduation level after intermediate. Trend also shows that females are more or less equally pursuing education upto elementary level, whereas there is decline in women education in higher education front.(Refer Table 6.7, as per the HH Survey) Dwelling Condition: Of the affected 125 households 122 have their own house, whereas only 3 are living in rented houses. 117 have their land patta whereas 8 housholds do not have any land patta.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 3
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Among the affected households 36% houses are kachha houses, 37% houses are Semi Pucca and rest 27% are pucca houses. It is revealed from the survey that 47.20 per cent households have separate place for their livestocks, only 33.60 per cent have bathroom in their houses and 45.60 per cent have toilet in their houses. This shows the poor status of sanitation in the affected families, although it is relatively better than the availability satus of toilet facility in rural Odisha according to 2011 Census. Only 74.40 per cent households have electricity connection. However, more than 90 per cent of the affected households have access to safe drinking water facility in the affected villages Of them, 44.80 per cent have access to pipe water supply, 47.20 per cent avail water from the tubewell/handpump and the rest others are dependent on rivers and streams. Health Status: Study evaluated various health perspectives, facilities and peoples perception and benefits being taken from available health infrastructure by the people of the affected villaages. On evaluatin of last 12 months figures, it shows that 36 per cent family members of the affected families were indisposed during the period. Among the affected families 66.44 per cent people accept the modern medicine more readily and prefer allopathic treatment from government hospitals, 4.44 per cent prefer private clinics, 6.67 per cent prefer to Ayurvedic treatment, and 4.44 per cent prefer homeopathy. About 20 per cent of the affected families having good financial condition prefer to go to either government or private clinics for allopathic treatment. About 24 per cent affected families were found to be having persons suffering from chronic diseases requiring regular treatment. During past one year only five children wer born in the affected families of six villages and the families registered only three deaths. It is, however, reported that cent per cent of the new born children in the affected families of six affected villages have been fully immunised. Household Income: On analysis of household income it is found that 17.60 per cent households are having annual income above Rs.5 lakhs, 5.6 per cent are earning between Rs.3 to 5 lakhs, 6.4 per cent between Rs. 2 to 3 lakhs. From the total 125 affected households only 29 households (23.20%) earn an income of below Rs.60,000 per annum and they may be identified as BPL category households. This shows that the overall economic condition of the affected households in the affected area is fairly good. Majority among the land‐affected households can easily manage the loss of very small amount of land from their holdings in the wake of acquisition of land for the water pipeline corridor of 4000 MW UMPP without affecting their present
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 4
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
sustainable means of living in a greater way if fair cash compensation is awarded to those land‐affected families as per the RFCTLARR ACT, 2013 and Odisha RFCTLARR Rules , 2016. However, a few among the BPL category families losing cent per cent of their homestead land for the water pipeline corridor are required to be compensated adeqauately in cash and kind to restore their present living standard and to improve their living condition sustainably. Occupation Pattern: From the study it has been revealed that in the affected families, 126 (18.75%) persons are cultivators, 45 (6.70%) of PAPs are serviceholders and 42 (6.25%) are daily wage labourers doing both agricultural and non‐agricultural wage work and only 5 (0.74%) persons are engaged in petty business and trading work as self‐ emloyed workers. Household Assets: The SIA Study team identified the key assets owned by the PAPs, across the surveyed 6 villages during the field visit. The basic assets of the affected families are TV, Tape Recorder, Radio, Refrigerator and telephone. Surveyers also gathered information on the other assets such as cycle, motorcycle, auto rickshaw, car, bus, cooking, utensils, gold ornaments, etc. Indebtedness: Analysis of indebtedness of the affected households according to source or purpose of loan reveals that 48.80 per cent of the affected households in the six villages are indebted and among them 72.13 per cent have taken loan from banks. Except one person in Kundukela, none was found to have taken loan from local moneylender and the rest others have taken loans from friends, relatives and also from other formal source like credit cooperative societies. Expenditure Pattern: Analysis of food and non‐food expenditure pattern of the affected households shows that the highest percentage (23.20%) of the households are having food expenditure below Rs.1000 per month and the lowest percentage (1.60%) of households are having expenditure between Rs.8000 to 10000 per month. In non‐food category, 36 per cent famiies are spending more than Rs. 10,000 per month, whereas only 2.4 per cent among the affected families spend below Rs.1000 per month on non‐food items. This shows that the expenditure pattern of the families is higher in non‐food category and has been increasing year after year as reported by the respondents due to the speedy change of the life style. Majority of the affected families spending a high proportion of their income on consumption of non‐food category goods and
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 5
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
services shows that the living condition of people in the affected villages is reasonably good.
Vulnerable groups: Study assessed the vulnerability on the basis of BPL and household headed by physically disabled persons and women. A majority of the project affected families are agriculturists and they are not categorised as BPL faaaamilies. Cent percent of the affected households of Deuli and Kaintara are identified as APL category families. However, that does mean that all the affected villagers of the study area are affluent families. It has been found that there are 11 women headed households constituting 8.80 per cent amongst the 125 project‐affected families and those families are vulnerable to poverty and economic insecurity.
V. Social Impacts:
Social Impacts are the changes that occur in communities or to individuals as a result of an externally‐induced change. The changes due to the project may affect on the employment, income, production, way of life, culture, community, political systems, environment, health and well‐being, personal and property rights, and fears and aspirations. These impacts can be positive or negative. Therefore, a social impact is a significant improvement or deterioration in people’s well‐being.
Socio‐economic Impacts: Loss of livelihood, specific impacts on women, violations of human rights, land dispossession, loss of landscape/sense of place. displacement, lack of work security, labour absenteeism, firings, unemployment, Loss of traditional knowledge/practices/cultures are some of the negative socio‐economic impacts that may affect the sustainable living of land‐ affected families due to acquisition of land for the proposed water pipeline corridor in the six land‐affected villages.
Environmental Impacts: Loss of wildlife, agro‐diversity, food insecurity (crop damage), global warming, loss of landscape/aesthetic degradation, noise pollution, soil contamination, surface water pollution / decreasing water (physico‐chemical, biological) quality, groundwater pollution or depletion, large‐scale disturbance of hydro and geological systems, reduced ecological / hydrological connectivity are some of the negative environmental effects that may be caused due to the location of proposed 4000 MW UMPP in Sundargarh district. Although the water pipeline corridor per se may not cause any adverse environmental impact in those
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 6
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
six affected villages, functioning of UMPP in future may cause severe environmental impacts on the living of PAPs.
Health Impacts: Negative environmental impacts may cause an increase of severe pollution related diseses in the villages such as respiratory disorder, water borne diseases and life style related diseases like diabetes, bloodpressure, heart diseases and the like.
Livelihood: About 24.59 Ha of private land in six villages of Sundargarh tahasil is to be acquired for the water pipeline corridor of UMPP. Compensation levels need to be agreed through negotiated settlements and at rates of prevailing market prices. Since there are economic activities affected by land acquisition and restricted access to public grazing land, which will be addressed through a livelihood restoration program.
VII. Mitigation Measures The Social Impact Assessment (SIA) study includes Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) which is based on the principle that the population affected by the proposed Ultra Mega Power Project will be assisted to improve their living standards. The RAP is project specific and it has been prepared in accordance with the RTFCTLARR Act 2013 of the Government of India.
The RAP is based on the general findings of the census socio‐economic survey, field visits, and meetings with various project‐affected persons in the project area. The primary objective of the RAP is to identify impacts and to plan measures to mitigate various losses of the Project while the specific objectives are as follows:
¾ To prepare an action plan for the project affected people for improving or at least retaining the living standards in the post resettlement period; ¾ To outline the entitlements for the affected persons for payment of compensation and assistance for establishing the livelihoods; ¾ To develop communication mechanism to establish harmonious relationship between OIPL and Project Affected Persons (PAPs); ¾ To ensure adequate mechanism expeditious implementation of R&R.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 7
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐1
Introduction
1.1. Background of the Project:
Orissa Integrated Power Limited (OIPL) is a wholly owned subsidiary of PFCL which is identified by PFCL as SPV and owner for the Orissa UMPP. OIPL is carrying out preliminary work up to selection of Developer for the 4000 MW Ultra Mega Power Project at Site located at district Sundargarh of Orissa. It is a very large sized project, approximately 4000 MW involving an estimated investment of about Rs. 16,000 crore. The projects will meet the power needs of the State/distribution companies located in the State, and are being developed on a Build, Own, and Operate (BOO) basis. In view of the fact, promotion of competition is one of the key objectives of the Electricity Act, 2003, and of the legal provisions regarding procurement of electricity. The Power Finance Corporation (PFC), a PSU under the Ministry of Power, has been identified as the nodal agency for this initiative.
Sundargarh district in which Odisha UMPP thermal plant has been proposed, was constituted on the 1st January, 1948 out of the two ex‐States of Gangpur and Bonai, which merged with Odisha on that day. True to its name, this “beautiful” district of Sundargarh with about 43 per cent of its total area under forest cover and numerous colorful tribes dotting its landscape and with abundant mining potential is bounded by Gumla district of Jharkhand on the North, Raigarh district of Chhatisgarh on the West and North‐West, Jharsuguda, Sambalpur and Angul districts of Odisha on the South and South‐East and Singhbhum district of Jharkhand on the East.
Geographically the district is not a compact unit and consists of widely dissimilar tracts of expansive and fairly open country dotted with tree‐clad isolated peaks, vast inaccessible forests, extensive river valleys and mountainous terrain. Broadly speaking, it is an undulating tableland of different elevations broken up by rugged hill ranges and cut up by torrential hill streams and the rivers IB and Brahmani. The general slope of the district is from North to South. Because of this undulating, hilly and sloping nature of landscape, the area is subject to rapid runoff leading not only to soil erosion but also to scarcity of water for both agriculture and drinking purpose.
1.2. Salient features of the Plant and Choice of Technology
The Ultra Mega Power Projects would use Super Critical Technology with a view to achieve higher levels of fuel efficiency, which results in saving of fuel and lower green‐house gas emissions; flexibility in unit size subject to adoption of specified minimum Supercritical
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 8
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
parameters; and Integrated power project with dedicated captive coal blocks for pithead projects. Coastal projects to use imported coal.
State owned power trading firm Gridco Ltd has been appointed as the lead utility among all the utilities that shall be allocated power from the Bhedabahal UMPP. As the lead utility, Gridco will discharge the obligations on behalf of all the individual entities.
Ultra‐Mega Power Project site is to be located at District Sundargarh of Orissa.The proposed plant will comprise supercritical boilers, condensers, turbines and generators with all accessories. PFCL in turn has identified shell companies (SPV – Special Purpose Vehicle) to carryout various preparatory activities at different sites such as initial and detailed Survey, Site selection, fuel tie‐up, expediting various clearances, preparation of the Project Report along with Plant layout, detailed investigations, etc. to bring the Project to a stage of readiness for handing over to Developers who would be selected through a process of competitive tariff‐based bidding.
1.3. Land, Water and Fuel for Odisha UMPP
The UMPP needs around 3100 acres of land. Odisha will get 1300 MW as its share from this power project. Water for this UMPP has been allocated from the Ib River and check dams and barrages would be put up on the river for this purpose. Meenakshi, Meenakshi‐B and Dip side Meenakshi coal blocks with a total reserve of 880 million tonnes have been allotted for the UMPP.
1.4. Land Requirement for Water Pipeline Corridor
In the proposed OIPL, the total land requirement will be around 2502 acre which includes about 1531 acre of land for main power plant area, about 821 acre for ash disposal and about 150 acre for colony area. Additional land for railway and water pipeline corridor will be required.
1.5. Water Pipeline Corridor and Location of the plant
The project being coal based thermal power plant (4000 MW) requires huge quantity of water for cooling towers, blow down, lubricating water backwash, service water, make up water and potable (drinking) water for colony and plant. The plant has to run continuously, therefore, the water requirement is of prime importance and needs to be available at all time. The water requirement of plant and related components works out to be 150 cusec/ 4.25 cumec / 366.99 MLD and the Intake capacity is planned to be of same discharge.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 9
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
The quantity of 150 cusec raw water required for the plant is proposed to be pumped from Hirakud Reservoir. From the intake at Patrapally village the water shall be transported to the plant site through dedicated pipeline laid from Patrapally to Sambalpur and along the L & T Road by passing Jharsuguda town up to power plant at Sundargarh. Pipelines will be designed so as to safely carry the required quantity of water by pumping and adequate water hammer protection devices will be suggested if necessary.
1.6. Land Acquisition for Water Pipeline Corridor and need of Social Impact Assessment
For water pipeline corridor about 24.59 acres of land is to be acquired from six villages of Sundargarh such as Bhasma, Deuli, Kaintara, Kudabaga, Kundukela and Podbahal. For acquisition of land suitable policy guidelines are in place and Social Impact Assessment is the primary pre‐requisite for defining the impact and assessing the ground situation for resettlement of the affected people.
The National R&R Policy, 2007 has made a provision for conducting SIA whenever a new project or expansion of an existing project is undertaken. Social Impact Assessment as an important part of the project preparation process, especially for the preparation of Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs), SIA is carried out as socio‐economic survey to identify social and economic impacts on people and communities facing project‐induced displacement. In addition, data thus generated will be used in designing mitigation measures as well as in monitoring mitigation implementation.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 10
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Figure‐1.1: Location Map of the UMPP Pipeline Corridor
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 11
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐2 SIA Scoping and Planning, Team Composition, Approach and Methodology
2.1. Scope of the Study
Clause 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 of India requires that a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) study is to be carried out at the planning stage of the proposed project that is requiring land acquisition. As per this clause, IRDMS Bhubaneswar as the empanneled agency of State Social Impact Assessment Unit (SIA), NCDS, Bhubaneswar has conducted SIA study of the Water Pipeline Corridor of Bhedabahal Ultra Mega Power Project (UMPP), passing through Sundargarh tahasil of Sundargarh district. The scope of the study is as per the terms of reference of SIA Unit of the Government of Odisha and the Land Acquisition Act, 2013.
1. The team/organization shall collect and analyze a range of both quantitative and qualitative data, undertake detailed site visits, use participatory methods such as social mapping, focused group discussions (FGDs), participatory rural appraisal (PRA) techniques and informant interviews by canvassing of a structured interview schedule at the household level to prepare the social impact assessment report. 2. Involve and seek advice from the official functionaries of all affected Gram Panchayats and Municipalities relating to conduct of SIA. 3. A detailed assessment based on a thorough analysis of all relevant land records and field data, field verification, review and comparison with similar projects shall be conducted by the SIA organization. The assessment shall include the followings: a) area of impact under the proposed project, land to be acquired and the social, economic, cultural, environmental and other impacts of the project, b) quantity and location of land proposed to be acquired for the project and whether it is the bare minimum requirement for the project, c) possible alternative sites and their feasibility, d) whether the land to be acquired is in scheduled area and it is demonstrable last resort, e) land if any already purchased, alienated, leased or acquired, and the intended use for each plot of land required for the project, f) the scope for use of any public, unutilized land and whether any of such land is under occupation, g) nature of the land, present use and classification of land and if it is an agricultural land, its irrigation coverage and cropping pattern, h) impact of the land on food security of the affected families, i) size of holdings, ownership patterns, land distribution, number of residential houses, and public and private infrastructure and assets, and j) land prices and recent changes in ownership, transfer and use of lands over the last three years.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 12
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
4. Accurate estimation of number of affected families and displaced families basing on land assessment, land records and field verification by following census enumeration method for all affected families. 5. Socio‐economic and cultural profile of the affected area. 6. Basing upon data collected from the field and in consultation with the stakeholders, the SIA team/organization shall make identification and assessment of the nature, extent and intensity of the positive and negative social impacts of the project by using cost‐benefit analysis method. 7. Preparation of a social impact management plan (SIMP) containing ameliorative measures to address the negative social impacts of the project identified in the course of SIA study. 8. The SIA must provide a comprehensive analysis of social costs and benefits to be accrued from the project and the impoverishment risk of the families losing land and getting displaced and the mitigation plan for resettlement and rehabilitation of such displaced and project affected families. 9. Preparation of draft SIA report and SIMP in the local language (Odia) and their distribution in all affected GPs and municipal offices prior to six weeks of public hearing. 10. Organization of public hearings through the local administration and land requiring body to disseminate the main findings of the SIA in the affected areas in the local language and to seek feedback on findings, additional information and views for incorporating the same in the final SIA report. 11. Video recording and transcribing of the public hearings, which are to be submitted along with their analysis in the revised SIA report accordingly.
2.2. Components of Study:
• Preparatory Work: Framing and printing of questionnaires/interview schedules; identification of villages in Sundargarh Tahasil, affected households and their land holdings out of which land is to be acquired for the Water Pipeline Corridor of 4000 MW UMPP in Sundargarh tahasil of Sundargarh district, training of Field Investigators. • Census survey of land affected households and sample survey of indirectly affected households of the identified villages by following simple random sampling method, doing social mapping and conducting PRA and focus group discussions with people in the affected field area. • Scrutiny of filled in interview schedules and data entry. • Generation of Tables, Analysis of field data and preparation of study report.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 13
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
2.3. Parameters for Impact Assessment:
The objective of Social Impact Assessment (SIA) was to prepare a complete inventory of structures, affected families and persons, to identify social impacts, and to prepare Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). Therefore, the SIA team focussed its study on the eight most common impoverishment indicators as follows: • Landlessness • Joblessness • Homelessness • Marginalization • Food Insecurity • Increased Morbidity and Mortality • Loss of Access to Common Property • Social Disarticulation
2.4. Steps followed for the SIA:
Step 1: Define the Impact Area
The first step was to define the Area of Impact. The SIA team undertook field visit to the area during December‐2015 and January 2016 to have a better understanding of the geographic limits of the area, and interacted with the affected people (both directly and indirectly).
Step 2: Identify Information/Data Requirements and their Sources
The SIA team reviewed the existing data on impacts likely to follow from the project to see if that could be used for assessment purposes. This provided disaggregated data according to caste, religion, sex and other administrative categories, such as persons below poverty line. This review helped to identify the need for collection of additional primary data through surveys and participatory methods.
Step 3: Involve All Affected Stakeholders
The SIA team planned to share information and consult with all stakeholders. Stakeholders were people, groups, or institutions which are likely to be affected by a proposed intervention (either negatively or positively), or those which can affect the outcome of the intervention. Developed and implemented an effective public involvement plan to involve all interested and affected stakeholders. The first step in developing plans for consultation and participation was to identify stakeholders who would be involved in the consultative processes.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 14
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Step 4: Conduct Screening
Social Impact Assessment (SIA) process begins with screening. Screening was undertaken in the very beginning stages of project development. The purpose of screening is to screen out “no significant impacts” from those with significant impacts and get a broad picture of the nature, scale and magnitude of the issues.
This helped in determining the scope of detailed SIA that was subsequently carried out.
Step 5: Carry out Scoping in the Field
The next step is scoping the SIA team has planned to undertake. Essentially, this involved visit to the project site, and consultation with all stakeholders. It was important to confirm their understanding of key issues. On‐site appreciation of impacts is indispensable for projects that cause displacement on a large scale. The local knowledge can be invaluable in finding alternatives that help avoid or at least reduce the magnitude and severity of adverse impacts.
Step 6: Prepare a Socio‐economic Profile of Baseline Condition
To assess the extent of social impacts, it is necessary to assess the socio‐economic conditions of the affected people. This assessment generally involved conducting a socio‐ economic survey and a broad based consultation with all affected groups. The socioeconomic profiling was not restricted to adversely affected population. The survey included those who benefit from the employment and other economic opportunities generated by the project (non‐affected) and also get affected due to loss of common property resources.
Step 7: Identify and Assess the Impacts
After the identification of the range of impacts that are predictable, the SIA team determined their significance (that is, whether they are acceptable, require mitigation, or are unacceptable). Since many impacts are not quantifiable, it was impossible to rank them objectively. The community perceptions of an impact and those of the SIA team are not necessarily the same. The affected people were therefore consulted in ranking impacts.
Step 8: Develop a Mitigation Plan
Develop a mitigation plan to firstly avoid displacement, secondly to minimize it, and thirdly to compensate for adverse impacts. The major contribution of SIA study is to help plan for, manage, and then mitigate any negative impacts (or enhance any positive ones) that may arise due to a proposed project.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 15
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
2.5. List of all Team Members with Qualifications:
The SIA Team comprised one social scientist as Team Leader, one Field Supervisor, four Field Investigators and one data entry operator along with one data analyst. The detail of the team is as follows: Sl.No Name of the team member M/F Age Designation Qualification
1 Mr. Prasanna Kumar Lima M 54 Team Leader Master of Arts in Social Work (MSW)
2 Mr. Santosh Rao Dora M 43 Field Supervisor Post Graduate in Rural Development
3 Mr. Surath Nayak M 38 Field Investigator Bachelor in Arts
4 Mr. Ashok Sahu M 30 Field Investigator Bachelor in Arts
5 Ms. Harapriya Nayak F 25 Field Investigator Bachelor in Arts
6 Ms. Sasmita Nayak F 24 Field Investigator Bachelor in Arts
7 Subhlaxmi Behera F 27 Data Analyst MCA
8 Sasmita Malla F 25 Data Entry MSW, PGDCA Operator
2.6. Description and Rationale for the Methodology and Tools used to collect Information for the SIA:
The methodology adopted to prepare SIA report was desk research, site visits and information dissemination, enumeration of structure, socio‐economic survey, compilation, verification and analysis of data and public consultation at local level.
The following table presents the approach and methodology of SIA study in the form of flow chart and various steps involved in the study have been described in detail in the following paragraphs.
¾ Study of relevant documents, reports and project alignment drawing. ¾ Site visits and information dissemination about the project ¾ Enumeration of structures ¾ Analysis of socio‐economic survey data ¾ Consultations and meetings with PFCCL field team, ¾ Community/Public Consultations
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 16
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
2.6.1. PRE SURVEY ACTIVITIES (Phase‐I) LITERATURE REVIEW & PRELIMINARY SURVEY & PRELIMINARY CONSULTATIONS LAUNCHING OF FIELD WORK 9 Detail Project Report(DPR) 9 Survey for ground verification of (Project Background) the project area 9 National & State Policy on Land 9 Preparation & testing survey Acquisition, Rehabilitation & instruments Resettlement 9 Draft Progress Report 9 Other available documents 9 Discussion with District level officials 2.6.2. SURVEY OF PAFs/PAPs & IMPLEMENTATION SYSTEM (Phase‐II) PROJECT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION FAMILIES/PERSONS/COMMUNITIES ARRANGEMENTS 9 Training the SIA team 9 Analysis of legal policy and 9 Inventory survey of affected regulation properties & families 9 Discussion with concerned 9 100% Census survey among the district officials on affected families/persons implementation of RAP 9 One to one household interviews 9 Content analysis 9 Public consultation 9 Field work arrangement, data 9 FGDs with PAFs, Vulnerable group collection, analysis & draft 9 Discussion with officials of SIA/RAP report concerned department 2.6.3. POST SURVEY ACTIVITIES, ANALYSIS, REPORT (Phase‐III) DATA ANALYSIS AND SIA REPORT CONSULTATION ON SIA REPORT 9 Data tabulation and analysis plan 9 Assist authority in conducting 9 Data coding, cleaning and entry public hearings 9 Finalisation of SIA report 9 Consultation on SIA findings with structure affected people, other 9 Analysis of survey results stakeholders such as civil 9 Prepare and submission of draft societies, NGOs, etc. SIA report 9 Presentation of draft SIA report to NCDS 9 Review & comments from NCDS 9 Incorporation of comments and submission of the final SIA report
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 17
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
While preparing an effective SIA and RAP, the consultant followed some essential components and steps which are (i) identification of socio‐economic impacts of the project; (ii) public/community consultation; (iii) legal framework for land acquisition and compensation; (iv) entitlement policy and matrix; (v) organizational responsibilities; (vi) relocation and resettlement; (vii) income restoration; (viii) implementation schedule; (ix) detail R&R budget; and (x) monitoring, evaluation and reporting.
2.7. Methods and Tools used:
The social impact assessment involved the use of a broad array of data collection methods, quantitative and qualitative, common in social science research. In addition to substantive analytical tools, SIA used participatory methods that contributed to a better understanding of the project. These helped increase the ownership of projects.
The tools and methods for the SIA are chosen depending on several factors, such as the project and the affected people, multiple units of analysis, such as households, individuals within the households, communities, time and resources. The household unit is generally used for purposes of resettlement planning.
2.7.1. Data Collection Methods
The methods used for collecting socioe‐conomic data for purposes of conducting social impact assessment include:
2.7.1.1. Qualitative Methods:
Key Informant Interview: An interview schedule adopted to establish baseline conditions prior to undertaking the study. The questions covered all aspects of socio‐economic situation such as religion, caste, family size, education, occupation and income. The design of the schedule focussed on key issues; it was quite simple and in the local language. Persons selected to conduct the interviews were adequately and properly briefed and trained to get the questionnaires completed. The team conducting the interviews ensured the inclusion of female members, as they alone are in a position to talk to women, especially in rural areas and among communities where there are restrictions on their movements.
The factors considered for generating the quality of information through interviews which include the following:
¾ The relationship that the interviewer is able to establish with the respondent. ¾ Willingness to adjust interviews to the time convenient to respondents
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 18
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
¾ Ability to listen to answers patiently, and to probe and cross‐check them in a thorough but polite way ¾ Recognizing that same questions can be asked (and answered) in several others ways ¾ Taking notes in a way that does not interrupt the flow of conversation and appear threatening
Focused Group Discussions (FGDs): In FGDs, one to two surveyors guided a group discussion using probes but letting group members discuss the topic among them. One group had 6 to 10 participants to discuss issues set out by the surveyors. The surveyors usually used an interview guide but minimally structured the discussion. Through Group interviews the surveyors attempted to collect the background information, generate ideas and hypotheses, for intervention models, feedback from beneficiaries, and to assess responses to recommended innovations.
Rapid Appraisal: The key to rapid appraisal techniques is used to compress the study process so that data are collected, analysed and put together in a useable form in the shortest possible time span.
2.7.1.2. Quantitative Methods
Land Acquisition Survey: This method is exclusively used to collect data on land acquisition for projects that would lead to displacement and loss of livelihoods for local people. A land acquisition assessment survey provided detailed information on whom and how many would be adversely affected by land loss. This survey was largely based on government land records, land use maps, statistical information, and existing legislation and administrative practice with respect to land acquisition, and project planning documents, but the data collected on the spot verification during the field visit. This is a rapid, low‐cost preliminary assessment done at this stage. The Land Acquisition Survey was conducted to learn and identify the land that is required for the project, the land’s current owner, the tenure status of the present land users and the procedure for land acquisition.
Census Survey: This is the most important survey method used as it facilitates to determine the exact number of people who will bear the brunt of adverse project impacts, and the total property affected. Since the purpose of the census survey is to prepare an inventory of all affected persons and properties, it covered the all affected persons living in the project area, all affected property, and the level and sources of all incomes, and the project’s impact on them.
Typically, the census used the household as the basic unit for data collection. The disaggregated data by gender, caste, tribe and other social categories are captured. In
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 19
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
addition, a comprehensive list of common property of the potential affected families is prepared which include: • Common property resources: These include pastures, fishing ponds and forests including sources of building and craft materials, biomass for domestic energy. • Public structures: These include schools, clinics, places for worship, bathing and washing places, community centres, lamp posts, playgrounds, wells, and bus stops • Cultural property: Cultural property includes archaeological sites, monuments, burial grounds, places of historical or religious importance. • Infrastructure: This includes all infrastructures likely to be destroyed or disrupted by project construction activities, including roads, bridges, power lines, and water and sewerage lines.
2.7.2. Socio‐economic Survey: This study helped to generate information on impacts on critical socio‐economic aspects of the affected population. These include: demographic details (family size, sex ratio, literacy/education levels, population by caste, tribe, religion, gender, age groups, and vulnerable groups), socio‐economic production systems, sources of income, patterns of social organization and leadership, women’s economic activities and income, ancestral property provisions and custom, levels of health and nutrition, etc.
As the project does not involve a large population, socio‐economic survey and census were combined. The socio‐economic profile includes both those adversely affected population and those who would benefit from the employment and other economic opportunities generated by the project.
Looking into the limitation of this quantitative data collection methodology the SIA study team tried their best to maintain balance of quantitative and qualitative methods of collecting data to ensure as complete an understanding of the project’s impacts on the affected people as possible.
2.7.3. Observation: Observation is an activity of a living being, such as a human, consisting of receiving knowledge of the outside world through the senses. The term refers to any data collected during this activity. An observation can also be the way you to look at things or when you look at something. Both the participant and non‐ participant observation methods were used for the collection. As part of participant observation the researcher stayed few days at village and participated in their day to day activities and observed the recent happening in their daily life. The different sources of livelihoods, forest resources, water for irrigation and the land pattern were observed. Also, the cropping pattern, the traditional and modern means of water conservation and utilization, crop production, soil conservation, use of
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 20
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
fertilizer, pesticide, and other forms of traditional and modern forms of agricultural practices were carefully observed.
During preparation of SIA preliminary public consultations and discussions were conducted by IRDMS study team with the help of NCDS and PFCCL field officials through community meetings with PAPs as well as general public and group discussions at particularly Project Affected Areas (PAAs). The methods adopted for conducting public consultation such as walk‐through informal group consultation at project affected areas. The specific tools used are: Village level meetings, Focus Group Discussions (FGD) with different groups of affected people including residential groups, and village level petty traders, in‐depth individual interviews, discussions and interviews with key informants and sharing the opinion and preferences of the PAPs.
The approach that was adopted to conduct social impact assessment and to prepare RAP is described below and is structured on the scope of work as mentioned in the Term of Reference (TOR). The SIA which includes RAP has been prepared with special reference to the guidelines of RTFCTLARR Act 2013.
2.7.4. Data Collected from Secondary Sources Secondary sources information were collected from a number of quarters such as from Census data, District Statistical Hand Book, concerned departments, quantitative information with regard to land‐holding, demographic aspects, cropping pattern and irrigation system were also collected from Panchayat profile and District Statistical Hand Book and a host of other literature. Thus, the secondary sources information complemented the primary data elicited through field survey from the affected people and other stakeholders. Understanding was created about the physical, social, economic, and cultural set‐up of the project area before undertaking detailed field investigations.
2.7.5. Site Visits and Information Dissemination Before the start of detailed social Impact Assessment study, Department of Revenue and Disaster Management (DRM) issued a notification (vide letter no DRM‐LAC‐SUN‐ 0003‐2016‐6070 dated 22nd February,2016) for informing the people about the proposed UMPP project.
The field visits and studies were conducted during December–2015 and January‐ 2016. Survey team visited the sites along with field staff of PFCCL officials to verify the alignment drawings on the ground and to identify the affected areas. After identifying the affected areas the team consulted the district officials especially with the District Land Acquisition Officer, Sundargarh and different stakeholders at the
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 21
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
project area and organized meetings with them to generate awareness about the project. During site visit it was found that people from six villages – Bhasma, Kaintara, Deuli, Kundukela, Podbahal and Kudabaga are likely to be affected.
The survey team began its work by holding community meetings in these areas that are affected and have to be enumerated. Information about the UMPP and the survey procedure (from the numbering of structures to filling out forms) was shared with the community. They were also informed about the kinds of documents they would need to locate and keep ready for the survey.
2.8. Compilation and Verification of Data Survey forms duly filled were consolidated and entered into a database. This information was updated on a regular basis as and when data for incomplete forms were filled in. The data were later shared with the communities to cross‐check if anyone has been left out due to some reasons and extra counting has been done.
2.9. Data Analysis and Report Writing Once the data were collected and finalized with all the necessary changes, analysis of collected data was done for different sections.
2.10. Community and Public Consultation Preliminary public consultations and discussions were conducted by study team with the help of NCDS and PFCCL officials through community meetings with PAPs as well as general public at particularly proposed station locations. The objective of conducting public consultation is to obtain the views and suggestions of the potentially affected persons to minimize adverse social impacts. The consultation process involved various sections of affected persons such as farmers, women, businessmen, village level frontline service providers and other inhabitants. Special care was taken during the study to hold discussions with women group to elicit the adverse effects they are anticipating due to the project and their suggestions in this regard for mitigating the foreseeable adverse effects. During public consultations, issues relating to land acquisition, compensation, income restoration, employment generation, information flow, grievance redressal, safety, role of administration etc. were discussed. The methods adopted for conducting public consultation are:
1. Walk‐through informal group consultation at station locations 2. Public meetings 3. Focused Group Discussions (FGD) with different groups of affected people
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 22
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
4. In‐depth individual interviews 5. Discussions and interviews with key informants 6. Sharing the opinion and preferences of the PAPs.
2.11. Sampling Methodology used
By using systematic circular sampling method in six villages such as Bhasma, Deuli, Kaintara, Kudabaga, Kundukela and Podbahal the SIA team collected requsite information from the indirectly affected families from 5 per cent of the land non‐affected households.
In consultation with SIA unit‐ NCDS, the above mentioned six project‐affected villages were visited for the Social Impact Assessment study. These villages are falling under Sundargarh sadar block under Bhasma, Kundukela and Deuli GPs.
2.12. Overview of information/data source used
Social Impact assessment study carried out with basic objectives to provide:
• Baseline information about the social and economic conditions in the project area • Information on potential impacts of the project and the characteristic of the impacts, magnitude, distribution, and their duration; • Information on who would be the affected group, positively or negatively • Information on perceptions of the affected people about the project and its impact • Information on potential mitigation measures to minimize the impact
The SIA relied on both secondary and primary data.
(a) Secondary Source: Such sources of data include: • Government census data • Village information from front line service providers • Land records, including records of land transactions • District gazetteers • Documents from non‐governmental organizations (b) Primary Source: The existing data from secondary sources cannot however be a substitute for project‐specific surveys. In addition, SIA derives much more relevant information directly from surveys of various kinds including socioeconomic survey, and meetings with the affected people.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 23
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Schedule of consultations with public representatives and key stakeholders
For UMPP project that have environmental and social impacts, consultation was not to be a single conversation but a series of opportunities to create understanding about the project among those it would likely affect or interest, and to learn how these external parties view the project and its attendant risks, impacts, opportunities, and mitigation measures. Listening to stakeholder concerns and feedback could be a valuable source of information that can improve project design and outcomes and help a company to identify and control external risks. It could also form the basis for future collaboration and partnerships. For stakeholders, a company’s consultation process was an opportunity to get information, as well as to educate company staff about the local context in which a project will take place, to raise issues and concerns, ask questions, and potentially help shape the project by making suggestions for the company to consider and respond to.
Regardless of what stage of the project consultation is taking place, the basic steps in the process will essentially remain the same and can be repeated as needed over the life of the project ‐
1. Plan ahead: SIA team would plan a more formal Stakeholder Engagement Plan with multiple stakeholder groups and issues 2. Consult using basic principles of good practice: techniques, methods, approaches and timetables would be tailored for the local situation and the various types of stakeholders being consulted 3. Incorporate feedback: Consulting people entails an implicit “promise” that, at a minimum, their views would be considered during the decision‐making process. 4. Document the process and results of consultation: Documenting consultation activities and their outcomes is critical to effectively managing the stakeholder engagement process. 5. Report back: Communities sometimes express frustration that companies show up on their doorstep to consult on an issue and then are not heard of again – or at least not until the next time they come, and that too about a totally different matter. It is both good practice and common courtesy to follow up with stakeholders whom consulted, to let them know what has happened and what the next steps in the process would be. 2.13. Limitations of the Study During social survey in project affected areas the survey team had to face some limitations which are as follows: ¾ Incomplete documentation, locked houses, non‐responders: the surveyors had to come back repeatedly to these houses in order to record accurate and complete forms
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 24
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
¾ Local festivals and harvesting during the survey data collection and organising public consultation and focus group discussion was difficult for our survey team. ¾ Migration of few households and reluctance to respond are one of the barriers in the process of data collection. In spite of all these problems every effort has been made for making this study very realistic to the existing situation.
2.14. Structure of the SIA Study Report • Chapter‐1: Introduction • Chapter‐2: SIA Scoping and Planning, Team Composition, Approach and Methodology. • Chapter‐3: Applicable Legislations and Policies • Chapter‐4: Profile of the Study Area • Chapter‐5: Land Assessment • Chapter‐6: Socio‐Economic and Cultural Profile of the Study Area • Chapter‐7: Public Consultation and Participation • Chapter‐8: Assessment of Social Impacts • Chapter‐9: Social Impact Management Plan (SIMP)
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 25
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐3 Applicable Legislations and Policies
The legal framework in which the proposed UMPP project will be implemented with respect to social issues as well as the guidelines for environmental and social consideration has been summarized in this chapter. The applicable laws on land acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement for the proposed Sundargarh UMPP project are: 9 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 9 Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 9 Right to Information Act,2005 9 Provision of Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996
The following section deals with these policies with a comparison and subsequently deals with the entitlements and eligibility for compensation and other resettlement entitlements.
3.1. Right to fair compensation and transparency in land Acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement act, 2013: The new land acquisition law came into force on 1st January, 2014.The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, (RFCTLARR Act) replaces the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which existed from colonial times. The new RTFCTLARR Act is an attempt to revamp and make the land acquisition process more effective by addressing the major lacunae in the old Land Acquisition Act.
The Act seeks to harmonize the interests of land owners, industrialization/ growth of real estate and infrastructure industries and bring in transparency in the process of land acquisition. The objective of the Act is thus in line with the requirements of modern times. The Act, inter alia, contains provisions pertaining to mandatory rehabilitation and resettlement of those whose lands are acquired and payment of fair compensation to them. Significantly, the Act provides for enhanced compensation to land owners in cases of land acquisition by the government for public purposes or for Public Private Partnership (PPP) projects that may aggregate up to four times the market value in rural areas and up to twice the market value in urban areas. The Act has been hailed as beneficial and necessary to protect the interest of landholders and other affected persons.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 26
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
3.1.1. Key Features of RTFCTLARR Act The Act specifies provisions for land acquisition as well as R&R. Some of the major changes from the current provisions are related to (a) the process of land acquisition; (b) rights of the people displaced by the acquisition; (c) method of calculating compensation; and (d) requirement of R&R for all acquisitions.
3.1.2. Public Purpose: 9 Land may be acquired only for public purpose. The Act defines public purpose to include: defense and national security; roads, railways, highways, and ports built by government and public sector enterprises; land for the project affected people; planned development; and improvement of village or urban sites and residential purposes for the poor and landless, government administered schemes or institutions, etc. This is broadly similar to the provisions of the LA 1894 Act. 9 In certain cases consent of 80 per cent of the project affected people is required to be obtained. These include acquisition of land for (i) use by the government for purposes other than those mentioned above, and (ii) use by public‐private partnerships, and (iii) use by private companies.
3.1.3. Process of Land Acquisition: The government shall conduct a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) study through an independent body in consultation with the Gram Sabha in rural areas (and with equivalent bodies in case of urban areas). After this, the SIA report shall be evaluated by an independent multidisciplinary expert group. The expert group shall comprise two non‐ official social scientists; two representatives of Panchayat, Gram Sanbha, Municipality or Municipal Corporation as the case may be; two experts on rehabilitation; and a technical expert on the subject relating to the project. The SIA report will be examined further by a committee to ensure that the proposal for land acquisition meets certain specified conditions. 9 A preliminary notification indicating the intent to acquire land must be issued within 12 months from the date of evaluation of the SIA Report. Subsequently, the government shall conduct a survey to determine the extent of land to be acquired. Any objections to this process shall be heard by the Collector. Following this, if the government is satisfied that a particular piece of land must be acquired for public purpose, a declaration to acquire the land is made. Once this declaration is published, the government shall acquire the land. No transactions shall be permitted for the specified land from the date of the preliminary notification until the process of acquisition is completed.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 27
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
3.1.4. Compensation to Land Owners: The compensation for land acquisition is determined by the Collector and awarded by him to the landowner within two years from the date of publication of the declaration of acquisition.
The process of determination of compensation is given below. 9 First, the market value of the acquired land is computed as the higher of (i) the land value specified in the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 for the registration of sale deeds; or (ii) the average of the top 50 per cent of all sale deeds in the previous three years for similar type of land situated in the vicinity. 9 Land owners whose property is acquired using the urgency provisions shall be given an additional 75 per cent of the market value of the land.
3.1.5. Process of Rehabilitation and Resettlement 9 The RTFCTLARR Act requires R&R to be undertaken in case of every acquisition. Once the preliminary notification for acquisition is published, an Administrator shall be appointed. The Administrator shall conduct a survey and prepare the R&R scheme. This scheme shall then be discussed in the local bodies in case of urban areas. Any objections to the R&R scheme shall be heard by the Administrator. Subsequently, the Administrator shall prepare a report and submit it to the Collector. The Collector shall review the scheme and submit it to the Commissioner appointed for R&R. Once the Commissioner approves the R&R scheme, the government shall issue a declaration identifying the areas required for the purpose of R&R. The Administrator shall then be responsible for the execution of the scheme. The Commissioner shall supervise the implementation of the scheme.
3.1.6. Rehabilitation and Resettlement Entitlement 9 The Act also provides the displaced families with certain R&R entitlements. These include, among other things, (i) land for a house as per the Indira Awas Yojana in rural areas or a constructed house of at least 50 square metres plinth area in urban areas; (ii) a one‐time allowance of Rs 50,000 for affected families; and (iii) the option of choosing either mandatory employment in projects where jobs are being created or a one‐time payment of Rs 5 lakh or an inflation adjusted annuity of Rs 2,000 per month per family for 20 years,(iv)subsistence grant of Rs.3000/‐ for one year,(v)Transportation cost of Rs.50,000/‐ for shifting,(vi)one –time assistance ofRs.25,000/‐for cattle shed/petty shop,(vii)One –time grant of Rs.25,000/‐ to artisan, small traders & others,(viii)one‐time resettlement allowance of Rs. 50,000/‐ to PAF.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 28
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
9 Every resettled area is to be provided with certain infrastructural facilities. These facilities include roads, drainage, provision for drinking water, grazing land, banks, post offices, public distribution outlets, etc. 3.2. DISABILITIES (EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES, PROTECTION OF RIGHTS AND FULL PARTICIPATION) ACT, 1995 The Act is guided by the philosophy of empowering persons with disabilities. The Act endeavors to introduce an instrument for promoting equality and participation of persons with disability on the one hand, and eliminating discriminations of all kinds, on the other.
3.3. RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 The Act provides for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
3.4 The Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996. (PESA) The PESA is very relevant legislation in the land acquisition proposals as the entire area comes within the Scheduled Area. Thus, provisions of PESA need elaboration. The PESA came into force with effect from 24th December, 1996 and has the objectives to provide for the extension of the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution relating to the Panchayats to the Scheduled Areas as referred to in Clause (1) of Article 244 of the Constitution. The Act mandates that State law shall be in consonance with the customary law, social and religious practices and Traditional management practices of community resources in accordance with traditions and customs. Every village shall have a Gram Sabha and every Gram Sabha shall be competent to safeguard and preserve the traditions and customs of the people, their cultural identity, community resources and the customary mode of dispute resolution; shall approve the plans, programmes and projects for social and economic development before such plans, programmes and projects are taken up for implementation by the Panchayat at the village level; the Gram Sabha or the Panchayats at the appropriate level shall be consulted before making the acquisition of land in the Scheduled Areas for development projects and before re‐settling or rehabilitating persons affected by such projects in the Scheduled Areas; and the recommendations of the Gram Sabha or the Panchayats at the appropriate level are mandatory prior to grant of prospecting licence or mining lease for minor minerals in the Scheduled Areas. The State Government has to grant the ownership of minor forest produce; and the power to prevent alienation of land in the Scheduled Areas and to take appropriate action to restore any unlawfully alienated land of a Scheduled Tribe. The State may endow Panchayats with powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self‐government shall contain
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 29
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
safeguards to ensure that Panchayats at the higher level do not assume the powers and authority of any Panchayat at the lower level or of the Gram Sabha.
3.5. PROJECT RESETTLEMENT POLICY AND ENTITLEMENT MATRIX 3.5.1. The Project Policy OIPL on behalf of Government will use the Project Resettlement Policy (the Project Policy) for the Proposed UMPP, Sundargarh. The Project Policy is aimed at filling‐in any gaps in what local laws and regulations cannot provide in order to help and ensure that PAPs are able to rehabilitate themselves to at least their pre‐project condition.
The key principles of the project policy on land acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement are summarized below: a. Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement will be avoided where feasible, or minimized, by identifying possible alternative project designs that have the least adverse impact on the communities in the project area. b. Where displacement of households is unavoidable, all PAPs (including communities) losing assets, livelihoods or resources will be fully compensated and assisted so that they can improve, or at least restore, their former economic and social conditions. c. Compensation and rehabilitation support will be provided to any PAPs, that is, any person or household or business which on account of project implementation would have his, her or their: i. Standard of living adversely affected; ii. Right, title or interest in any house, interest in, or right to use, any land (including premises, agricultural and grazing land, commercial properties, tenancy, or right in annual or perennial crops and trees or any other fixed or moveable assets, acquired or possessed, temporarily or permanently; iii. Income earning opportunities, business, occupation, work or place of residence or habitat adversely affected temporarily or permanently; or iv. Social and cultural activities and relationships affected or any other losses that may be identified during the process of resettlement planning.
d. All affected people will be eligible for compensation and rehabilitation assistance, irrespective of tenure status, social or economic standard and any such factors that may discriminate against achievement of the objectives
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 30
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
outlined above. Lack of legal rights to the assets lost or adversely affected tenure status and social or economic status will not bar the PAPs from entitlements to such compensation and rehabilitation measures or resettlement objectives.
e. All PAPs residing, working, doing business and/or cultivating land within the project impacted areas as on the date of the latest census and inventory of lost assets(IOL),are entitled to compensation for their lost assets (land and/or non‐ land assets), at replacement cost, if available and restoration of incomes and businesses, and will be provided with rehabilitation measures sufficient to assist them to improve or at least maintain their pre‐project living standards, income‐ earning capacity and production levels.
f. PAPs that lose only part of their physical assets will not be left with a portion that will be inadequate to sustain their current standard of living. The minimum size of remaining land and structures will be agreed during the resettlement planning process.
g. People temporarily affected are to be considered PAPs and resettlement plans address the issue of temporary acquisition.
h. Where a host community is affected by the development of a resettlement site in that community, the host community shall be involved in any resettlement planning and decision‐making. All attempts shall be made to minimize the adverse impacts of resettlement upon host communities.
i. The resettlement plans will be designed in accordance with the Government of India’s RTFCTLARR, Act 2013.
j. The Resettlement Plan will be translated into local languages and disclosed for the reference of PAPs as well as other interested groups.
k. Payment for land and/or non‐land assets will be based on the principle of replacement cost.
l. Replacement lands, if the preferred option of PAPs, should be within the immediate vicinity of the affected lands wherever possible and be of comparable productive capacity and potential. As a second option, sites should be identified that minimize the social disruption of those affected; such lands should also have access to services and facilities similar to those available in the lands affected.
m. Resettlement assistance will be provided not only for immediate loss, but also for a transition period needed to restore livelihood and standards of living of PAPs.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 31
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Such support could take the form of short‐term jobs, subsistence support, salary maintenance, or similar arrangements.
n. The resettlement plan must consider the needs of those most vulnerable to the adverse impacts of resettlement (including the poor, those without legal title to land, ethnic minorities, and women, children, elderly and disabled) and ensure they are considered in resettlement planning and mitigation measures identified. Assistance should be provided to help them improve their socio‐economic status.
o. PAPs will be involved in the process of developing and implementing resettlement plans.
p. PAPs and their communities will be consulted about the project, the rights and options available to them, and proposed mitigation measures for adverse effects, and to the extent possible be involved in the decisions that are made concerning their resettlement. Adequate budgetary support will be fully committed and made available to cover the costs of land acquisition (including compensation and income restoration measures) within the agreed implementation period.
q. Displacement does not occur before provision of compensation and of other assistance required for relocation. Sufficient civic infrastructure must be provided in resettlement site prior to relocation. Acquisition of assets, payment of compensation, and the resettlement and start of the livelihood rehabilitation activities of PAPs, will be completed prior to any construction activities, except when a court of law orders so in expropriation cases. (Livelihood restoration measures must also be in place but not necessarily completed prior to construction activities, as these may be ongoing activities).
r. Organization and administrative arrangements for the effective preparation and implementation of the resettlement plan will be identified and in place prior to the commencement of the process; this will include the provision of adequate human resources for supervision, consultation, and monitoring of land acquisition and rehabilitation activities.
s. Appropriate reporting (including auditing and redress functions), monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, will be identified and set in place as part of the resettlement management system. An external monitoring group will be hired by the project and will evaluate the resettlement process and final outcome. Such groups may include qualified NGOs, research institutions or universities.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 32
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
3.5.2. The Entitlement Matrix The Project Affected People (PAPs) who are squatters and not legal titleholder of land and buildings shall also be eligible for R&R if enumerated during the census survey. All impacted persons will be identified and the nature of the impact disclosed. PAPs who settle in the affected areas will be eligible for compensation and/or other assistance. They, however, will be given sufficient advance notice, requested to vacate premises and dismantle affected structures prior to project implementation. Their dismantled structures will not be confiscated and they will not pay any fine or suffer any sanction. The entitlement matrix presents the entitlements of the affected and displaced people in the following order. a) Entitlement for title holders consisting of (i) Loss of private land; (ii) Loss of private residential structure; (iii) Loss of private commercial structures; (iv) Impact on tenants (residential/commercial/residential cum commercial) b) Entitlement to Non‐Titleholders consisting of (i) Impact on squatters; (ii) Impact on encroachers (iii) Impact on Kiosks c) Loss of employment to workers/employees d) Assistance to affected and displaced vulnerable people e) Common infrastructure and common property resources (CPRs)
Table‐3.1: Entitlement Matrix
S.No Type of Loss Unit of R&R Entitlement Framework Entitlement 1 Loss of land Titleholder of family a) Land will be acquired on (agricultural/ payment of compensation as per homestead/ RTFCTLARR Act 2013. commercial or otherwise) i. Market value as per the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 for the registration of sale deed or agreement to sell, in the area where land is situated; or Average sale price of similar type of land situated in the nearest vicinity area,
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 33
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
S.No Type of Loss Unit of R&R Entitlement Framework Entitlement ascertained from the highest 50% of sale deeds of the preceding 3 years; or Consented amount paid for PPPs or private companies.
The market price of land collected from the Sub‐Registrar, Sundergarh is as follows:
The market value/average sale prices is:‐ (Govt. Rate)‐Rs.26, 40,000/‐ per acre of Mal / Bahal / Berna / Guda / Gharbari land. The sale value for the road side land is Rs. 31,20,000/‐ and for Patita / other land I Rs.13,20,00/‐ per acre.)
ii. Plus 100% solatium and 12% interest from the date of notification of award. iii. The multiplier factor will be applied as per the Act.
b) Where jobs are created through the project, after providing suitable training and skills development in the required field, make provision of employment at a rate not lower than minimum wages; or
Onetime payment of Rs.5, 00,000/‐ per affected household or annuity policy that shall pay Rs.2000/‐ per month for 20 years with appropriate indexation to Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers (CPIAL).
a) One time subsistence allowance of Rs.36,000/‐ per affected family who
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 34
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
S.No Type of Loss Unit of R&R Entitlement Framework Entitlement requires to be relocated due to project. b) Shifting assistance of Rs.50,000/‐ per affected family who requires to be relocated due to the project. c) One time Resettlement Allowance of Rs.50,000/‐ per affected family.
2 Loss of Residential Titleholder of family In addition to Compensation for Structure land and Assistances listed above under S.No.1
a. Cash compensation at scheduled rates for structure without depreciation with100% solatium. b. Right to salvage affected materials. c. One time assistance of Rs.25,000 to all those who lose a cattle shed. d. An alternative house as per Indira Awas Yojana(IAY) specifications in rural areas and constructed house/flat of minimum 50 sq.m in urban areas or cash in lieu of house if opted for those who do not have any homestead land. The cash in lieu of house will be Rs.11,20,000/‐(in line with IAY standards in rural areas).
Note: Stamp duty and registration charges will be borne by the project authority in case of new houses or sites.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 35
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
S.No Type of Loss Unit of R&R Entitlement Framework Entitlement 3 Loss of Titleholder family In addition to Compensation for Commercial land and Assistances listed Structure above under
S.No.1
a) Cash compensation at scheduled rates for structure without depreciation with 100% solatium.
b) Right to salvage affected materials.
c) One time assistance of Rs.25,000 for loss of trade/self‐ employment for the business owner.
4 Tenants Tenant/lease Residential: (residential/comme holder(Non‐ rcial) Titleholder) a) Rental allowance at Rs.3,000/‐ per month in rural areas and Rs.4,000/‐ per month in urban areas for six months.
b) One time financial assistance of Rs.50,000 for shifting.
Commercial:
a) Rental allowance at Rs.4,000/‐ per month in rural areas and Rs.6,000/‐ per month in urban areas for six months.
b) One time shifting assistance of
Rs.50,000.
c) Commercial tenant will receive one time financial assistance of Rs.25,000 (fixed) for loss of trade/self‐employment.
5 Squatters(homeste Family(Non‐ Residential: ad purpose) Titleholder) a) Valuation of the structure
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 36
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
S.No Type of Loss Unit of R&R Entitlement Framework Entitlement b) Right to salvage the affected materials.
c) One time subsistence allowance of Rs.3,000 per month for one year from the date of award.
d) One time shifting assistance of Rs.50,000.
e) PAPs losing residential units shall be offered tenements of 36.5sq.m at residential buildings by Municipal body.
Squatters (commer Family(Non‐ Commercial: cial purpose) Titleholder) a) Valuation of the structure b) Right to salvage the affected materials. c) Commercial squatter will receive one time financial assistance of Rs.25,000 (fixed) for loss of trade/self‐employment. f) One time shifting assistance of Rs.50,000. g) PAPs losing commercial units will be rehabilitated by OIPL. 6 Mobile and Vendor(Non‐ Ambulatory vendors licensed for ambulatory Titleholder) fixed locations will be considered vendors as kiosks and each affected vendor will get a) One time subsistence allowance of Rs.3,000 per month for six months from the date of award. 7 Loss of Workers/employees a) One time subsistence Employment allowance of Rs.3,000 per month for one year from the date of award.
8 Vulnerable family Family In the principal Act, in section 31,
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 37
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
S.No Type of Loss Unit of R&R Entitlement Framework Entitlement in sub‐section (2), in clause (h), after the words “affected families”, the words “including compulsory employment to at least one member of such affected family of a farm labourer” shall be inserted.
One adult member of the affected family whose livelihood is affected will be entitled for skill development. Training for skill development. This assistance includes cost of training and financial assistance for travel/conveyance and food.
9 Common Community a) Community properties will be infrastructure and replaced in consultation with the common community. Property Resources b) Civic infrastructure would be replaced in consultation with the affected community and the District/Urban/Rural administration 10 Any Unforeseen Affected Any unforeseen impact would be Impact community / mitigated/enhanced as per the persons RTFCTLARR Act 2013.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 38
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐4
Profile of the Study Area
4.1. Sundargarh Districe – Profile
Fig. 4.1. Block Map of Sundargarh district
The district spreads over an area of 9,712 sq km which is 6.23 per cent of the State area. It is surrounded by Jharkhand State in the north and Chhattisgarh State on the north‐west. The districts is also bounded by Jharsuguda, Sambalpur and Deogarh districts of Odisha on the south, and Keonjhar and Angul districts on the east. It is located between 21035' N and 22032' N latitudes and 83032' E and 85022' E longitudes.
Sundargarh is the second largest district in the State in terms of geographical area. The total cultivable land of the district is 3.35 lakh hectares (ha) and the area used for nonagriculture activity is 0.7 lakh ha. The barren and pasture land is 0.6 lakh ha and 0.3 lakh ha respectively. It is a fairly open country interspersed with tree‐clad isolated peaks, vast forest tracts, extensive river valleys and mountainous terrain. It is an undulating tableland of different elevations broken up by rugged hill ranges and cut‐off by torrential hill streams and Brahmani river. Because of this undulating, hilly and sloping nature of landscape, the area is subject to rapid runoff leading to soil erosion. Administratively, the district is divided into three sub‐divisions, namely, Bonai, Panposh and Sundargarh, 18 Tahasils and 17 Community Development (CD) Blocks. The district also has four municipalities namely, Biramitrapur, Rajgangpur, Rourkela and Sundargarh. The district has 262 Gram Panchayats (GP), 102 RI Circles and 1,762 revenue villages. Table 4.1 summarise various aspects of administrative set‐up of the district.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 39
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table 4.1: Administrative Set‐up of Sundargarh District
Particulars Units Geographical Area (sq kms) 9,712 Sub‐Division (No.) 3 Tahasils (No.) 18 Community Development Blocks (No.) 17 Police Stations including Mahila P.S. (No.) 47 Municipal Corporation / Municipality (No.) 4 Notified Area Council (No.) ‐ Census Towns* (No.) 8 RI Circles** (No.) 102 Gram Panchayats (No.) 262 Villages* (No.) 1,762 Fire Stations (No.) 5 Assembly Constituencies (No.) 7 Source: District Human Development Report, Sundargarh, 2015
4.1.1. Topography and Climate Topographically, the district exhibits widely diversified tracts of mountains, forests and extensive river valleys with variegated flora and fauna and a rich bio‐diversity. Sundargarh and Panposh sub‐divisions are long and undulating tracts of varying heights up to about 700 ft. (213 meter) above the mean sea level, dotted with hill‐ranges and isolated peaks of considerable height. Similarly, the Bonai sub‐division is largely an isolated hilly tract with an average elevation of about 800 ft. (244 meter) above mean sea level. The hot season begins in March and touches high temperatures in May and ranging between 39 oC to 47 oC.
4.1.2. Demographic Profile According to the 2011 census, total population of the district is 20.93 lakh, which is 4.99 per cent of the total population of the State. Out of the total population, 50.69 per cent is male population, and 49.31 per cent female population. The density of population is about 216 persons per sq km, which is much lower than the State average of 269 persons per sq km. as per 2011 census. However, there is an increase in the density of population from 188 in 2001 to 216 in 2011 census.
Table 4.2: District population as per 2011 census.
Year Rural Urban Total Population Sex Ratio
2011 1,355,340 738,097 2,093,437 973 (64.70) (35.30) (100) Source: District Human Development Report, Sundargarh, 2015. Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 40
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table 4.3: Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Population of Sundargarh District, 2011
Social Rural / Persons Males Females % to Total Sex Ratio Group Urban Population Scheduled Rural 115,853 57,762 58,091 8.5 1,006 Castes Urban 75,807 38,703 37,104 10.3 959 Population Total 191,660 96,465 95,195 9.2 987 Scheduled Rural 908,475 450,276 458,199 67.0 1,018 Tribes Urban 153,874 76,580 77,294 20.8 1,009 Population Total 1,062,349 526,856 535,493 50.7 1,016 Source: District Human Development Report, Sundargarh, 2015
Sundargarh has sizeable Scheduled Tribes (ST) population and main tribal communities are Munda, Kharia, Kisan, Bhuyan, Oram and Gond. The Kisan tribe dominates in the district. They speak several languages including Kisan, Sadri, Sambalpuri, Odiya, and Hindi. In addition, Mundari, Ho, Santali, Kurukh and Kharia languages are also spoken. They are farmers and gatherers of forest products. As per 2011 census, the percentage of Scheduled Tribes population in the district is 50.7 per cent (see Table 4.3).
4.1.3. Land Utilisation Patterns in Sundargarh District
The total forest area is 496 thousand ha which is about 51 per cent of the total geographical area of the district. The total permanent pasture land comprises 26 thousand ha. Barren and un‐cultivable land comprises 66 thousand ha. Table 4.4 gives the main land‐use patterns in Sundargarh district. Cultivable land of the district can be classified into four categories. Aatt lands are mainly unbounded uplands which are less fertile and rain‐fed. Maal lands are bounded uplands and terraced to catch run‐off. Berna lands are medium or mid‐low lands with average fertility. Bahal lands are low lands, which are generally plain fertile lands suitable for paddy cultivation. Dangar lands are located on hill slopes and are occasionally utilized for shifting cultivation while Bari lands are adjacent to homestead lands and are used generally for kitchen gardens and cultivation of fruits and vegetables. The area, along the banks of major rivers namely Brahmani, Sankha and Koel are generally alluvial sandy and sandy loam spills. The total cultivable land of the district is 3.36 lakh hectares and the area used for non‐agriculture activity is 0.5 lakh hectares. The barren and pasture land of the district is 0.7 and 0.16 lakh hectares respectively.
Table‐4.4: Land Utilisation Patterns in Sundargarh District
Particulars Units (‘000 ha.) Geographical Area 971 Forest Area 496 Misc. Tree and Groves 25 Permanent Pasture 26 Cultivable Wasteland 16
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 41
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Particulars Units (‘000 ha.) Land Put to Non‐Agricultural Use 29 Barren and Un‐cultivable Land 66 Net Area Sown 284 Current Fallow 29 Other Fallow 0 Source: District Human Development Report, Sundargarh, 2015.
Out of 3,13,000 Ha cultivated land, 52% is upland, 30% is medium land and 18% is low land. As paddy is the main crop, 75% of land is covered with paddy during Kharif. Due to limited irrigation facilities, 24% land is irrigated during Kharif and 8% of land is irrigated during Rabi. Normal rainfall of the area is 1422.4mm, but there is deviation in receipt of rainfall pattern which is influencing crop production. The total Cultivated area of 3,13,000 Ha land is divided into three categories: (a) High Land: 1,63,000 Ha (b) Medium Land : 95,000 Ha. (c) Low Land: 55,000 Ha. Total Paddy Area: 2,26,000 Ha (a) High Land: 76,000 Ha (b) Medium Land: 95,000 Ha and (c) Low Land: 55,000 Ha. Total Non‐Paddy Area: 87,000 Ha.
4.1.4. Agriculture Agriculture and allied sector is the mainstay of the people's livelihoods, despite the fact that manufacturing and mining dominate the district economy. To facilitate agricultural promotion, five agricultural districts including Sundargarh, Panposh, Banai, Lephripada and Rajgangpur function in the district. The climate is generally hot and moist, sub humid and main soil groups are mixed red and yellow soil types. Out of total 313,000 ha cultivated land, 52 per cent is upland, 30 per cent medium land and 18 per cent low land. Paddy is the main crop covering 72 per cent of cultivable land in Kharif season. Due to limited irrigation facilities, about 20 per cent land is irrigated during Kharif and only 8 per cent in Rabi season. Normal rainfall is about 1,422.4 mm. Rainfall sometimes is erratic and has uneven distribution in the district. Major agricultural products, for home consumption and sale, include paddy, pulses, cereal, castor seeds, groundnut, maize, dal, and jowar. Vegetable cash crops/products include brinjal, potato, tomato, beans, green leaves, onion, etc. Apart from crop cultivation, buffaloes, cattle, goats, and sheep are reared as economic assets. Key agricultural indicators of Sundargarh district are summarised in Table 4.5.
Table 4.5: Agricultural Indicators of Sundargarh District
Indicators Value Indicators Value DAO Circles (No.) 5 Average Annual Rainfall (mm) 1,422 AAO Circles (No.) 34 Govt. Agri Farms for seed multiplication 4 Seed Sale Centres (No.) 17 Large Size Farms (No.) 1
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 42
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Indicators Value Indicators Value Addl. Sale centres (No.) 17 Small Size Farms (No.) 3 AO/VAW/LVAW circles (No) 322 Seed processing Plant (No) 3 Geographical Area (Ha) 9,71,200 Farm Families (No) 1,78,487 Total Cultivated Area (Ha) 3,13,000 Marginal Farmers (No) 76,361 High Lands (Ha) 1,63,000 Small Farmers (No) 61,173 Medium Lands (Ha) 95,000 Big Farmers (No) 40,953 Low Lands (Ha) 55,000 Medium Irrigation projects (No) 4 Total Paddy Lands (Ha) 2,26,000 Minor Irrigation Projects (No) 83 High Land Paddy (Ha) 76,000 Lift Irrigation Projects (LIP) (No) 437 Medium Land Paddy (Ha) 95,000 Private Lift Irrigation Projects (No) 552 Low Land Paddy (Ha) 55,000 Dug Well (No) 18,024 Total Non‐paddy Area (Ha) 87,000 Lift Irrigation Points (commercial) (No) 357 Source: District Human Development Report, Sundargarh, 2015.
4.1.5. Culture and Language
The district has diverse culture and languages. People observe Nuakhai or Nabarnna, which is an agricultural festival and mainly observed by the people of Western Odisha, including Sundargarh. It is observed to welcome the new paddy/rice of the season. Karma is also celebrated by both Hindus and Christians. Ratha Yatra of Lord Jagannath is also celebrated at places having Jagannath temple. Ramnavami festival is observed at different places like Bargaon, and Rajgangpur. At Bargaon, where the festival and cultural programmes are performed, the village enact the entire story of Ramayana in open and multiple stages. Nam Sankirtana is a form of worship of Lord Krishna and Lord Rama in a gathering as per Odiya Vashnavite philosophy. The main language spoken in this region is Odiya which is known as "Sundargarhia Odiya" with a variation to other major dialects or Odiya spoken in western part of Odisha. People of Agariya community speak Agariya language, which is mix of Odiya and Hindi. In the border areas of the district, people speak Agariya, as most of the population are Agariya. Hindi is understood and spoken by people of the district due to its close proximity to Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh states.
4.1.6. Factors that contribute to local livelihoods
Livelihood: Agriculture, the principal means of livelihoods is rain‐fed. It has mixed demographic profile with STs and SCs constituting roughly 50 and 8 percent of population respectively. The topographical and demographic conditions pose several development challenges.
Agriculture: Agriculture and allied sector continues to be the main stay of the economy of the district with more than 50% of the total workforce depending for their sustenance. Total
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 43
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
cultivated area of the district 35 per cent. The district’s agriculture is highly vulnerable to weather and it has very low irrigation coverage. Percentage of irrigated area under Kharif and Rabi crops are 11.4 and 4.48 respectively. Rice is the principal food crop of the district. The productivity of rice per hectare is 17.43 Qtl / hect.
Lead Sectors: Agriculture, Horticulture, Animal Husbandry, Forestry, Mining, Small and Medium Enterprises. Eco tourism can be promoted as a lucrative venture.
Irrigation: The total certified Ayacut area under Kharif is 37,354 hectares. Similarly the total certified Ayacut area under Rabi is 2930 hectares. There is no major irrigation project in the district. Around 337 LI points are being reported in the district.
Rainfall: About 86% of the annual rainfall is received during the monsoon months extending over June to September and July is the month of heaviest rainfall. The variation in the rainfall from year to year is not large
River System: Brahmani and Ib are the two principal rivers of the district. The Ib originates from the Khudia plateau in the Ex‐state of Jaspur in Chhatisgarh and enters the district from the North at Tilijora. It passes through Sundargarh and merges in the Hirakud reservoir on Mahanadi at Brajarajnagar of Jharsuguda district.
Forest Resources: Forests, which cover about 51.07% of the total area of the district, play a very important role in the economy of this tribal district. The forests found here are of moist peninsular valley Sal forest, dry peninsular sal forest, dry mixed deciduous forest and dry bamboo forest. Bamboo, timber (Bija, Asan, Sal) and Kendu leaves are the principal forest produce of the district. The minor forest products like siali leaves, char, seeds, broomsticks, Kusum seeds, Sunari bark, honey, lac, sabai grass, mahua flowers, mahua seeds etc. are the main earning sources of the tribes. The management of the entire forest areas of the district is looked after by the Sundargarh, Panposh and Bonai forest divisions.
Animal Husbandry: The livestock wealth of the district comprises cattle, buffalo, goat, sheep, pig, milch‐animal and poultry. To protect animals against common contagious diseases and to impart technical know‐how to the people, 30 veterinary institutions and 116 livestock aid centres are functioning in the district. Milk, egg and meat production in the district is reasonably good in quantity.
Credit Institutions: There are around 102 commercial banks and 17 regional banks found in the district.
Communication: The district is well communicated by road and rail. The road length in the district is 14168.9 Kms. and the length of railway line is 285 Kms. The District Headquarter of Sundargarh is not connected by rail.
Other Economic Activities: The district has rich mineral deposits and a good industrial base. Besides Rourkela Steel Plant there are four large scale and 24 medium scale industries in the
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 44
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
district. There are 1700 SSI units registered with DIC, Rourkela and 466 SSI units registered with DIC Sundargarh. According to 2001 census, 9,779 are employed in mining activities and 79,926 are employed in industrial activities. Of late, in a very short span of two years, 28 sponge iron plants have come up in the iron belt, i.e., from Koira to Bargaon, and a few more are in the pipeline, resulting in a spurt of economic activity in the district
4.2. Profile of the Affected Area
Total number of six villages will be affected from the Sundargarh Tahasil of Sundargarh district. These villages are Bhasma, Deuli, Kaintara, Kundukela, Kudabaga and Podbahal. This section makes focus on the socio‐economic profile of these six villages.
4.2.1. Demography of the Area:
The table given below shows the total population of the affected villages as well as number of household in the villages. It is amply clear that Deuli village is the most populated village and Podbahal has lowest population among the six affected villages of the area.
Table 4.5: Population of the affected villages
Total no. of Total Name Households Population Toal Males Total Females Sex Ratio
Podbahal 74 221 117 104 889
Kudabaga 276 998 542 456 841
Kundukala 373 1476 751 725 965
Deuli 484 1787 882 905 1026
Bhasma 339 1332 707 625 884
Kaintara 142 473 249 224 900
Total 1688 6287 3248 3039 936 Source : Census Data 2011.
4.2.2. SC & ST Population:
From Table 4.6 it is clear that village Kaintara has largest SC Population (45.45%) and Deuli has the lowest SC Population (12.36%), whereas village Deuli has the largest ST Population (53.16%) and village Podbahal has the lowest ST Population (4.97%) among the six villages. In aggregate 22.14% population belongs to SC category and 40.70% population is ST in the six affected villages.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 45
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table 4.6: SC& ST Population of the Affected Villages Name Total SC Population SC SC Females ST Population ST ST Females Population Males Males Podbahal 221 62 33 29 11 5 6 (100) (28.05) (4.97) Kudabaga 998 199 118 81 416 221 195 (100) (19.93) (41.68) Kundukela 1476 384 207 177 622 314 308 (100) (26.01) (42.14) Deuli 1787 221 109 112 980 479 501 (100) (12.36) (53.16) Bhasma 1332 311 165 146 490 242 248 (100) (23.34) (36.78) Kaintara 473 215 113 102 40 18 22 (100) (45.45) (8.45) Total 6287 1392 745 647 2559 1279 1280 (100) (22.14) (40.70) Source: Census Data, 2011 Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
4.2.3. Literacy
In the affected village Bhasma has the largest number of literates (74%), whereas the most populated Deuli has lowest literates (57%). Among all the six affected villages, more number of males and females were literate in village Bhasma i.e. 42% and 32% respectively. In aggregate 65% population of the six affected villages are literates and rest 35% are illiterates. Details in table‐4.7 below.
Table 4.7: Literacy Rate of the Affected Villages
Literate Literate Literate Illiterate Illiterate Illiterate Name Total Population Males Females Population Males Females 148 90 58 73 27 46 221 Podbahal (67) (41) (26) (33) (12) (21) (100) 628 368 260 370 174 196 998 Kudabaga (63) (37) (26) (37) (17) (20) (100) 986 553 433 490 198 292 1476 Kundukala (67) (37) (29) (33) (13) (20) (100) 1025 575 450 762 307 455 1787 Deuli (57) (32) (25) (43) (17) (25) (100) 984 558 426 348 149 199 1332 Bhasma (74) (42) (32) (26) (11) (15) (100) 321 186 135 152 63 89 473 Kaintara (68) (39) (29) (32) (13) (19) (100) Total 4092 2330 1762 2195 918 1277 6287 (65) (37) (28) (35) (15) (20) (100) Source: Census Data, 2011 Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 46
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
4.2.4. General Infrastructure Survey
Sl. General infrastructure Existing in AFFECTED VILLAGES No. Project Area BHASMA KAINTARA DEULI KUNDUKELA KUDABAGA PODBAHAL Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Units Units Units Units Units Units 1 Road (Internal/External) i.Kuchha 1.31 2 0.5 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.5 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.25 1 kms. kms. kms. kms. ii.Pucca 1.9 4 2.00 3 3.25 5 2.5 3 1.5 2 2.5 4 kms. kms. kms. kms. kms. kms. iii. Semi Pucca 1.35 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.5 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 0.5 2 0.2 1 kms. kms. kms. kms. 2 Water Supply (Specify type) i.Dug Well ‐‐‐ 2 nos. ‐‐‐ 4 nos. ‐‐‐ 6 nos. ‐‐‐ 3 nos. ‐‐‐ 4 nos. ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ii.Tube Well ‐‐‐ 5nos. ‐‐‐ 7nos. ‐‐‐ 11 nos. ‐‐‐ 7nos. ‐‐‐ 4nos. ‐‐‐ 6nos. iii.Hand Pumps ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iv.Pipeline (Drinking Water Supply ‐‐‐ 3 nos. ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 8 nos. ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 nos. Posts) (defunct) (defunct) (defunct) v.Any other specify ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 3 Electricity (Yes‐1, No‐2) 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 4 Cremation ground 5 Bricks Yards ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 6 Marker Area 2 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 3 Acres 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 Acre 1 2 Acre 1 7 Cattle Market Area ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 8 Village Industry Sites ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 9 Samudaya Bhawan ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 10 Anganwadi Centre ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. 11 Panchayat Ghar 2 Acre 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 12 Community Hall (Youth Club) 1 Acre 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 Acr 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 47
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Sl. General infrastructure Existing in AFFECTED VILLAGES No. Project Area BHASMA KAINTARA DEULI KUNDUKELA KUDABAGA PODBAHAL Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Units Units Units Units Units Units 13 Post Office ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 14 Police Station / Police Posts ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 15 Banks (specify type) i.Commercial Bank ‐‐‐ 5 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ii.Religion rural bank ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iii.Creadit Cooperative Society ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 16 Prayer Hall / Bhagabata Tungi ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 17 Schools / Education Centres (Specify type) i.Primary 1 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 2 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 ii.Secondary 1 Acre 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 1 Acre 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iii.High School 2 Acres 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 Acres 1 2 Acres 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iv. Technical Institution ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ v.Adult Education Centre ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ vi.Special Schools for disabled ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ vii.Other Vulnerable groups centre ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ viii.Library/Study Centers ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 18 Health Centre (Specify type): i.PHC/CHC ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ii.Sub Centre ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iii.ANM Centre ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iv.Dispensary / hospital (allopathic / ayurvedic / homeopathic / ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ others) v.Veterinary center 19 Fair Price Shop ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. ‐‐‐ 1 no. 20 Cooperative Societies ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 21 Shops i.Textile Shop ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 48
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Sl. General infrastructure Existing in AFFECTED VILLAGES No. Project Area BHASMA KAINTARA DEULI KUNDUKELA KUDABAGA PODBAHAL Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Units Units Units Units Units Units ii.Grocery Shop ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 6 ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 1 iii.Chemist & Pharmacy ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 iv.Hardware/Cement/Construction ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ material shops v.Hotels/lodges/guest houses ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 22 Service Centre i.Flour mill ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 ii.Tractor repairs ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iii. Cycle/automobile repairs ‐‐‐ 5 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 23 Servicemen i.Barber ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 6 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 2 ii.Carpenter ‐‐‐ 6 ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 5 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 2 iii.Blacksmith ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ iv.Goldsmith ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ v.Tailor ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 2 vi.Cobbler ‐‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ vii.Masson ‐‐‐ 7 ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ 2 viii.Potter ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ix.Washer man ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 2 x.Any other ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 24 Others (Specify) ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 49
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
4.2.5. Village‐wise Social and Cultural Infrastructure
Sl. Social and Cultural infrastructure AFFECTED VILLAGES No. Existing in Project Area BHASMA KAINTARA DEULI KUNDUKELA KUDABAGA PODBAHAL Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Units Units Units Units Units Units A) Social Infrastructure 1 Festive Locations 3 Acre 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 Acre 1 0.5 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Acre 2 Local trade guilds ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 3 Trading spots ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 4 Bhajan Mandals ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 5 Sports Groups / Associations / ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Clubs 6 Musical Groups / Associations / ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Clubs 7 Dance Teams/associations ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 8 Drama Groups / Associations / ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Clubs 9 Self Help Groups ‐‐‐ 9 ‐‐‐ 4 ‐‐‐ 11 ‐‐‐ 5 ‐‐‐ 7 ‐‐‐ 3 10 Yuvak Mandals ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 11 Yuvati Mandals ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 12 Folk Art Groups ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 13 Painting Groups ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 14 Handicraft Associations ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 15 Local Bandsets ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 16 Co‐operative Bodies: 1‐Credit Co‐ ops, 2.Consumer Co‐ops. 3. ‐‐‐ 1 no‐6 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 no.‐6 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Fishing Co‐ops, 4. Craft Co‐ops, 5.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 50
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Sl. Social and Cultural infrastructure AFFECTED VILLAGES No. Existing in Project Area BHASMA KAINTARA DEULI KUNDUKELA KUDABAGA PODBAHAL Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Units Units Units Units Units Units Milk producers’ Co‐ops, 6. Farmers Co‐ops, 7. Poultry Producers Co‐ops, 8. Labour Co‐ ops. 17 Money Landers ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 3 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 18 Local Quack Doctors ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 2 ‐‐‐ 1 19 Caste Panchayats/Committee of ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ Elders 20 Village Panchayat ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 21 Any other Organized units of ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ social or cultural nature (Specity) 22 Forts ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 23 Ancient Places ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 24 Canons ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 25 Battle fields ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 26 Other monuments ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 27 Village entrance gates ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 28 Boundary Stones ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 29 Akhadas ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 30 Archaeological sites ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 31 Monasteries ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 32 Maths ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 33 Mathadhipatis ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 34 Chawdy ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 35 Dharmashala ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 51
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Sl. Social and Cultural infrastructure AFFECTED VILLAGES No. Existing in Project Area BHASMA KAINTARA DEULI KUNDUKELA KUDABAGA PODBAHAL Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Area No. of Units Units Units Units Units Units 36 Musafirkhanas ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 37 Caravan Series ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 38 Jatra grounds 3 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 2 1 2 1 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 39 Holy Groves ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 40 Holy springs ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 41 Samadhasis ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 42 Dargahs ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 43 Caves ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 44 Birth Place of religious leaders ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ /Saints 45 Inscriptions ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 46 Memorial Stones ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 47 Mahasati Stones ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 48 Temples 0.5 Ac. 2 0.05 Ac. 1 2 Ac. 3 1Ac. 2 0.1 Ac 1 0.5 Ac. 1 49 Idgahs ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 50 Masjids ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 51 Churches ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 52 Gurudwaras ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 53 Jain Basadis ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 54 Budhistist stupas ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 55 Other religious monuments ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 56 Other‐(Specify) ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 52
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
4.2.6. Local Economic Activities
Generally, when we analyse the local economic activities in the affected six villages around 80% households are owner cultivators, 13.64% are employed in service sector, 15.34% involved in both agricultural labour work and business activities. Those who are engaged in non‐agricultural activities are working in construction site, daily wage labour under MGNREGS, construction work, etc. The figure mention below reflects that now nobody in the study village is fully depending on forest resources for their livelihoods. A sharp shift has been seen from the field of agriculture to non‐agricultural activities.
If we discuss on the size of land holding in study village it is observed that all most all the households are marginal landholders. While around 8.82% households are landless, 23.52% are having land size of more than 2 acres. The rest of the households are having less than two acres of land. Even around 50% landholding households in the village are having less than 1 acre of land. The fertile land is popularly used for paddy cultivation. The villagers mainly cultivate kharif crops specially paddy. The villagers in Sundargarh area are mostly using traditional seeds and methods of cultivation. They used to depend on bullock for ploughing. They are not using high yielding variety (HYV) seeds.
In the district of Sundargarh sizeable land comes under barren land. Here agriculture depends on monsoon. There are very minimum irrigation facilities. No alternative irrigation facilities are being provided by the Government. Though very few households are cultivating wheat and other Rabi crops, it is very low. Village youths interacted with the SIA team have shown their interest in taking vocational courses like ITI, polytechnic, etc.
From the above discussions, it is revealed that there has been a sharp change in the source of livelihoods of people. At present the source of livelihoods are diversified. The villagers are no more depending on forest or agriculture only. They have so many options in front of them.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 53
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐5
Land Assessment
5.1 Map showing area of impact under the project:
Fig.‐5.1: Project Affected Area
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 54
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
5.2. Extent and location of land proposed to be acquired for the project:
Water Pipeline Corridor requires the procurement of privately owned land. This land will be acquired by the government from 125 families and 12 migrated/non‐responders.
Affected area: For water pipeline corridor the extent and location of proposed land of Ac. 24.59 to be acquired is explained below.
Chart‐5.1: Village wise area to be acquired (in acr)
10 8.96 9 8 7 5.94 6 5 3.74 4 3.03 3 2 1.52 1.4 1 0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal
(Source: Field Survey)
From the above chart it is observed that, maximum (8.96 acres) of land will be acquired from Bhasma village and minimum (1.4 acres) will be acquired from Podbahal village. Assets to lose: The surveyors approached the Project Affected Families (PAFs) to know their willingness to lose their assets for the proposed UMPP, at Bhedabahal. Majority of the respondents expressed their views positively for the public purpose except very few of them who showed reluctance due to lack of awareness about the project. The chart‐5.2 reveals that, being aware about the upcoming UMPP, 93.60% of households are ready to lose their permanent assets (especially land and homestead) for the public purpose after getting fair compensation.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 55
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chart‐5.2: Willingness to lose Assets
6.40% Total 93.60% 12.50% Podbahal 87.50% 5.56% Kundukela 94.44% 7.69% Kodabaga 92.31% Percentage of No 16.67% Kaintara 83.33% Percentage of Yes 0.00% Deuli 100.00% 2.17% Bhasma 97.83%
00.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
(Source: Field Survey)
5.3 Nature of the Land, Present Use and Classification of Land
Total Landholdings: It may be mentioned here that as revealed from the SIA survey most of the land is owned and cultivated by OBCs (non‐tribals) called Agharia community in the proposed project area. When the total landholding patterns is analysed from Table‐5.1, it is found that out of a total available land of 825.78 acres in the six affected villages, 820.78 acres are private land, 2.5 acres forest land and another 2.5 acres are other categories of land. Table‐5.1: Total Landholdings
Sl Private Govt Religious Community Forest Others Total Village No 1 Bhasma 310.11 0 0 0 0 0.61 310.72 (99.8) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0.2) (100) 2 Deuli 74.08 0 0 0 0 0.8 74.88 (98.93) (0) (0) (0) (0) (1.07) (100) 3 Kaintara 260.32 0 0 0 2.5 0.08 262.9 (99.02) (0) (0) (0) (0.95) (0.03) (100) 4 Kudabaga 78.9 0 0 0 0 0.14 79.04 (99.82) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0.18) (100) 5 Kundukela 66.84 0 0 0 0 0.87 67.71 (98.72) (0) (0) (0) (0) (1.28) (100) 6 Podbahal 30.53 0 0 0 0 0 30.53 (100) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (100) Total 820.78 0 0 0 2.5 2.5 825.78 (99.39) (0) (0) (0) (0.3) (0.3) (100) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 56
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
5.4 Size of Holdings, Ownership Pattern, Land Distribution, Number of Residential Houses, and Public and Private Infrastructure and Assets:
The landholdings in standard acres are calculated on the basis of the extent of irrigated and unirrigated holdings. The irrigated holdings were assumed to have two irrigated crops of paddy each year (Class I land‐ one acre equals one standard acre), whereas unirrigated uplands were assumed to be equivalent to Class IV lands (4.5 acres of Class IV lands is equivalent to one standard acre). When just the landholding is taken without converting it into standard acres, the average landownership of the tribals is considerably less than the general caste/OBC (Agharias) landowners. Conversion into standard acres provides a more balanced perspective.
Land Utilization: The below table reveals that, out of the total land area of Ac. 825.78 the maximum area of Ac. 683.48 (82.77%) and area of Ac. 18.87 (2.29%)is utilized for productive agriculture and residence purpose respectively. Apart from that, Ac 66.37 (8.04%) is utilized for forestation/plantation and remaining Ac 57.06 (6.91%) is considered as barren land.
Table‐5.2: Use of Land (in acres)
Sl No Village Cultivation Orchard Residential Forestation Barren Others Total 1 Bhasma 285.1 0 7.00 1.26 17.36 0 310.72 (91.75) (0) (2.25) (0.41) (5.59) (0) (100) 2 Deuli 68.53 0 2.5 0.9 2.95 0 74.88 (91.52) (0) (3.34) (1.2) (3.94) (0) (100) 3 Kaintara 196.1 0 1.79 58 7.01 0 262.9 (74.59) (0) (0.68) (22.06) (2.67) (0) (100) 4 Kudabaga 75.6 0 0.55 0.45 2.44 0 79.04 (95.65) (0) (0.7) (0.57) (3.09) (0) (100) 5 Kundukela 31.42 0 6.57 5.76 24 0 67.71 (46.4) (0) (9.7) (8.51) (35.45) (0) (100) 6 Podbahal 26.73 0 0.5 0 3.3 0 30.53 (87.55) (0) (1.64) (0) (10.81) (0) (100) Total 683.48 0 18.87 66.37 57.06 0 825.78 (82.77) (0) (2.29) (8.04) (6.91) (0) (100) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 57
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Status of Ownership: The Table‐5.3 below indicates out of the total 125 PAFs, 122 families are the patta holders of their respective land, 2 of them are customary right holders and only 1 is an encroacher.
Table‐5.3: Status of Ownership
Title Customary Encroacher Squatter Total Sl. No. Village Holder Right 46 0 0 0 46 1 Bhasma (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 17 0 0 0 17 2 Deuli (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 22 2 0 0 24 3 Kaintara (91.67) (8.33) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 13 0 0 0 13 4 Kudabaga (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 17 0 1 0 18 5 Kundukela (94.44) (0.00) (5.56) (0.00) (100.00) 7 0 0 0 7 6 Podbahal (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 122 2 1 0 125 Total (97.60) (1.60) (0.80) (0.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total. 5.5 Land Prices and Recent Changes in Ownership, Transfer and Use of Lands over the Last Three Years:
The SIA team visited the office of Sub‐Registrar, Sundargarh to collect the land price of the lands over the last three years. As per the information received, the average rate of land price is Rs. 26,40,000/‐ per acre for the Mal/Bahal/Guda/Gharbari land. It is bit higher in case of the land at the road side, which is Rs. 31,20,000/‐ per acre. In case of Patita/other kinds of land the price is Rs. 13,20,000/‐ per acre.
The social and psychological impacts and associated costs are more complex, and they are often much more devastating. Neighbourhoods can be disrupted, people who are their subsistence on daily basis and who constantly do each other small but important favours may be left deprived. There are also social and psychological costs associated with disruptions of businesses. Business people may find their established clientele cut off from their shops or experience changes in business practices they neither anticipate nor like.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 58
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
5.6 Families whose Land or Other Immovable Properties Acquired
Based on the land assessment, land records and field verification, it is to be mentioned here that 125 numbers of families are going to be affected by the project. List of village wise affected families is provided in Table‐5.4.
Table‐5.4: Total Affected Land in Acres and Number of Families
Sl. No Village Affected Total Total area Total land to be acquired by the project HHs Land of (Acr) owned affected Project Migrated Not Total (Acr) plot Acquired responded Acquired (Acr) land 1 Bhasma 46 310.11 40.04 8.65 0.31 0 8.96 2 Deuli 17 74.08 22.25 3.39 0.65 1.9 5.94 3 Kaintara 24 260.32 21.31 2.93 0.81 0 3.74 4 Kudabaga 13 78.9 17.37 2.12 0 0.91 3.03 5 Kundukela 18 66.84 4.09 1.52 0 0 1.52 6 Podbahal 7 30.53 13.26 1.4 0 0 1.4 Total 125 820.78 118.32 20.01 1.77 2.81 24.59 Source: Field Survey
Particulars of land proposed for acquisition from affected families of all six affected villages is as follows:
Table‐5.5: Village‐Bhasma
Sl.No Name of the person Total Khata Total Area of % of land to be amount No area of land to acquired to of land affected be total amount of owned plot acquired land owned 1 Sambhari Rohidas 5 3 0.43 0.16 3.2 2 Kishor Chandra Patel 4 5 0.72 0.29 7.25 3 Ganda Rohidas 3.6 8 0.37 0.09 2.5 4 Arjun Sa 12 9 0.53 0.09 0.75 5 Chandan Makar 7.52 18 2.51 1.11 14.76
6 Sankar Behera 9.21 29 0.07 0.76 7 Hemalu Behera 9.21 29 0.47 0.07 0.76 8 Chandrasekhar Behera 9.21 29 0.07 0.76 9 Biseswar Mishra 4.24 30 0.57 0.14 3.3 10 Tarinisen Patel 20 32 & 41 2.62 0.62 3.1 11 Mokshya kanta patel 5.12 33 0.28 0.03 0.59
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 59
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Sl.No Name of the person Total Khata Total Area of % of land to be amount No area of land to acquired to of land affected be total amount of owned plot acquired land owned 12 Dambarudhar patel 4.7 43 0.2425 5.16 13 Rajkumar Patel 4.7 43 0.2425 5.16 4.66 14 Rajkumar Patel 4.83 43 0.2425 5.02 15 Devkumar Patel 4.83 43 0.2425 5.02 16 Dulari Ganda 3.26 48 0.79 0.07 2.15 17 Malya Choudhury 4 49 4.85 0.55 13.75 18 Manoj Naik 29.57 50 2.04 0.44 1.49 19 Sundarmani Choudhury 8 98 5.96 1 12.5 20 Sidhartha Mishra 3.5 55 0.76 0.12 3.43 21 Baladeb Soreng 0.5 67 0.01 2 22 Pani Budhi Khadia 2 67 0.01 0.5 23 Kishore Khadia 1.05 67 1.2 0.01 0.95 24 Purna Chandra Khadia 1.06 67 0.01 0.94 25 Bhubane Soreng 1.06 67 0.01 0.94 26 Mahendra Chaudhury 9 68 0.37 0.07 0.78 27 Subash Gouda 14.31 69 0.162 1.13 28 Bijayaram Gouda 14.31 69 0.162 1.13 29 Satyanada Gouda 14.31 69 3.02 0.162 1.13 30 Madhab Gouda 14.31 69 0.162 1.13 31 Kodananada Gouda 14.31 69 0.162 1.13 32 Purusottam Naik 2.29 88 0.195 8.52 2.1 33 Thomas Naik 2.29 88 0.195 8.52 34 Kahnu Khadia 2 99 0.71 0.42 21 35 Benudhar Choudhury 7.52 104 0.31 0.11 1.46 36 Pancha Rohidas 1.27 106 0.1 0.01 0.79 37 Shovas Rohidas 1.05 117 0.02 1.9 38 Putul Rohidas 2 117 0.06 0.02 1 39 Ganesh Rohidas 2 117 0.02 1 40 Harichand Dharua 8.21 121 0.18 0.12 1.46 41 Debarcchan Patel 10.48 124 0.55 0.18 1.72 42 Tikeswara Rohidasa 0.5 124/16 0.17 0.02 4 43 Netramani Choudhuri 8.33 124/81 0.13 1.56 2.24 44 Rajib Chodhury 8.33 124/81 0.13 1.56
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 60
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Sl.No Name of the person Total Khata Total Area of % of land to be amount No area of land to acquired to of land affected be total amount of owned plot acquired land owned 45 Chumi Chudhury 7 124/81 0.13 1.86 46 Sundarmani Choudhury 8 124/80 0.51 0.13 1.62 Total 313.99 38.57 8.65 Besides, there are two families found migrated out are as follows: 47 Danar Meher 2.3 40 0.63 0.09 3.91 48 Binodini Chaudhuri 2.5 75 0.84 0.22 8.8 All Total 318.79 40.04 8.96 2.81 Source: Field Survey Thus out of total Ac. 40.04 area of land a total Ac 8.96 of land of 48 families including 2 migrated families of Bhasma Village will be acquired by the project, which is only 22.38 per cent of the affected plot area and only 2.81 per cent of the land presently owned by the affected households of village Bhasma.
Table 5.6: Village‐Deuli
SL. No Name of the person total Khata Total area Area of % of project answering to survey amount No. of land to be affected area to of land affected acquired total amount of owned plot land owned
1 Bibhuti Bhusana Naik 4 13 0.25 0.15 3.75 2 Dileswara Patel 9 19 0.81 0.21 2.33 3 Pradeep Chaudhury 3 25 0.05 0.05 1.67 4 Bhubana Chaudhury 4.91 26 0.04 0.81 0.2 5 Dillip Chaudhury 2.4 26 0.04 1.67 6 Sumanta Chaudhury 6.6 45, 50 0.55 0.24 3.63 7 Ganesh Ram Patel 6 68, 0.61 10.16 202/187 2.81 8 Narendra Chaudhury 2.06 72/25 1 0.51 24.76 9 Abhimanue Patel 3 72/66 0.2 0.08 2.67 10 Basanta Ku Patel 7 72/67 0.355 5.07 1.13 11 Prafula ku Patel 6 72/67 0.355 5.92 12 Bhagaban Chaudhury 12 130 0.74 0.15 1.25 13 Uditi Khanda 2 142 0.15 7.5 14 Nakula Khanda 2.6 142 0.15 5.77 2.06 15 Chaitanya Khanda 1.66 142 0.15 9.04 16 Chhanda Dhara Khanda 2.65 142 0.15 5.66 Total 74.88 9.8 3.39 4.53 Source: Field Survey
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 61
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
In Deuli village, out of 16 families identified as affected and owning 74.88 acres of land only Ac. 3.39 will be acquired by the project, which is 4.53 per cent of the land owned by the affected families. Besides, there are four families (Table‐5.7) who were not available and informed as migrated and the Managing Trustee of the village temple, Jhadeswar Mahadev did not respond during the enumeration. As mentioned below, Ac. 2.55 area of land is to be acquired out of the total affected plot of Ac. 12.76 (19.98%). The details are as follows Table‐5.7: Affected Migrant and Non‐respondents from Deuli village
SL. No Name of the person Total Khata Total Area of % of project answering to survey amount of No. area of land to affected area land owned affected be to total plot acquired amount of land owned 17 Mina Dehuri Migrated 40 0.09 0.09 .... 18 Tankadhara Chaudhury Migrated 58 0.18 0.07 .... 19 Madan Mohan Chaudhury Migrated 131 3.55 0.43 .... 20 Gobinda Narayan Patel Migrated 158 0.31 0.06 .... 21 Jhadeswar Mahadev, Not 179 8.63 1.9 .... Managing Trustee Responded Sub‐Total 12.76 2.55 .... All Total 22.25 5.94 .... Source: Field Survey
Thus in this village, there are altogether 21 families (Including the migrated and non‐ responders) whose Ac. 5.94 (26.70%) of land will be acquired out of Ac. 22.25 affected plot area.
Table 5.8: Village‐ Kaintara
SL. Name of the person total Khata No. Total Area of % of project answering to survey amount area of land to affected area of land the be to total owned affected acquired amount of plot land owned 1 Dushila Naik 7.5 2 0.9 0.25 3.33 2 Arati Patel 1 7 0.91 0.01 1 3 Sunil ku Naik 10 17 0.13 0.03 0.3 4 Chandrasen Naik 5.81 18 0.91 0.19 3.27 5 Jayanarayan naik 5.5 30 0.3 0.15 2.73 6 Aswini Nayak 21.02 33 0.65 0.16 0.76 7 Bibhuti bhusana Naik 8 40 2.8 0.41 5.13 8 Uttara Naik 10.5 42 0.05 0.48 0.1 9 Kuldeep Naik 4.57 42 0.05 1.09 10 Gunanidhi Naik 9.17 44 0.47 0.14 1.53 11 Mohana Chandra Patel 7 47 0.05 0.71 3.01 12 Binod chandra Patel 7 47 0.05 0.71
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 62
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
SL. Name of the person total Khata No. Total Area of % of project answering to survey amount area of land to affected area of land the be to total owned affected acquired amount of plot land owned 13 Haraprasad Chaudhury 4.5 51 0.065 1.44 0.79 Manoranjan Chaudhury 6 51 0.065 1.08 14 Binod Chandra Patel 6.15 52 & 72/12 3.67 0.12 1.95 15 Dipti Naik 5 58 0.005 0.1 0.19 16 Dibyalochana Naik 19.2 58 0.005 0.03 17 Sradhakar Bag 4 67 0.11 2.75 18 Basanti Bag 59 67 1.36 0.11 0.19 19 Rama chandra Bag 59 67 0.11 0.19 20 Kisan Naik 4.6 68 0.16 0.09 1.96 21 Rama chandra BARIK 0.75 70 0.12 16 0.71 22 Padmalochan Barik 0.75 70 0.12 16 23 Durga charan Chaudhury 2.5 72/61 1.37 0.32 12.8 24 Surendra ku Naik 1.42 72/70 0.26 0.15 10.56 Sub‐Total 269.94 18.69 2.93 1.09 Source: Field Survey
The SIA team had interaction with the above mentioned 24 families of Kaintara village and after due verification it is found that out of the Ac 18.69 total area of the affected plot Ac.2.93 of land will be acquired by the project. This is in fact only 1,09 per cent of the total land owned by the project‐affected households. However, there are two families named (Sri Uttar Nayak and Sri Kuldeep Nayak), whose homestead land of total Ac. 0.10 (0.05 Ac. each) will be acquired by the project.
The following four families of Kaintara village (Table‐5.9) were informed migrated out from the village during the SIA, whose land of Ac. 0.81 out of the Ac. 2.62 total area of the plots would be acquired.
Table‐5.9: Affected Migrants and Non‐respondents from Kaintara Village
SL. Name of the person total Khata No. total Area of % of project No answering to survey amount area of land to affected area of land the be to total owned affected acquired amount of plot land owned 25 Dusmanta Nayak Migrated 28 0.8 0.25 .... 26 Namita Hota Migrated 37 0.08 0.08 .... 27 Keshav Chandra Majhi Migrated 72/13 0.84 0.36 .... 28 Gruha Chnadra Patel Migrated 72/14 0.9 0.12 .... Sub‐Total 2.62 0.81 .... All Total 21.31 3.74 .... Source: Field Survey
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 63
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Thus, from the above details it is clear that, a total of Ac. 3.74 of land of 25 families altogether including four migrated out families out of total 21.31 acres of area of plot will be acquired by the project at Kaintara village.
Table‐5.10: Village‐Kudabaga
Sl. Name of the Total Khata No. total area Area of land % of project No person answering amount of of the to be affected area to survey land affected acquired to total owned plot amount of land owned 1 Satyabhama Naik 5.44 18 0.1366 2.51
2 Hemalata Naik 5.44 18 5.47 0.1367 2.51 3 Sobhakar Naik 20 18 0.1367 0.68
4 Chandrabhanu Sa 2.57 30 0.74 0.2 7.78 5 Narayan Naik 8 64 0.095 1.19 0.65 6 Biranchi Naik 8 64 0.095 1.19 7 Munu Munda 1 96 0.1425 14.25 8 Bhabani Munda 1 96 0.1425 14.25 2.96 9 Santosh Munda 6 96 0.1425 2.38 10 Paltu Munda 0.51 96 0.1425 27.94 11 Radhashyam Naik 5.04 117 2.3 0.19 3.77 12 Aditya Patel 16 132 2.98 0.52 3.25 13 Sibalal Munda 0.04 143/137 0.04 0.04 100 Total 79.04 15.14 2.12 2.68 Source: Field Survey
In the village of Kudabaga, 13 families, whose land of Ac. 2.12 out of the total area of plot of Ac 15.14 is verified to be acquired by the project. This is just 2,68 per cent of the total land owned by the project‐affected families. However, importantly the only homestead land of Ac. 0.04 (100%) of Sri. Sibalal Munda is going to be affected due to the project land acquisition.
Moreover, the SIA team identified through due verification and discussion with the concerned villagers and ward member that an area of 2.31 acres of land is purchased by a private company such as Ms. Kalinga Steel Tech. Pvt. Ltd. Out of which Ac. 0.91 of land will be acquired by the project. However, in spite of repeated personal contact and over telephone, the SIA team could not get the information from the concerned authority. The detail of the purchased land is mentioned below (Table‐5.11).
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 64
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐5.11: Affected Migrants and Non‐respondents from Kudabaga Village
SL. Name of the total amount of Khata No. total Area of % of project No person land owned area of land to affected area to answering to affected be total amount of survey plot acquired land owned
14 Ms. Kalinga Not Responded 143/146 0.73 0.15 .... Steel Tech. 15 Pvt. Ltd. Not Responded 143/147 0.1 0.04 ....
16 Not Responded 143/170 1.48 0.72 ....
Sub‐Total 2.31 0.91 .... Grand Total 17.45 3.03 .... Source: Field Survey
Thus, altogether, a total of 3.03 acres of land out of Ac. 17.45 of total area of plot including the land of Ms. Kalinga Steel Tech. Pvt.Ltd. is going to be acquired by the proposed project.
Table‐5.12: Village‐Kundukela
SL. Name of the person Total Khata No. Total Area of % of project No answering to survey amount area of land to affected area to of land the be total amount of owned affected acquired land owned plot
1 Suresh chandra Patel 6.46 10 1.08 0.4 6.19
2 Jagdish Kumura 8 81 0.38 0.04 0.5
3 Shisira Kumura 1.08 81 0.04 3.7
4 Parmeswara Samrtha 0.18 110 0.74 0.15 83.33
5 Jashbant Kumura 5.21 112 0.25 0.016 0.31
6 Hrudananada Kumura 5.21 112 0.016 0.31
7 Sudhansu Kumura 5.21 112 0.016 0.31
8 Tarakanata Patel 18 128 1.28 0.24 1.33
9 Barendra Patel 18 128 0.24 1.33
10 Bijaya mahananada 0.04 132/39 0.04 0.04 100
11 Mani Majhi 0.04 132/40 0.04 0.04 100
12 Rebati Mahananda 0.04 132/41 0.04 0.04 100
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 65
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
SL. Name of the person Total Khata No. Total Area of % of project No answering to survey amount area of land to affected area to of land the be total amount of owned affected acquired land owned plot
13 Kartika Naik 0.04 132/52 0.04 0.04 100
14 Sikandar Munda 0.04 132/75 0.04 0.04 100
15 Pushu munda 0.04 132/76 0.04 0.04 100
16 Pandia Munda 0.04 132/77 0.04 0.04 100
17 Mangalu Munda 0.04 132/78 0.04 0.04 100
18 Upasi Lahore 0.04 132/79 0.04 0.04 100
Total 67.71 4.09 1.518 2.24 Source: Field Survey
At the village Kundukela the SIA team verified the land to be acquired from the 18 families as mentioned above and came to the conclusion that, out of 4.09 acres of total area of the affected plot, the project will acquire Ac. 1.518 of land, which is 2.24 per cent of the total land owned/operated by the land‐affected families. Importantly, out of the total 18 families, 9 families are going to lose their homestead land of Ac. 0.04 each.
Table‐5.13: Village‐Podbahal
SL. Name of the person Total Khata No. Total Area of % of project No answering to survey amount area of land to affected area to of land the be total amount of owned affected acquired land owned plot
1 Sandhya Rani Patel 3.5 7 2.53 0.31 8.86
2 Shantilata Patel 11 13 0.52 0.3 2.73
3 Sandyarani Patel 4.53 14 1.98 0.285 6.29
4 Ekkadasia Patel 5.5 14 1.98 0.285 5.18
5 Tikenanada Bagara 2.5 22 2.04 0.0375 1.5
6 Tapaswini Bagara 2.5 22 2.04 0.0375 1.5
7 Lundu Bagara 2.5 22 2.04 0.0375 1.5
8 Iswara Bagara 2 22, 29//6 0.13 0.1075 5.38
Total 34.03 13.26 1.4 4.11 Source: Field Survey
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 66
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
The SIA team could find 8 families of Podbahal village, whose land of Ac. 1.4 will be acquired by the project out of the total area of affected plot Ac. 13.26. This is in fact only 4.11 per cent of the total land owned/operated by the land‐affected families.
Thus, the above analysis of field data clearly shows that in six villages of Sundargarh tahasil less than 5 per cent of the total land presently owned by the land‐affected families shall be acquired for the water pipeline corridor of 4000 MW UMPP. In none of the affected villages the land to be acquired for the water pipeline project of UMPP exceeds more than 5 per cent of the total land owned/operated by the families for agriculture purpose. More so, the land to be acquired does not come under highly productive irrigated/fertile land. So, there is less likelihood of loss of livelihood of project‐affected families or loss of food security of project‐affected people in the case land is acquired for the water pipeline project of UMPP. However, it is to be noted that quite a few number of families in Kundukela village are losing their sole homestead land and after acquisition all of them shall become landless and homeless. So, there has to be special compensation package for all such families and the land requiring body has to provide both cash and land‐based compensation as well as skill development support to prevent impoverishment and livelihood insecurity.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 67
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐6 Socio‐Economic and Cultural Profile (Affected Area and Resettlement Site)
6.1. Demographic details of the Population in the Project Area:
The demographic profile of the study area represents the numerical strength of different communities. It also shows the percentage of males and females in the respective villages and communities.
Table‐6.1: Number of Affected Families and their Demographic Profile
Village Total Surveyed PAFs Total PAPs Gender Sex Ratio Male Female Bhasma 46 (36.8) 232 135 97 719 Deuli 17 (13.6) 117 60 57 950 Kaintara 24 (19.2) 111 63 48 762 Kudabaga 13 (10.4) 74 43 31 721 Kundukela 18 (14.4) 101 56 45 804 Podbahal 7 (5.6) 37 17 20 1176 Total 125 (100) 672 374 298 797 Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.1: Village‐wise percentage of Affected Families
5.6
14.4 Bhasma 36.8 Deuli Kaintara 10.4 Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal
19.2 13.6
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 68
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
From the above table and chart, it is clear that of the total identified 125 Project Affected Families (PAFs) in the 6 affected villages, 46 (36.8%) are from the village Bhasma, 24 (19.2%) are from Kaintara, 17 (13.6%) from Deuli, 18 (14.4%) from Kundukela, 13 from Kudabaga (10.4%) and the remaining 7 (5.6%) from village Podbahal. Chart‐6.2: Sex Ratio
1176 1200 950 1000 804 797 762 721 800 719
600
400
200
0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal Total
Among the six villages only seven affected families in Podbahal have shown a vey highly favourable sex ratio of 1176 females per 1000 males as gainst 979 females per 1000 males at the all‐Odisha level according to 2011 Census. The affected families in the other five villages of the project area have low and adverse sex ratio of female and male population. On the whole the sex ratio of male and female population in the affected families of seven villages is found to be only 796. (Table‐6.1)
Table‐6.2: Type of Families
Family Type Sl No Village Joint Nuclear Total 17 29 46 1 Bhasma (36.96) (63.04) (100.00) 7 10 17 2 Deuli (41.18) (58.82) (100.00) 10 14 24 3 Kaintara (41.67) (58.33) (100.00) 4 9 13 4 Kudabaga (30.77) (69.23) (100.00) 8 10 18 5 Kundukela (44.44) (55.56) (100.00) 3 4 7 6 Podbahal (42.86) (57.14) (100.00) 49 76 125 Total (39.20) (60.80) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 69
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
It may further be seen from Table‐6.2 that 49 (39.20%) families out of 125 live in joint family. The rest 76 families which constitute 60.80% of the total are nuclear in character. Among the six affected villages village Kundukela has shown higher percentage (44.44) of joint family, whereas village Kudabaga has higher percentage (69.23) nuclear family.
Chart‐6.3: Type of Families
80
69.23 70 63.04 60.8 58.82 58.33 60 55.56 57.14
50 44.44 41.18 41.67 42.86 39.2 40 36.96 Joint 30.77 Nuclear 30
20
10
0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podabahal Total
6.2. Age Profile
From Table‐6.3 it is found that out of the total population of 672 persons in the project‐ affected households, 23 (3.42%) are children below 6 years of age, 95 are in the age group of 6 to 18 years (14.14%), 437 (64.87%) persons belong to the age group of 19 to 60 and the remaining 117 persons are 61 and above years of age (17.41%). That means around 65 per cent of the people in project‐affected families belong to the category of economically active population group and they can keep themselves engaged in different economic activities for their improved living condition. Morover, in the affected 6 villages there are 117 (17.41%) persons in the age group of 61 years and above, which means the logevity of population in the project‐affected families of the six villages under study is relatively better than the state’s average life expectancy and longevity on the basis of population in 60 plus age group, which is around 12 per cent according to 2011 Census.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 70
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.3: Age‐wise distribution of Project‐affected Population
Age Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Group Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total 4 3 7 2 3 5 7 0 7 1 0 1 0‐6 (2.96) (3.09) (3.02) (3.33) (5.26) (4.27) (11.11) (0.00) (6.31) (2.33) (0.00) (1.35) 9 7 16 5 5 10 5 6 11 4 3 7 6‐14 (6.67) (7.22) (6.90) (8.33) (8.77) (8.55) (7.94) (12.50) (9.91) (9.30) (9.68) (9.46) 5 5 10 3 3 6 4 1 5 2 1 3 14‐18 (3.70) (5.15) (4.31) (5.00) (5.26) (5.13) (6.35) (2.08) (4.50) (4.65) (3.23) (4.05) 67 37 104 25 24 49 24 21 45 22 14 36 18‐45 (49.63) (38.14) (44.83) (41.67) (42.11) (41.88) (38.10) (43.75) (40.54) (51.16) (45.16) (48.65) 29 26 55 15 9 24 13 9 22 7 5 12 45‐60 (21.48) (26.80) (23.71) (25.00) (15.79) (20.51) (20.63) (18.75) (19.82) (16.28) (16.13) (16.22) 60 & 21 19 40 10 13 23 10 11 21 7 8 15 Above (15.56) (19.59) (17.24) (16.67) (22.81) (19.66) (15.87) (22.92) (18.92) (16.28) (25.81) (20.27) 135 97 232 60 57 117 63 48 111 43 31 74 Total (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00)(100.00) (100.00)(100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00)
Age Kundukela Podbahal Total Group Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total 2 0 2 0 1 1 16 7 23 0-6 (3.57) (0.00) (1.98) (0.00) (5.00) (2.70) (4.28) (2.35) (3.42) 7 6 13 2 3 5 32 30 62 6-14 (12.50) (13.33) (12.87) (11.76) (15.00) (13.51) (8.56) (10.07) (9.23) 5 2 7 1 1 2 20 13 33 14-18 (8.93) (4.44) (6.93) (5.88) (5.00) (5.41) (5.35) (4.36) (4.91) 24 24 48 4 9 13 166 129 295 18-45 (42.86) (53.33) (47.52) (23.53) (45.00) (35.14) (44.39) (43.29) (43.90) 12 10 22 5 2 7 81 61 142 45-60 (21.43) (22.22) (21.78) (29.41) (10.00) (18.92) (21.66) (20.47) (21.13) 60 & 6 3 9 5 4 9 59 58 117 Above (10.71) (6.67) (8.91) (29.41) (20.00) (24.32) (15.78) (19.46) (17.41) 56 45 101 17 20 37 374 298 672 Total (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 71
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chart‐6.4: Age‐wise Population of Affected Villages
Bhasma Village Deuli Village
3.02 4.27
6.9 4.31 8.55 17.24 19.66 5.13
23.71 20.51
44.83 41.88
Kaintara Village Kudabaga Village
1.35
6.31 9.46 4.05 18.92 9.91 20.27
4.5
19.82 16.22
40.54 48.65
0‐6 6‐14 14‐18 18‐45 45‐60 60 & Above
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 72
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Kundukela Village Podabahal Village
1.98 2.7
8.91 12.87 13.51 24.32
6.93 5.41 21.78
18.92 35.14
47.52
Total Affected Population
3.42
17.41 9.23 4.91
21.13
43.9
0‐6 6‐14 14‐18 18‐45 45‐60 60 & Above
6.3. Caste Composition and Religion
It may be mentioned here that Sundargarh is a sceduled area with more than 50 per cent of the population in the district belonging to the category of scheduled tribe. However, it is found from SIA survey that in the 6 affected villages, 55.65 per cent of land‐affected families belong to OBC category and cent per cent of the affected families in the villages Deulli and Podbahal are from OBC category. The respective percentages of SC and ST categories of land affected families are found to be 16 and 20 only. That means only a few among the marginalized category SC and ST families shall be affected due toland acquisition for the water pipeline corridor project of UMPP in Sundargarh. The social category‐wise division of land‐affected families is also shown graphically in Chart‐6.5.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 73
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.4: Social Category
Sl No Village SC ST OBC GEN Total
1 Bhasma 12 8 20 6 46 (26.09) (17.39) (43.48) (13.04) (100) 2 Deuli 0 0 17 0 17 (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) (0.00) (100) 3 Kaintara 2 2 17 3 24 (8.33) (8.33) (70.83) (12.50) (100) 4 Kudabaga 0 5 7 1 13 (0.00) (38.46) (53.85) (7.69) (100) 5 Kundukela 6 10 1 1 18 (33.33) (55.56) (5.56) (5.56) (100) 6 Podbahal 0 0 7 0 7 (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) (0.00) (100) Total 20 25 69 11 125 (16.00) (20.00) (55.20) (8.80) (100) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.5: Percentage of Social Categorisation of Affected Families
120
100 100 100
80 70.83 SC 60 53.85 55.56 55.2 ST 43.48 38.46 OBC 40 33.33 26.09 GEN 20 17.39 8.33 16 20 13.04 12.5 5.56 8.33 8.8 7.69 5.56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podabahal Total
In the study area, it has been observed that the all the land‐affected families are Hindu by religion in the 6 affected villages.Odia is the mother tongue of majority of the project‐ affected people and only a very few speak Hindi and other tribal dialect such as Shadri, Karia, etc. The surveyed families belonging to Hindu religion are worshiping Lord Siva, Goddess Durga, Tarini and local deity Goddess Bolani. There are temples and shrines found in all the six affected villages of the study area. Throughout the year they celebrate many festivals as per their own religion, beliefs and customs. However, all most all the villagers
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 74
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
irrespective of their religion do participate in celebrating Holi and Diwali as community festival. The tradition of animal sacrifice is still prevalent in that locality. They do celebrate Bolani Maa festival in every two years where people of all communities and religions participate. During these festivals people do sacrifice animals as a mark of respect to Goddess Bolani. Table‐6.5: Religion Sl No Village Hindu Total 1 Bhasma 46 (100.00) 46 (100.00)
2 Deuli 17 (100.00) 17 (100.00)
3 Kaintara 24 (100.00) 24 (100.00)
4 Kudabaga 13 (100.00) 13 (100.00)
5 Kundukela 18 (100.00) 18 (100.00)
6 Podbahal 7 (100.00) 7 (100.00)
Total 125 (100.00) 125 (100.00)
Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.4. Marital Status
Table‐6.6 shows that out of 672 PAPs majority of surveyed family members are married i.e. 449 (66.82%) persons are married, 220 (32.74%) are unmarried, 2 (0.30%) are divorcees, and 1 (0.15%) is a widow.
Table‐6.6: Marital Status
Village Sex Married Un Married Divorcee Separated Widowed Total 91 44 0 0 0 135 Male (67.41) (32.59) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 70 27 0 0 0 97 Bhasma Female (72.16) (27.84) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 161 71 0 0 0 232 Total (69.40) (30.60) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 39 21 0 0 0 60 Male (65.00) (35.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Deuli 40 17 0 0 0 57 Female (70.18) (29.82) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00)
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 75
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village Sex Married Un Married Divorcee Separated Widowed Total 79 38 0 0 0 117 Total (67.52) (32.48) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 34 26 2 0 1 63 Male (53.97) (41.27) (3.17) (0.00) (1.59) (100.00) 36 12 0 0 0 48 Kaintara Female (75.00) (25.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 70 38 2 0 1 111 Total (63.06) (34.23) (1.80) (0.00) (0.90) (100.00) 25 18 0 0 0 43 Male (58.14) (41.86) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 24 7 0 0 0 31 Kudabaga Female (77.42) (22.58) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 49 25 0 0 0 74 Total (66.22) (33.78) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 32 24 0 0 0 56 Male (57.14) (42.86) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 32 13 0 0 0 45 Kundukela Female (71.11) (28.89) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 64 37 0 0 0 101 Total (63.37) (36.63) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 12 5 0 0 0 17 Male (70.59) (29.41) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 14 6 0 0 0 20 Podbahal Female (70.00) (30.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 26 11 0 0 0 37 Total (70.27) (29.73) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 233 138 2 0 1 374 Male (62.30) (36.90) (0.53) (0.00) (0.27) (100.00) 216 82 0 0 0 298 Total Female (72.48) (27.52) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 449 220 2 0 1 672 Total (66.82) (32.74) (0.30) (0.00) (0.15) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 76
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.5. Literacy in Project Area:
Education level of the people in the affected families of six villages is found to be comparatively much better than the average education levelof people in Odisha. It is found from SIA survey of land‐affected families that the litearcy level of people on the whole is about 86 per cent, which is higher than the state’s literacy rate of population in Odisha that is about 74 per cent according to 2011 Census. When we classify the educational level of population in the affected families on the basis of years of schooling and technical/professional type education, it is found that among the literates, 10.01 per cent are just literate category people without any education level, 12.79 per cent have studied upto primary level below class VIII, 18.48 per cent are under matric having less than 10 years of schooling, 16.64 per cent of them are matriculates, 13.41per cent are intermediates, 5.08 per cent are graduates, 2.92 per cent are post graduates,3.08 per cent are technical degree holders, 1.84 per cent are technical diploma holders, 0.47 per cent are ITI/CT qualified and 2.70 per cent are professional degree holders. That means around 13 per cent among the literates in alnd‐affected families are degree holders as compared to around 7 per cent graduates and abov e qualified people at the state and district level (for details see Table 6.7). This further implies that the affected families of six villages are having highly qualified human capital and there is scope for generating employment for many of them in the growing manufacturing and tertiary sector economy in the case of loss of livelihood opportunity for many of them in the agricultural sector. It is also that the education level of female population in the affected families is comparatively much better than the district and state’s average
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 77
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table 6.7: Literacy status of affected population
Village Gender Just Below Post Tech. Tech. Prof. Illiterate Elementary Matriculate Intermediate Graduate ITI/CT Total Literate matric Graduate Degree Diploma Degree Male 19 13 10 35 23 15 4 3 2 4 0 3 131 (14.50) (9.92) (7.63) (26.71) (17.55) (11.14) (3.05) (2.29) (1.53) (3.05) (0.00) (2.29) (100.00) Female 25 10 13 17 13 8 3 4 0 0 0 1 94 Bhasma (26.59) (10.64) (13.83) (18.09) (13.83) (8.51) (3.10) (4.26) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (1.06) (100.00) Total 44 23 23 52 36 23 7 7 2 4 0 4 225 (19.56) (10.22) (10.22) (23.11) (16) (10.22) (3.11) (3.11) (0.89) (1.77) (0.00) (1.77) (100.00) Male 3 5 5 8 10 10 6 3 3 1 2 2 58 (5.17) (8.62) (8.62) (13.79) (17.24) (17.24) (10.34) (5.17) (5.17) (1.72) (3.44) (3.44) (100.00) Female 6 7 10 6 13 8 3 0 1 0 0 0 54 Deuli (11.11) (12.96) (18.51) (11.11) (24.07) (14.81) (5.55) (0.00) (1.85) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Total 9 12 15 14 23 18 9 3 4 1 2 2 112 (8.03) (10.71) (13.39) (12.5) (20.53) (16.07) (8.03) (2.67) (3.57) (0.89) (1.78) (1.78) (100.00) Male 0 2 8 13 4 13 8 3 3 0 0 2 56 (0.00) (3.57) (14.28) (23.21) (7.14) (23.21) (14.28) (5.36) (5.36) (0.00) (0.00) (3.57) (100.00) Female 1 6 8 6 7 10 5 3 1 1 0 0 48 Kaintara (2.08) (12.50) (16.67) (12.50) (14.58) (20.83) (10.42) (6.25) (2.08) (2.08) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Total 1 8 16 19 11 23 13 6 4 1 0 2 104 (0.96) (7.70) (15.38) (18.26) (10.57) (22.11) (12.5) (5.76) (3.84) (0.96) (0.00) (1.92) (100.00) Male 5 5 2 8 12 4 0 0 2 3 1 0 42 (11.90) (11.90) (4.76) (19.04) (28.57) (9.52) (0.00) (0.00) (4.76) (7.14) (2.38) (0.00) (100.00) Female 8 5 5 5 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 Kudabaga (25.80) (16.13) (16.13) (16.13) (19.35) (6.45) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Total 13 10 7 13 18 6 0 0 2 3 1 0 73 (17.80) (13.69) (9.58) (17.80) (24.65) (8.21) (0.00) (0.00) (2.73) (4.10) (1.37) (0.00) (100.00)
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 78
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village Gender Just Below Post Tech. Tech. Prof. Illiterate Elementary Matriculate Intermediate Graduate ITI/CT Total Literate matric Graduate Degree Diploma Degree Male 8 3 9 9 9 5 1 0 5 2 0 3 54 (14.81) (5.56) (16.67) (16.67) (16.67) (9.26) (1.85) (0.00) (9.26) (3.70) (0.00) (5.56) (100.00) Female 10 6 9 4 7 4 0 3 1 1 0 0 45 Kundukela (22.22) (13.33) (20.00) (8.89) (15.56) (8.89) (0.00) (6.67) (2.22) (2.22) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Total 18 9 18 13 16 9 1 3 6 3 0 3 99 (18.18) (9.09) (18.18) (13.13) (16.16) (9.09) (10.10) (3.03) (6.06) (3.03) (0.00) (3.03) (100.00) Male 3 1 2 2 4 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 17 (17.65) (5.88) (11.76) (11.76) (23.53) (23.53) (0.00) (0.00) (5.88) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Female 0 2 2 7 0 4 3 0 1 0 0 0 19 Podbahal (0.00) (10.52) (10.52) (36.84) (0.00) (21.05) (15.79) (0.00) (5.26) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Total 3 3 4 9 4 8 3 0 2 0 0 0 36 (8.33) (8.33) (11.11) (25) (11.11) (22.22) (8.33) (0.00) (5.55) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) Male 38 29 36 75 62 51 19 9 16 10 3 10 358 Total (10.61) (8.10) (10.06) (20.95) (17.31) (14.24) (5.31) (2.61) (4.47) (2.79) (0.83) (2.80) (100.00) Female 50 36 47 45 46 36 14 10 4 2 0 1 291
(17.18) (12.37) (16.15) (15.46) (15.80) (12.37) (4.81) (3.43) (1.37) (0.68) (0.00) (0.34) (100.00) Total 88 65 83 120 108 87 33 19 20 12 3 11 649
(13.55) (10.01) (12.79) (18.48) (16.64) (13.41) (5.08) (2.92) (3.08) (1.84) (0.47) (1.70) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 79
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chart‐6.6: Literacy status in the affected area
Prof. Degree 1.7
ITI/CT 0.47
Tech. Diploma 1.84
Tech. Degree 3.08
Post Graduate 2.92
Graduate 5.08
Intermediate 13.41
Matriculate 16.64
High School 18.48
Elementary 12.79
Just Literate 10.01
Illiterate 13.55
02468101214161820
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 80
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.6. Basic Amenities: 6.6.1. Dwelling Condition Tables (6.8 & 6.9) below depict that 122 HHs (97.60%) have their own houses and only 3 families (2.40%) are residing in rented houses – 2 at Bhasma and 1 at Kudabaga. Out of those, 117 HHs (93.60%) have homestead patta land and the rest 8 HHs (6.40%) do not have any patta land for the houses presently being resided by them. There are 5 (10.87%) land‐ affected families at Bhasma, 1 (5.56%) at Kundukela and 2 (28.5%) at Podbahal who do not have patta for the houses. Table‐6.8: Dwelling Condition Housing Sl No Village Own Rented Others Total 44 2 0 46 1 Bhasma (95.65) (4.35) (0.00) (100.00) 17 0 0 17 2 Deuli (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 24 0 0 24 3 Kaintara (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 12 1 0 13 4 Kudabaga (92.31) (7.69) (0.00) (100.00) 18 0 0 18 5 Kundukela (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 7 0 0 7 6 Podbahal (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 122 3 0 125 Total (97.60) (2.40) (0.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Table‐6.9: Availability of Patta
Sl No Village Yes No Total 41 5 46 1 Bhasma (89.13) (10.87) (100.00) 17 0 17 2 Deuli (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) 24 0 24 3 Kaintara (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) 13 0 13 4 Kudabaga (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) 17 1 18 5 Kundukela (94.44) (5.56) (100.00) 5 2 7 6 Podbahal (71.43) (28.5) (100.00) 117 8 125 Total (93.60) (6.40) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 81
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.6.2. Separate place for animal Table‐6.10 shows that 59 (47.20%) HHs have separate place for animals and 66 (52.80%) HHs do not have any animal shed. When the SIA team wanted to know the reason of not having separate place for animals, the respondents of affected families responded from different angles. Some of them told that they have separate land near the house; some of them expressed that they do not want separate place for animals, as they do not have any domestic animals; and few of them said that though they are aware about the need of a separate place for animal, they don’t like to do so.
Table‐6.10: Separate Place for Animals
Sl No Village Yes No Total 19 27 46 1 Bhasma (41.30) (58.70) (100.00) 11 6 17 2 Deuli (64.71) (35.29) (100.00) 13 11 24 3 Kaintara (54.17) (45.83) (100.00) 6 7 13 4 Kudabaga (46.15) (53.85) (100.00) 7 11 18 5 Kundukela (38.89) (61.11) (100.00) 3 4 7 6 Podbahal (42.86) (57.14) (100.00) 59 66 125 Total (47.20) (52.80) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.6.3. Bathroom in the House
Only 42 families (33.60%) have bathing rooms inside the house. The rest of 83 HHs (66.40%) do not have any bathroom inside their residence. Among the six affected villages, maximum 77.78 per cent households in Kundukela have no bathroom, whereas 47.06 per cent households in Deuli have bathroom. Villagers expressed that they go to nearby river/pond and tube well to take bath, some other spoke that they are not able to afford for the same. Table 6.11 shows village‐wise details of bathrooms found in affected families.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 82
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.11: Bathroom in the House Sl No Village Yes No Total 17 29 46 1 Bhasma (36.96) (63.04) (100.00) 8 9 17 2 Deuli (47.06) (52.94) (100.00) 7 17 24 3 Kaintara (29.17) (70.83) (100.00) 4 9 13 4 Kudabaga (30.77) (69.23) (100.00) 4 14 18 5 Kundukela (22.22) (77.78) (100.00) 2 5 7 6 Podbahal (28.57) (71.43) (100.00) 42 83 125 Total (33.60) (66.40) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.6.4. Sanitation:
It is revealed from the analysis of household level survey that only 45.60 per cent affected families have access to toilet facility inside their own house. This is, however, found to be better than the average per centage of households having access to private toilet facility in rural Odish, which is around 30 per cent according to 2011 Census data. Lack of awareness and poor economic condition is the major obstacle for better sanitation facility in the affected villages (Table 6.12). According to people the root cause of not having any toilet facility iside the residence of many households of the affected villages is lack of drainage system. People in the village without such sanitary facilities go for open defecations.
Table‐6.12: Toilet within or adjacent to house (Sanitation facility) Sl No Village Yes No Total 20 26 46 1 Bhasma (43.48) (56.52) (100.00) 8 9 17 2 Deuli (47.06) (52.94) (100.00) 12 12 24 3 Kaintara (50.00) (50.00) (100.00) 5 8 13 4 Kudabaga (38.46) (61.54) (100.00) 9 9 18 5 Kundukela (50.00) (50.00) (100.00) 3 4 7 6 Podbahal (42.86) (57.14) (100.00) 57 68 125 Total (45.60) (54.40) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 83
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chart‐6.7: Percentage of Households having Sanitation Facility
70 61.54 60 56.52 57.14 52.94 54.4 50 50 50 50 50 47.06 45.6 43.48 42.86 38.46 40 Yes 30 No
20
10
0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podabahal Total
6.6.5. Washing Place within the House It may be seen from Table‐6.13 shows that 68.00 per cent of the affected families have the provision of washing facility within their houses, whereas 32.00 per cent of families go to nearby tube wells, stream, river or village pond for washing of their dishes and clothes. It is the village Deuli, where 82.35 per cent of the affected families are having washing places within their houses; whereas in Podbahal only 57.14% families have the same. The women of the families those who do not have this facility usually go out of house for washing of clothes and dishes. Table‐6.13: Washing Place within House
Sl No Village Yes No Total 30 16 46 1 Bhasma (65.22) (34.78) (100.00) 14 3 17 2 Deuli (82.35) (17.65) (100.00) 17 7 24 3 Kaintara (70.83) (29.17) (100.00) 8 5 13 4 Kudabaga (61.54) (38.46) (100.00) 12 6 18 5 Kundukela (66.67) (33.33) (100.00) 4 3 7 6 Podbahal (57.14) (42.86) (100.00) 85 40 125 Total (68.00) (32.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 84
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.6.6. Electricity: Although all the six affected villages have been electrified, 32 (25.6%) of the land‐affected families do not have electricity connection for their house. They are found to be using lanterns and kerosene lamps for the lighting of their house during night. It is sen from Table 6.14 that while all the affected families in the Deuli village have elecitiry connection in Kundukela only 50 per cent of the affected families have electricity facility in their house.
Table‐6.14: Households having Electricity
Sl No Village Yes No Total 31 15 46 1 Bhasma (67.39) (32.61) (100.00) 17 0 17 2 Deuli (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) 18 6 24 3 Kaintara (75.00) (25.00) (100.00) 12 1 13 4 Kudabaga (92.31) (7.69) (100.00) 9 9 18 5 Kundukela (50.00) (50.00) (100.00) 6 1 7 6 Podbahal (85.71) (14.29) (100.00) 93 32 125 Total (74.40) (25.60) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.8: Percentage of Households having Electricity Facility
120
100 100 92.31 85.71 80 75 74.4 67.39
60 50 50 Yes No 40 32.61 25 25.6 20 14.29 7.69 0 0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podabahal Total
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 85
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.6.7. Source of Drinking Water: As regards the source of drinking water it has been found that 44.80 per cent affected households are availing the facilities of safe drinking water from pipe water supply and 47.20 per cent avail water from the tube well/hand pump. The remaining 8 per cent families fetch water from the stream, river, pond, open well, etc. to meet their drinking water needs (Table‐6.15). Table‐6.15: Source of Drinking Water Sl No Village Pipe water Tube well River/stream Open well Other Total
28 15 1 0 2 46 1 Bhasma (60.87) (32.61) (2.17) (0.00) (4.35) (100.00)
12 5 0 0 0 17 2 Deuli (70.59) (29.41) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00)
8 14 0 2 0 24 3 Kaintara (33.33) (58.33) (0.00) (8.33) (0.00) (100.00)
2 9 0 1 1 13 4 Kudabaga (15.38) (69.23) (0.00) (7.69) (7.69) (100.00)
1 14 3 0 0 18 5 Kundukela (5.56) (77.78) (16.67) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00)
5 2 0 0 0 7 6 Podbahal (71.43) (28.57) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00)
56 59 4 3 3 125 Total (44.80) (47.20) (3.20) (2.40) (2.40) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.9: Household level Access to Drinking Water Facility
90 77.78 80 70.59 69.23 71.43 70 60.87 58.33 60 50 44.847.2
40 32.61 33.33 29.41 28.57 30 20 15.38 16.67 8.33 7.697.69 10 4.35 5.56 3.2 2.17 0000000 00000 2.42.4 0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podabahal Total
Pipe water Tube well River /stream Open well Other
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 86
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Health Status and Facilities
The SIA study looked into the health related issues and problems of affected families, major sickness and diseases of individual and household characteristics and their formal therapies. It has been observed that the individual health conditions of people in the affected villages are not only driven by the generally inefficient supply side of the public health care services, but also from the interesting structure of patient’s demand. It is found from Table 6.16 that 36 per cent of the affected households in six villages have suffered from some diseases and illness during last 12 months from the date of survey. However, incidence of sickness among the affected families of Podbahal (57,14%) and Kudabaga (46.14%) is found to be much higher than the other four villages. Table‐6.16: Illness Profile of Affected Families during last 12 Months Sl No Village Yes No Total 17 29 46 1 Bhasma (36.96) (63.04) (100.00) 6 11 17 2 Deuli (35.29) (64.71) (100.00) 7 17 24 3 Kaintara (29.17) (70.83) (100.00) 6 7 13 4 Kudabaga (46.15) (53.85) (100.00) 5 13 18 5 Kundukela (27.78) (72.22) (100.00) 4 3 7 6 Podbahal (57.14) (42.86) (100.00) 45 80 125 Total (36.00) (64.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.10: Illness Profile of Affected Families during last 12 Months
0.8 70.83% 72.22% 0.7 63.04% 64.71% 57.14% 0.6 53.85% 0.5 46.15% 36.96% 35.29% 42.86% 0.4 Yes 29.17% 27.78% 0.3 No
0.2
0.1
0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kodabaga Kundukela Podbahal
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 87
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.6.8. Preference of Treatment:
Many villagers who have formal education shown knowledge about some diseases like tuberculosis, malaria, jaundice etc. About 64.44 affected families who are educated accept the modern medicine more readily. They prefer allopathic government hospitals or government doctor. About 4.44 of the affected households prefer to visit allopathic private clinics for their sickness. Only around 6.67 per cent families prefer to go for Ayurvedic treatment, whereas around 20.00 per cent highly educated people in the affected families usually prefer to visit government hospitals and private clinics for allopathic treatment of diseases suffered by their family members.
Table‐6.17: Preference of Medical Treatment
Sl Allopathic Allopathic Allopathic Homeopathy Ayurvedic Others Total Village No Govt. Pvt. Govt & Pvt 7 0 5 2 3 0 17 1 Bhasma (41.18) (0.00) (29.41) (11.76) (17.65) (0.00) (100.00) 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 Deuli (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 4 1 2 0 0 0 7 3 Kaintara (57.14) (14.29) (28.57) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 4 0 2 0 0 0 6 4 Kudabaga (66.67) (0.00) (33.33) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 4 1 0 0 0 0 5 5 Kundukela (80.00) (20.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 Podbahal (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 29 2 9 2 3 0 45 Total (64.44) (4.44) (20.00) (4.44) (6.67) (0.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.6.9. Nearest Formal Medical Facility
Table 6.18 indicates that 35.20 per cent households go to nearby PHC and another 36.80 per cent of them prefer to go to the district hospital run by the government, whereas 15.20 per cent of households prefer to CHC as their nearest medical facility. There are very few people who are economically sound prefer to go to private clinics and hospitals i.e. 2.40% and 3.20% respectively.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 88
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.18: Nearest formal medical facility
Sl PHC CHC Dist Pvt Pvt Others Total Village No Hospital Clinic Hospital 9 14 14 2 3 4 46 1 Bhasma (19.57) (30.43) (30.43) (4.35) (6.52) (8.70) (100.00) 3 3 10 1 0 0 17 2 Deuli (17.65) (17.65) (58.82) (5.88) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 16 1 5 0 1 1 24 3 Kaintara (66.67) (4.17) (20.83) (0.00) (4.17) (4.17) (100.00) 1 1 10 0 0 1 13 4 Kudabaga (7.69) (7.69) (76.92) (0.00) (0.00) (7.69) (100.00) 12 0 4 0 0 2 18 5 Kundukela (66.67) (0.00) (22.22) (0.00) (0.00) (11.11) (100.00) 3 0 3 0 0 1 7 6 Podbahal (42.86) (0.00) (42.86) (0.00) (0.00) (14.29) (100.00) 44 19 46 3 4 9 125 Total (35.20) (15.20) (36.80) (2.40) (3.20) (7.20) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.6.10. Preference of Chronic Disease’s Regular Treatment: When people perceive a disease is severe only 24.00 per cent among the affected households seek treatment immediately and regularly. Generally 76.00 per cent of the villagers give preference to traditional medicine. If the traditional medical system fails to cure the disease they seek for modern health care.
Table‐6.19: Households suffering from Chronic Disease requiring Regular Treatment
Sl Yes No Total Village No 10 36 46 1 Bhasma (21.74) (78.26) (100.00) 4 13 17 2 Deuli (23.53) (76.47) (100.00) 9 15 24 3 Kaintara (37.50) (62.50) (100.00) 4 9 13 4 Kudabaga (30.77) (69.23) (100.00) 0 18 18 5 Kundukela (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 3 4 7 6 Podbahal (42.86) (57.14) (100.00) 30 95 125 Total (24.00) (76.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 89
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.6.11. Death Cases:
There were only 3 (2.40%) among the affected families which reported death cases during last one year in the six surveyed villages. Table 6.20 given below shows that not a single death case was reported among the rest 122 (90.60%) families. This shows that mortality rate among the affected families of the six villages is very low. It is only 4.4 per thousand as compared to 8 plus mortality rate per 1000 at the all‐Odisha level.
Table‐6.20: Death Case reported by the Affected Families during Last Oe Year
Sl No Village Yes No Total 1 45 46 1 Bhasma (2.17) (97.83) (100.00) 0 17 17 2 Deuli (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 0 24 24 3 Kaintara (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 0 13 13 4 Kudabaga (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 2 16 18 5 Kundukela (11.11) (88.89) (100.00) 0 7 7 6 Podbahal (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 3 122 125 Total (2.40) (97.60) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.6.12. New Born child cases:
Table‐6.21 below indicates that there have been cases of 5 births among the affected families of six villages (Bhasma‐3, Deuli‐1 & Kaintara‐1) during last one year. The rest 120 (96.00%) families responded no birth during the household interview of the affected families. That means the average birth rate among the reproductive age group population between 14‐60 years (470 persons) of the 125 affected families is only 10.64 per 1000. This shows that the present living condition of the project affected families in the six villages of Sundargarh tahasil characterised by low birth and low death rates is much better than the general living condition of people in Odisha
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 90
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.21: Child born in family during last one year
Sl No Village Yes No Total 3 43 46 1 Bhasma (6.52) (93.48) (100.00) 1 16 17 2 Deuli (5.88) (94.12) (100.00) 1 23 24 3 Kaintara (4.17) (95.83) (100.00) 0 13 13 4 Kudabaga (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 0 18 18 5 Kundukela (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 0 7 7 6 Podbahal (0.00) (100.00) (100.00) 5 120 125 Total (4.00) (96.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.6.13. Immunization: It is found that in the affected 125 households of 6 villages there were only cases of 5 new born children during the last one year of SIA survey, and the immunization coverage of children is reported to be cent percent. It may be seen from Table 6.22 that not a single new born child is left out without vaccination. Table‐6.22: Immunization Status of New Born Children Sl No Village Yes No Total 3 0 3 1 Bhasma (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) 1 0 1 2 Deuli (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) 1 0 1 3 Kaintara (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) 0 0 0 4 Kudabaga (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 0 0 0 5 Kundukela (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 0 0 0 6 Podbahal (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 5 0 5 Total (100.00) (0.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 91
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.7. Income
Agriculture plays a key role in the overall economic and social well‐being of the project affected families. More than half of the workforce of the affected villages are engaged in farming or allied activities. Agricultural activities include cultivation of field and animal husbandry, cattle rearing, goatery, poultry, etc.
Household Level Annual Income When we look into the household level annual income of the affected families in Table 6.23, it is found that 22 households (17.6%) have income level of more than Rs. 5 lakh per annum. Most of the households (76.80%) in the affected villages at present earn more than Rs.60,000 per annum from their occupation. From the total 125 affected households only 29 households (23.80%) have reported their annual income below Rs.60000. This shows economic condition of the majority of households in the affected areas is fairly good and the households can sustain the adverse impact of land acquisition easily with the provisions of entitlements under the rehabilitation and resettlement policy. Only 23.80 per cent of the households earning below Rs.5000 per month or say Rs.60,000 per annum may be categorised as poor households living below the poverty line according latest poverty estimates of the Planning Commission, which was Rs.26 per capita per day in the year 2012‐ 13. So, during the year 2015‐16 a household earning less than Rs.5000 per month may be categorised as poor by assuming there is an average annual increase of 5 per cent in the price index or cost of living of people due to inflationary situation of the country’s economy.
Table‐6.23: Annual Income of the Household
Annual Income Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal Total (In Rs)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Up to 10000 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) 2 1 2 0 0 0 5 10000‐20000 (4.35) (5.88) (8.33) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (4.00)
0 1 0 0 0 1 2 20000‐30000 (0.00) (5.88) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (14.29) (1.60) 2 1 1 2 2 0 8 30000‐40000 (4.35) (5.88) (4.17) (15.38) (11.11) (0.00) (6.40) 4 2 2 2 4 0 14 40000‐60000 (8.70) (11.76) (8.33) (15.38) (22.22) (0.00) (11.20) 10 3 4 3 3 0 23 60000‐80000 (21.74) (17.65) (16.67) (23.08) (16.67) (0.00) (18.40)
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 92
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Annual Income Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal Total (In Rs) 6 0 3 1 3 2 15 80000‐100000 (13.04) (0.00) (12.50) (7.69) (16.67) (28.57) (12.00) 14 8 1 1 2 2 0 100000‐150000 (11.20) (17.39) (5.88) (4.17) (15.38) (11.11) (0.00)
2 0 4 0 0 1 7 150000‐200000 (4.35) (0.00) (16.67) (0.00) (0.00) (14.29) (5.60) 2 2 2 0 1 1 8 200000‐300000 (4.35) (11.76) (8.33) (0.00) (5.56) (14.29) (6.40) 2 2 1 1 0 1 7 300000‐500000 (4.35) (11.76) (4.17) (7.69) (0.00) (14.29) (5.60) 8 4 4 2 3 1 22 500000 & Above (17.39) (23.53) (16.67) (15.38) (16.67) (14.29) (17.60)
46 17 24 13 18 7 125 Total (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.7.1. Occupational Pattern
Table 6.24 shows the major source of occupation and secondary source of occupation of the persons of the affected families. In this table the women folk who constitute 259 persons are found engaged in multifarious activities and those are categorized as other occupations. Agriculture is indicated as the principal occupation of 126 PAPs (male‐114 + female‐12), in percentage term it is 18.75 in the case of males and 4.3 in the case of females respectively. Of the rest, 45 (6.70%) of PAPs are service holders (male‐38 (10.16%) and female ‐7 (2.35%)], whose main income is reported as salary. The next larger population of 42 [6.25%) individuals [male‐34 (9.09%) & female‐8 (2.68%)] constitute the category of daily wage labour who mostly remain engaged in non‐farm activities after agricultural activities. The agriculture labour work is adopted as the key occupation by 18 (2.68%) persons only. Among them the majority (11) are females (3.69%), as compared to their male counterparts of 7 (1.87%) only. Among the rest other working population, 8 (2.14%) of male individuals are identified as craft artisans and the remaining 4 (1.07%) males and 1 (0.34%) female have reported that they do petty business as their main occupation in the 6 affected villages.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 93
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.24: Main Occupation Main occupation Daily Village Agl. Craft Busine Total Cultivator Wage Salaried Others Labour Artisan ss Labour 46 3 10 10 3 1 62 135 Male (34.07) (2.22) (7.41) (7.41) (2.22) (0.74) (45.93) (100.00) 3 7 1 2 0 0 84 97 Bhasma Female (3.09) (7.22) (1.03) (2.06) (0.00) (0.00) (86.60) (100.00) 49 10 11 12 3 1 146 232 Total (21.12) (4.31) (4.74) (5.17) (1.29) (0.43) (62.93) (100.00) 25 0 0 9 0 0 26 60 Male (41.67) (0.00) (0.00) (15.00) (0.00) (0.00) (43.33) (100.00) 1 0 0 4 0 0 52 57 Deuli Female (1.75) (0.00) (0.00) (7.02) (0.00) (0.00) (91.23) (100.00) 26 0 0 13 0 0 78 117 Total (22.22) (0.00) (0.00) (11.11) (0.00) (0.00) (66.67) (100.00) 17 2 2 4 4 2 32 63 Male (26.98) (3.17) (3.17) (6.35) (6.35) (3.17) (50.79) (100.00) 4 1 0 0 0 1 42 48 Kaintara Female (8.33) (2.08) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (2.08) (87.50) (100.00) 21 3 2 4 4 3 74 111 Total (18.92) (2.70) (1.80) (3.60) (3.60) (2.70) (66.67) (100.00) 16 0 3 2 0 0 22 43 Male (37.21) (0.00) (6.98) (4.65) (0.00) (0.00) (51.16) (100.00) 2 0 1 0 0 0 28 31 Kudabaga Female (6.45) (0.00) (3.23) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (90.32) (100.00) 18 0 4 2 0 0 50 74 Total (24.32) (0.00) (5.41) (2.70) (0.00) (0.00) (67.57) (100.00) 5 2 19 9 1 1 19 56 Male (8.93) (3.57) (33.93) (16.07) (1.79) (1.79) (33.93) (100.00) 1 3 6 0 0 0 35 45 Kundukela Female (2.22) (6.67) (13.33) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (77.78) (100.00) 6 5 25 9 1 1 54 101 Total (5.94) (4.95) (24.75) (8.91) (0.99) (0.99) (53.47) (100.00) 5 0 0 4 0 0 8 17 Male (29.41) (0.00) (0.00) (23.53) (0.00) (0.00) (47.06) (100.00) 1 0 0 1 0 0 18 20 Podbahal Female (5.00) (0.00) (0.00) (5.00) (0.00) (0.00) (90.00) (100.00) 6 0 0 5 0 0 26 37 Total (16.22) (0.00) (0.00) (13.51) (0.00) (0.00) (70.27) (100.00) 114 7 34 38 8 4 169 374 Male (30.48) (1.87) (9.09) (10.16) (2.14) (1.07) (45.19) (100.00) 12 11 8 7 0 1 259 298 Total Female (4.03) (3.69) (2.68) (2.35) (0.00) (0.34) (86.91) (100.00) 126 18 42 45 8 5 428 672 Total (18.75) (2.68) (6.25) (6.70) (1.19) (0.74) (63.69) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 94
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.7.2. Household Assets
The SIA study attempted to analyse the key durable goods/assets owned by the PAFs across the 6 surveyed villages during the field visit. The basic assets are such as TV, Taperecorder, Radio, Refrigerator, Telephone and the like. The individual families expressed and shared their respective assets openly and it is recorded during the interview. Table‐6.25 shows that around 70.40 per cent of the affected families possess TV and they use it as their main source of entertainment at home. As tape recorder now‐a‐days is outdated and has become an old equipment of entertainment, not a single family now uses it as its main source of entertainment. However, about 3.20 per cent of the affected families are found to be still using radio as their main source of entertainment. About 36.80 per cent of families possess refrigerator and another 71.20 per cent of families are found to be using cell phone for day to day communication.
Also, the survey team gathered information on the other such assets like cycle, motor cycle, auto rickshaw, car, bus, cooking gas, utensils, gold ornament, etc. possessed by the affected families. Table‐6.26 below shows that 58.40 per cent of the affected families using bicycle, 55.20 per cent families possess motor cycle, whereas only 2.40 per cent families have auto rickshaw, which they use for for commercial purpose, 6.40 per cent families possess motor car and 44.80 per cent families possess gold ornament. Though basic utensil is obviously used by all the affected families, only 33.60 per cent families use cooking gas in the kitchen.
Table‐6.25: Durable Household Assets
Sl TV Tape Radio Refrigerator Telephone Total Village No Recorder Village 33 0 1 14 30 46 1 Bhasma (71.74) (0.00) (2.17) (30.43) (65.22) (100.00) 16 0 1 10 13 17 2 Deuli (94.12) (0.00) (5.88) (58.82) (76.47) (100.00) 16 0 1 9 20 24 3 Kaintara (66.67) (0.00) (4.17) (37.50) (83.33) (100.00) 9 0 0 4 10 13 4 Kudabaga (69.23) (0.00) (0.00) (30.77) (76.92) (100.00) 9 0 1 5 10 18 5 Kundukela (50.00) (0.00) (5.56) (27.78) (55.56) (100.00) 5 0 0 4 6 7 6 Podbahal (71.43) (0.00) (0.00) (57.14) (85.71) (100.00) 88 0 4 46 89 125 Total (70.40) (0.00) (3.20) (36.80) (71.20) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 95
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.26: Durable Household Assets
Sl Cycle Two Three Four Bus Cooking Utensils Ornament Other Total Village No Wheeler Wheeler Wheeler Gas Village 32 24 1 3 0 12 46 21 0 46 1 Bhasma (69.57) (52.17) (2.17) (6.52) (0.00) (26.09) (100.00) (45.65) (0.00) (100.00) 10 11 0 1 0 8 17 8 0 17 2 Deuli (58.82) (64.71) (0.00) (5.88) (0.00) (47.06) (100.00) (47.06) (0.00) (100.00) 12 14 0 3 0 13 24 14 0 24 3 Kaintara (50.00) (58.33) (0.00) (12.50) (0.00) (54.17) (100.00) (58.33) (0.00) (100.00) 5 8 0 0 0 2 13 5 0 13 4 Kudabaga (38.46) (61.54) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (15.38) (100.00) (38.46) (0.00) (100.00) 10 7 0 1 0 3 18 7 0 18 5 Kundukela (55.56) (38.89) (0.00) (5.56) (0.00) (16.67) (100.00) (38.89) (0.00) (100.00) 4 5 2 0 0 4 7 1 0 7 6 Podbahal (57.14) (71.43) (28.57) (0.00) (0.00) (57.14) (100.00) (14.29) (0.00) (100.00) 73 69 3 8 0 42 125 56 0 125 Total (58.40) (55.20) (2.40) (6.40) (0.00) (33.60) (100.00) (44.80) (0.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.7.3. Livestocks Among the affected families, 38.40 per cent families have cows and 3.20 families have kept buffaloes for milk production purpose. This helps them in meeting their household’s milk needs and also provide additional income. Livestock based livelihood such as goat rearing and poultry are considered as the secondary source of income by 11.20 per cent and 8.00 per cent of the affected families respectively. Sheep are reared by only one family at Podbahal village. Table‐6.27: Live Stock Assets Sl Cows Buffaloes Sheep Goats Poultry Others Total Village Village No 12 2 0 3 2 0 46 1 Bhasma (26.09) (4.35) (0.00) (6.52) (4.35) (0.00) (100.00) 14 1 0 3 1 0 17 2 Deuli (82.35) (5.88) (0.00) (17.65) (5.88) (0.00) (100.00) 8 1 0 1 0 0 24 3 Kaintara (33.33) (4.17) (0.00) (4.17) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 8 0 0 4 1 1 13 4 Kudabaga (61.54) (0.00) (0.00) (30.77) (7.69) (7.69) (100.00) 4 0 0 3 4 0 18 5 Kundukela (22.22) (0.00) (0.00) (16.67) (22.22) (0.00) (100.00) 2 0 1 0 2 0 7 6 Podbahal (28.57) (0.00) (14.29) (0.00) (28.57) (0.00) (100.00) 48 4 1 14 10 1 125 Total (38.40) (3.20) (0.80) (11.20) (8.00) (0.80) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 96
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.7.4. Loan The SIA team had conducted a comprehensive survey to assess the areas of cocern that may affect the living condition of the families in the post acquisition years of land for the water pipeline project of UMPP in Sundargarh district. The concerns include: the educational level of households; level of living as measured by consumer expenditure, income, productive assets and indebtedness; their farming practices and preferences; resource availability; awareness, access to technological developments, etc. The SIA study dealt with the indebtedness among land‐affected households according to source or purpose of loan. It was reported by the respondents of the affected families that more than half of the households engaged in farming and other activities are in debt with an average loan burden of Rs 50,000. Table‐6.28: Loan & Indebtedness Taken any loan Sl No Village Yes No Total 24 22 46 1 Bhasma (52.17) (47.83) (100.00) 9 8 17 2 Deuli (52.94) (47.06) (100.00) 16 8 24 3 Kaintara (66.67) (33.33) (100.00) 5 8 13 4 Kudabaga (38.46) (61.54) (100.00) 5 13 18 5 Kundukela (27.78) (72.22) (100.00) 2 5 7 6 Podbahal (28.57) (71.43) (100.00) 61 64 125 Total (48.80) (51.20) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.11: Village‐wise Loan Particulars of Affected Families (in%)
80 70 66.67 60 52.17 52.94 48.8 50 38.46 40 27.78 28.57 30 20 10 0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podabahal Total
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 97
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Table‐6.29 reveals that 44 HHs (72.13%) have availed loan from the banks and other institutional sources. Only one among the 61 indebted families has borrowed money from the money lender, three have taken loan from the SHGs and 13 have borrowed money from other sources like LIC and other private financial institutions.
Table‐6.29: Source of Loan
Sl Bank NGO Money Relative SHG Other Total Village No Lender 18 0 0 0 2 4 24 1 Bhasma (75.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (8.33) (16.67) (100.00) 7 0 0 0 0 2 9 2 Deuli (77.78) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (22.22) (100.00) 9 0 0 0 1 6 16 3 Kaintara (56.25) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (6.25) (37.50) (100.00) 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 Kudabaga (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 3 0 1 0 0 1 5 5 Kundukela (60.00) (0.00) (20.00) (0.00) (0.00) (20.00) (100.00) 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 Podbahal (100.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (100.00) 44 0 1 0 3 13 61 Total (72.13) (0.00) (1.64) (0.00) (4.92) (21.31) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.12: Percentage of Loan taken from different Sources by the Affected Families
120
100 100 100
77.78 80 75 72.13
60 60 56.25
37.5 40
22.22 20 20 21.31 20 16.67 8.33 6.25 4.92 00000 0000 0 0 1.64 0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podabahal Total
Bank Money Lender SHG Other Sources
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 98
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.7.5. Expenditure Pattern: The study analyses the pattern of consumption expenditure of project affected households to show the frequent changes in both food and non‐food consumption expenditure due to the changes in income and occupation of the people. Consumption expenditure is increasing due to increase in urbanization, breaking up of the traditional joint family system, desire for quality food, lack of time which translates into an increased need for convenience. To examine the impact, the actual distribution of monthly per capita income and other selected characteristics of different income classes have been taken.
6.7.5.1. Expenditure Pattern (Food) The survey conducted is significant in terms of understanding food habits and cost of living of the affected families. It is seen from Table 6.30 that the highest percentage (23.20%) of households spend below Rs. 1000 per month on food and the lowest percentage (1.60%) of them have reported their food consumption expenditure in the range of Rs. 8000 to 10000 per month and 8.80 per cent in the range Rs.10000 and above. Interestingly about 60 per cent of the affected families in village Bhasma spend below Rs.1000 per month on their food, whereas 28.57 per cent households in village Podbahal and 23.53 per cent households in village Deuli have reported their food related consumption expenditure is more than Rs.10000 per month.
Table‐6.30: Expenditure Pattern (Food)
Income (In Rs) Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal Total 27 1 0 0 1 0 29 Below 1000 (58.70) (5.88) (0.00) (0.00) (5.56) (0.00) (23.20) 5 0 4 3 6 1 19 1000‐2000 (10.87) (0.00) (16.67) (23.08) (33.33) (14.29) (15.20) 6 2 4 6 3 0 21 2000‐3000 (13.04) (11.76) (16.67) (46.15) (16.67) (0.00) (16.80) 3 4 8 1 3 1 20 3000‐4000 (6.52) (23.53) (33.33) (7.69) (16.67) (14.29) (16.00) 3 5 1 1 2 2 14 4000‐6000 (6.52) (29.41) (4.17) (7.69) (11.11) (28.57) (11.20) 1 1 4 2 0 1 9 6000‐8000 (2.17) (5.88) (16.67) (15.38) (0.00) (14.29) (7.20) 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 8000‐10000 (0.00) (0.00) (4.17) (0.00) (5.56) (0.00) (1.60) 1 4 2 0 2 2 11 10000 & Above (2.17) (23.53) (8.33) (0.00) (11.11) (28.57) (8.80) 46 17 24 13 18 7 125 Total (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 99
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.7.5.2. Expenditure Pattern (Non‐Food)
Besides the fooding expenditure, families also spend on number of other activities such as agriculture, clothing, health, education, transportation and communication, social functions, etc. These items are covered under the Non‐food category and details of expenditure incurred on non‐food items by the affected families of the six villages are shown Table‐6.31. In Non‐food category, the highest 36 per cent families are spending more than Rs. 10000, whereas only 2.4 per cent families are spending below Rs. 1000 per month. This shows that the expenditure pattern of the families is higher in non‐food category items and this has been increasing year after year as reported by the respondents due to the rapid change of the consumerist society and because of the impact of modernity. More so, our analysis the expenditure pattern of the affected families in the aforesaid six villages of Sundargarh tahasil reveals tha the families are having reasonably good living standard at present (for details see Table 6.31).
Table‐6.31: Expenditure Pattern (Non‐Food)
Income (In Rs) Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal Total 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 Below 1000 (6.52) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (2.40) 4 0 0 1 1 0 6 1000‐2000 (8.70) (0.00) (0.00) (7.69) (5.56) (0.00) (4.80) 3 1 3 1 5 0 13 2000‐3000 (6.52) (5.88) (12.50) (7.69) (27.78) (0.00) (10.40) 3 3 4 2 3 0 15 3000‐4000 (6.52) (17.65) (16.67) (15.38) (16.67) (0.00) (12.00) 6 4 1 1 7 1 20 4000‐6000 (13.04) (23.53) (4.17) (7.69) (38.89) (14.29) (16.00) 6 3 2 2 0 2 15 6000‐8000 (13.04) (17.65) (8.33) (15.38) (0.00) (28.57) (12.00) 4 0 0 3 0 1 8 8000‐10000 (8.70) (0.00) (0.00) (23.08) (0.00) (14.29) (6.40) 17 6 14 3 2 3 45 10000 & Above (36.96) (35.29) (58.33) (23.08) (11.11) (42.86) (36.00) 46 17 24 13 18 7 125 Total (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
6.8. Vulnerable groups:
The vulnerable groups are categorically identified as those families, which are BPL, headed by physically challenged and women headed households. Table 6.32 reveals that out of 125 affected families, total 10 families of Bhasma, Kudabaga, Kundukelea and Podbahal fall
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 100
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
under below the poverty line, in percentage it comes to 8 per cent in all the project affected villages. In Deuli and Kundukela none of the project affected families comes under BPL categories. Table 6.32 shows that out of 125 affected families, only 5 (4.00%) families are headed by physically challenged persons and there are 11 women headed households constituting 8.80 per cent amongst the 125 project‐affected families. Thus, 26 (20.80%) out of the 125 affected families in six villages may be categorized as vulnerable group of families and they are required to be given proper attention by the project authority to prevent impoversihment risk among them in the wake of acquisition of land for the water pipeline corridor of UMPP in Sundargarh district.
Table‐6.32: Vulnerability Status of Affected Families
Sl Village BPL Household headed by Households headed Total No Household Physical Challenged by Women 1 Bhasma 5 2 4 46 (11.00) (4.35) (8.70) (100) 2 Deuli 0 0 0 17 (0) (0.00) (0.00) (100) 3 Kaintara 1 2 6 24 (4.00) (8.33) (25.00) (100) 4 Kudabaga 3 0 1 13 (23.00) (0.00) (7.69) (100) 5 Kundukela 0 0 0 18 (0) (0.00) (0.00) (100) 6 Podbahal 1 1 0 7 (13.00) (14.29) (0.00) (100) Total 10 5 11 125 (8.00) (4.00) (8.80) (100) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.13: Percentage of Vulnerable Households in Affected Villages
30
25 25 23
20
14.29 15 13 11 8.7 8.8 10 8.33 7.69 8
4.35 5 4 4
0 0 0 000 00 0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kodabaga Kundukela Podbahal Total
BPL Household Household headed by Physical Challenged Households headed by Women
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 101
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.9. Women Income in the Affected Villages From Table 6.33 it is found that the average income level of women is lowest in Kundukela village with an average annual income of Rs. 5,911/‐ only, whereas the women in village podbahal have rep[orted highest average annual income of Rs.23,900/‐. Amongst the earning women in the affected villages highest 44.44 per cent women are working in Kundukela village and the lowest 8.33 per cent women are working in Deuli village. In Kundukela most of the working women are found engaged in low paid jobs. Table‐6.33: Income of the Women Sl. Village No. of Women No. of Annual Average No. (Above 18yrs) Earning Income Annual Income Women (In Rs.) 1 Bhasma 81 20 1300800 16059 (100) (24.69) 2 Deuli 36 3 462000 12833 (100) (8.33) 3 Kaintara 32 6 526800 16463 (100) (18.75) 4 Kudabaga 23 7 297600 12939 (100) (30.43) 5 Kundukela 27 12 159600 5911 (100) (44.44) 6 Podbahal 12 3 286800 23900 (100) (25.00) Total 211 51 3033600 88105 (100) (24.17) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Chart‐6.14: Village‐wise Average Annual Income of Women(in Rs.)
30000 23900 25000
20000 16059 16463 15000 12833 12939
10000 5911 5000
0 Bhasma Deuli Kaintara Kudabaga Kundukela Podbahal
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 102
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
6.9.1. Women participation at Community Level Women participation at different forum in the community and village indicates the progressive behaviour and contribution of the women in the decision making process. From the study it is clear that only 15.20 per cent women are involved in the decision making process and 4.80 per cent women are members in the Panchayat Raj Setups , 9.60 per cent are working as anganwadi workers, 10.40 per cent are members of the SHGs and only 13.60 per cent women are directly supporting their families through economic contribution from these activities.
Table‐6.34: Women Participation at Community Level
Women Women Women Women Women Total participate as a work as also a make direct Sl in decision member Anganwadi member economic Village No at of worker or of SHG contribution community panchayat ANM for family level 6 4 10 7 4 46 1 Bhasma (13.04) (8.70) (21.74) (15.22) (8.70) (100.00) 1 0 0 0 1 17 2 Deuli (5.88) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (5.88) (100.00) 7 1 0 2 5 24 3 Kaintara (29.17) (4.17) (0.00) (8.33) (20.83) (100.00) 0 0 2 2 0 13 4 Kudabaga (0.00) (0.00) (15.38) (15.38) (0.00) (100.00) 4 1 0 1 5 18 5 Kundukela (22.22) (5.56) (0.00) (5.56) (27.78) (100.00) 1 0 0 1 2 7 6 Podbahal (14.29) (0.00) (0.00) (14.29) (28.57) (100.00) 19 6 12 13 17 125 Total (15.20) (4.80) (9.60) (10.40) (13.60) (100.00) Source: Field Survey Figuress in parenthesis represents percentage to the total.
Our analysis of the affected families in the six villages through which the water pipeline of UMPP is to be laid out clearly reveals that there will be very negligible negative impact on the living condition of people if land is acquired from the aforesaid 125 families. This can easily be mitigated by providing fair cash compensation to the affected families for the loss of their agricultural land as well as a portion of the homestead land. However, the vulnerable families require special support from the project authority for improvement of their skill to switch over to modern non‐farm sector occupations for their sustainable and comfortable living. The overall economic and social condition of persons in the affected families is found to be reasonably good in majority of the cases. There is least threat to food insecurity, livelihood insecurity or increase in morbidity or social disarticulation and loss of social capital of people due to land acquisition for the water pipeline project of UMPP as none is going to be landless, homeless or jobless.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 103
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐7 Public Consultation and Participation
7.1. Background
Public consultation is important for collation of information regarding understanding on likely impact, determining community and individual choices, selecting project alternatives and designing sustainable mitigation and compensation plans. Extensive public consultation meetings for UMPPs water pipeline project took place while undertaking this SIA study. The main objective for the consultation process was to involve the community so as to identify all negative impacts and find ways to minimize negative impacts and enhance positive impacts of the project.
7.1.1. Objectives of the consultation
The overall goal of the focus group discussion process is to sharing about the project and incorporates the views of the project beneficiaries and affected persons in the design of the mitigation measures and management plan. The specific aims of the consultation process are the followings:
• Improve the project design and thereby minimize conflicts and delays in implementation; • Facilitate the development of the appropriate and acceptable entitlement options; • Increase long term project sustainability and ownership; • Reduce problems of institutional coordination; • Make resettlement process transparent; and • Increase the effectiveness and sustainability of income restoration strategies, and improve coping mechanism.
7.2. Public Consultations
Focus group discussions were held in all the six affected villages within the project area during the survey period with the help of respective local heads or representatives. A total of 8 meetings were held covering 2 groups of people, viz. Male and female participants within the age group of 18‐40 years and also people above 40 years age. Village‐wise summary of the conducted FGDs are provided below:
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 104
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Focused Group Discussion (FGD):
Village‐Bhasma
Bhasma is one of the affected revenue villages among the six affected villages of UMPP‐ Sundargarh in Sundargarh tahasil. The village is coming under the Bhasma Gram Panchayat. It is situated 25 km away from the Block Headquarters i.e. Sundargarh Sadar block. In Bhasma, there are 339 households comprising of 1332 people (Male‐707, Female‐625). Mainly SC, ST & OBC people are residing in this village. Among the 339 households, SC households is 113 (33,33%), ST households is 120 (35,40%) and the rest 106 (31.27%) households are OBC. There are 153 children (Male‐72, Female‐81) among the age group of 0‐6 yrs. Literacy rate of the village is 83.46 per cent. There are 481 people coming under labourer class who are working as daily wage labourer and agricultural labourer for their daily livelihood earnings. About 4per cent of the local youths/labourers seasonally migrate outside of the state for their daily livelihood earnings. The average landholding patterns of ST and SC households are within 1 Acre but the OBC households families have holding land in average of 5 acres or more. There is no such irrigation facility in the area but still the farmers grow paddy, wheat, pulses, maize, oilseeds, vegetables, etc. in their agricultural fields.
On 7th January‐2016, a Focused Group Discussion session was organized by the SIA team of IRDMS. The meeting was presided by one of the honourable person of the village Mr. Malay Choudhury. During the meeting villagers informed the SIA team that most of the land proposed to be acquired is owned by ST people of the village. As the land acquisition process is new for them, they are very much confused about the acquisition and compensation process. Then after the SIA team members clarify about the acquisition and compensation processes and rules and regulations regarding this. The villagers were agreed to give their land (as per Govt. notification) but they put some demands on Govt./ Project authority for the purpose. Details findings of the FGD and the demand of the villagers are summarized below:
¾ Rupees 3 crores cash compensation for per 1 acre of land. ¾ Employment in UMPP for the eligible persons of all the affected families even in the case of 1 decimal of land of any family is proposed for acquisition. (It must be done for all nuclear families as well as joint families who are to be affected by the project). ¾ Provide compensation for the total affected plot from which land is to be acquired.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 105
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
¾ Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural seasons or standing crops in the field. If done so, then provide extra compensation for the crop loss. ¾ Clear all the bounds of the agricultural fields (where pipeline is to be plainconstructed) and make it plain. ¾ Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes i.e. hospital, drinking water supply, construction of temple, pond, club house, irrigation facility for agricultural purpose, electrification in the village, etc. by the company after the functioning of the UMPP. ¾ Payment of extra compensation amount for the structures and trees (if available in the plot to be acquired). ¾ If any other plot adjacent to the acquired plot will directly/indirectly get affected during construction work or later, then pay compensation to the plot owner for the purpose.
Village‐Deuli
Deuli is one of the affected revenue villages among the six affected villages of UMPP‐ Sundargarh. The village consists of other two hamlets i.e. Dehuripada and Deulisahi also to be affected by this project. In Deuli, there are 484 households comprising 1787 people (Male‐882, Female‐905). Mainly SC, ST and OBC people are living in the village. The SC population is 221 (12.37%) comprising109 males and 112 Females and ST population is 980 (54.84%), out of which 479 are males and 501 are females. The rest others are OBCs mostly Agria by sub‐caste. There are 194 children (Male‐83, Female‐111) in the age group of 0‐6 years. Among these 194 children, 132 are studying in primary level and the rest 62 are going to preschool education centres i.e. Anganwadi. Literacy rate of the village is 68.39% in total, among them Male‐71.96% and Female‐56.68%. There are 904 people coming under labourer class who are working as daily wage labourer and agricultural labourer for their daily livelihood earnings. About 10 per cent of the local youths/labourers migrate out seasonally outside the state for their daily livelihood earnings. The average landholding size of ST and SC households is within 1 acre, but the OBC households i.e. Agria families have an average holding size of 3 acres or more. There is no such irrigation facility in the area, but
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 106
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
still the farmers grow paddy, wheat, pulses, maize, oilseeds, vegetables, etc. in their agricultural fields by drawing water from the nearby Ib River.
On 6th January‐2016, a Focused Group Discussion meeting was organized by the SIA team of IRDMS by involving people from both the hamlet villages i.e. Dehuripada and Deulisahi. The meeting was presided by one of the honourable person of the village Mr. Pradip Kumar Choudhury. During the meeting villagers informed the SIA team that as the land acquisition process is the new for them, they are in confusion about the acquisition and compensation process. Then after the SIA team members clarify about the acquisition and compensation processes and rules and regulations regarding acquisition, then after details discussion the villagers were agreed to give their land (as per Govt. notification). But they put some demands on Govt./Project authority for the purpose. They also proposed to take the support of their local youth club members during this land acquisition process. Details findings of the FGD and the demand of the villagers are summarized as follows: Rupees 2 crores cash compensation for 1 acre of land. Employment/Govt. jobs for the eligible persons of the affected families on priority basis. Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural season or standing crops in the field. If done so then provide extra compensation for the crop loss. Clear all the bounds of the agricultural fields and make it plain then measure the land for the compensation purpose. Construct Pond, Village mandap for community purpose and provide irrigation facility to the agricultural lands. Pay extra compensation amount for the structures and trees (if available in the plot to be acquired). If any other plot adjacent to acquired plot will directly/indirectly get affected during construction work or later, then pay compensation to the plot owner for the purpose. Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes for their village by the company after the functioning of the UMPP.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 107
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village‐Kundukela
The village Kundukela is a revenue village coming under the Kundukela Gram Panchayat of Sundargarh Sadar Block. Long ago this village was situated very close to the river bank and as a portion of the habitations was damaged by the change in course of River Ib, a resettlement plan was made by the District Collector to resettle the affected families in Deuli Revenue Mouza. So for this reason half of the Kundukela revenue village is coming under Deuli revenue Mouza at present.
In Kundukela, there are 257 households comprising of 2454 persons. Mainly SC, ST & OBCs are living in the village. As it is GP headquarters most of the institutions like Teachers Training Centre, Gram Panchayat Office, LAMPS, College, Hospital, Bank, Post Office, etc. are found in this village. In the field of literacy, the village also shows much higher figure i.e 83.29%. Among them female literacy level is 74.99% and male literacy rate is 82.81%. The villagers mainly depend on agriculture and daily wage work for their livelihood.
On dated 6th January‐2016, a Focused Group Discussion was organized by the SIA survey team at Kundukela village by involving local leaders, village heads, PRI members, Community level service providers like AWW, ANM, ASHA, male and female participants from the affected as well as non‐affected households of UMPP. During discussion it was found that the villagers were aware about the UMPP water pipeline corridor (60 ft. wide and 10 ft. deep) to be passing through their village. They also were aware about the details of household‐wise land to be acquired for the purpose. During discussion the villagers emphasized on the issue that some SC and ST families have enchroached some govt. land for their residential/agriculture purpose and they have been living in that area since a very long time. But now the pipeline corridor is to be passed through that area. So as the enchroacher families have no records, how can they get their compensation? They demand reallocation along with cash compensation for these families. Another 2 families’ houses shall be lost by the project i.e. the house of Belamati Samartha and Sumitra Samartha. Also the religious land and pond of Jhadeswar Mahadev Temple shall be affected severely by the project. So they demand special compensation from Govt./UMPP authority for the purpose.
As the land acquisition process is the new for the villagers, they are in confusion about the acquisition and compensation process. During the FGD, after the SIA team members clarify about the acquisition and compensation processes and rules, the villagers were agreed to
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 108
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
give their land (as per Govt. notification) but they put some demands on Govt./ Project authority for the purpose. Those are:
i. Rupees 2 crores cash compensation for 1 acre of land. ii. Employment/Govt. jobs for the eligible persons of the affected families on priority basis. iii. Cash compensation (as other affected people) and land in exchange of land for the family who have enchroached govt. land and residing there at present. iv. Clear all the bounds of the agricultural field and make it plain and then measure the land for the compensation purpose. v. Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural season or standing crops in the field. vi. Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes for their village by the company after running of the UMPP.
Village‐Kaintara
The village Kaintara is a revenue village coming under the Kundukela Gram Panchayat of Sundargarh Sadar block. In this village there are 142 households comprising 473 people. Among the total population, 224 are females and 249 are males. There are 46 children (23 male, 23 female) in the age group of 0‐6 Yrs. Mainly SCs, STs and OBCs are living in the village. Among the total households 80% are OBCs and the rest 20% are SCs and STs. Literacy rate of the village is 75.18%. Among them 67.15% are female and 82.30% are male literates. The villager mainly depends on agriculture and daily wage work for their family’s livelihood. The SC and ST community also depends on fishing from Ib River for their livelihood, which passes adjacent to the village. But the OBCs (Agria) solely depend on agriculture as they own maximum amount of the land. Also, it was revealed that around 20% people of this community were doing Govt./private jobs and living outside of the village. On dated 11th January‐2016, a Focused Group Discussion was organized by the SIA survey team at Kaintara village for discussion on the land acquisition for the proposed UMPP pipeline corridor by involving local leaders, village heads, PRI members, community level
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 109
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
service providers like AWW, ANM, ASHA, and male and female participants from the affected as well as non‐affected households of UMPP. During discussion in the meeting, it is emerged that the villagers are aware about the UMPP water pipeline corridor which is to pass through their village. They also know about the details of household‐wise land to be acquired for the purpose. During discussion the villagers emphasized on the issues that as their fertile irrigated agricultural land shall be acquired, it will pose a threat to their livelihood. Household level income will be decreased markedly and for which they will suffer from poverty. They also apprehend that the poverty, criminal activities, alcoholism may increase in the area due to influence of external negative factors, which will ruin their family level social bonding as well as village level culture.
As the land acquisition process is the new for the villagers, they are in confusion about the acquisition and compensation process. During the FGD, after the SIA team members clarified them about the land acquisition and compensation processes, rules and regulations the villagers got agreed to give their land (as per Govt. notification) but they put some demand on Govt./Project authority for the purpose. These are summarized as follows: 9 Provide rupees 3 crore cash compensation per 1 acre of land to be acquired by UMPP. 9 Employment in UMPP for the eligible persons of all the affected families with cash compensation for the land loss. 9 Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural seasons or standing crops in the field. 9 If the construction work will be done during cultivation season, then provide the compensation towards the crops along with the land compensation amount. 9 Provide compensation for the total affected plot from which land is to be acquired for UMPP. 9 Pay extra compensation amount for the structures and trees (if available in the plot to be acquired) 9 If any other plot adjacent to the acquired plot will directly/indirectly get affected during construction work or later, then pay compensation to the plot owner for the purpose. 9 Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes for their village.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 110
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village‐Kudabaga
Kudabaga is one of the affected revenue villages among the six affected villages of UMPP‐ Sundargarh. The village consists of other two hamlets i.e. Patrapalli and Dhatukdihi also to be affected by this project. In Kudabaga, there are 276 households comprising 998 people (Male‐542, Female‐456). Mainly SC, ST and OBCs are living in the village. The ST and SC population is 416 (41.68%, Male‐221, Female‐195) and 199 (19.94%, Male‐118, Female‐81) respectively. Literacy rate of the village is 69.70%. Among them male literacy rate is 75.10% and Female literacy rate is 63.26%. There are 97 children in the age group of 0‐6 years. These 97 children are going to two Anganwadis and three Primary Study Centres for their education and nutrition purpose. There are 142 youths in the village from which 45 persons are migrated to other states for their living. In outside states they remain engaged in various private jobs as well as some of them work in govt. sector in informal category jobs. The average landholding size of ST and SC households is within 1 acre, but the OBC households i.e. Agria families have holding size of average 5 acres or more. In the agricultural land of the village farmers mainly grow paddy, pulses, maize, oilseeds and vegetables.
There are three different Focused Group Discussion meetings were organized by the SIA team of IRDMS in the main village and two hamlets. During the meeting some villagers informed the SIA team that a new train line is to be constructed on the land proposed to be acquired for the UMPP. They also said, as the land acquisition process is new for them, they are in confusion about the acquisition and compensation process. During the FGD, after the SIA team members clarify about the acquisition and compensation processes and rules and regulations regarding, the villagers were agreed to give their land (as per Govt. notification). But they put some demands on Govt./Project authority for the purpose. Village/hamlet wise details of the FGD summary are given below: Kudabaga main village:
• Provide rupees 3 crore cash compensation per 1 acre of land to be acquired. • Employment/Govt. jobs for the eligible persons of all the affected families with cash compensation. • Clear all the bounds of the agricultural fields and make it plain and then measure the land for the compensation purpose.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 111
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
• Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural seasons or standing crops in the field. • If the construction work will be done during cultivation season, then provide the compensation towards the crops along with the land compensation amount. • Provide compensation for the total affected plot from which land is to be acquired. • Pay extra compensation amount for the structures and trees (if available in the plot to be acquired) • If any other plot adjacent to acquired plot will get affected during construction work or later, then pay compensation to the plot owner for the purpose. • If the company does not construct pipeline corridor after 3/4 years of land acquisition, then the acquired land is to be handed over to its previous owner. • Expenditure of 2% CSR amount from the company,s profit for various developmental work of the village. • Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes i.e. hospital, ambulance service, drinking water supply, construction of temple, development/renovation of village playground, bathing place in river bank, electrification in the village, etc. by the company after running of the UMPP. • Quarterly meeting with the villagers by the company authority for various developmental works in their village. • Before 4‐5 Yrs. a plot bearing Khata No.‐143/146 & 143/147 was acquired by the M/S. Kalinga Steel Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, which is to be affected by the UMPP pipeline ncorridor project. After acquisition till date M/S Kalinga Steels Pvt. Ltd. has not done any work on the plot, so this plot should be returned to its previous owner and the UMPP should pay the compensation amount to him.
Dhatukdihi (Hamlet village of Kudabaga): • Provide rupees 3 crore cash compensation per 1 acre of land to be acquired. • Employment/Govt. jobs for the eligible persons of all the affected families with cash compensation. • Clear all the bounds of the agricultural fields and make it plain and then measure the land for the compensation purpose. • Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural seasons or standing crops in the field. • If the construction work will be done during cultivation season, then provide the compensation towards the crops along with the land compensation amount.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 112
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
• Provide compensation for the total affected plot from which land is to be acquired. • Pay extra compensation amount for the structures and trees (if available in the plot to be acquired) • If any other plot adjacent to acquired plot will get affected during construction work or later, then pay compensation to the plot owner for the purpose. • Provide compensation to those households who are depending on the forests (which are to be acquired) for their livelihood. • Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes i.e. hospital, school, drinking water supply, construction of temple, pond (2 nos), club house, ambulance service, electrification in the village, etc. by the company after running of the UMPP. • Quarterly meeting with the villagers by the company authority for various developmental works in their village.
Patrapalli (Hamlet village of Kudabaga):
• Provide rupees 3 crore cash compensation per 1 acre of land to be acquired. • Employment/Govt. jobs for the eligible persons of all the affected families with cash compensation. • Clear all the bounds of the agricultural fields and make it plain and then measure the land for the compensation purpose. • Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural seasons or standing crops in the field. • If the construction work will be done during cultivation season, then provide the compensation towards the crops along with the land compensation amount. • Provide compensation for the total affected plot from which land is to be acquired. • Pay extra compensation amount for the structures and trees (if available in the plot to be acquired) • If any other plot adjacent to acquired plot will get affected during construction work or later, then pay compensation to the plot owner for the purpose. • Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes for their village.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 113
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village‐Podbahal
The village Podbahal is a revenue village under Sundargarh Sadar block of Sundargarh district. In Podbahal, there are 112 households comprising 454 people (Male‐236, Female‐ 218). Among the 112 households, there are 22 households of SCs (19.64%), 18 households of STs (16.07%), and 72 OBC households (64.29%) comprising mostly Agrias and Gouds. The OBC families are mainly dependent on agriculture as they have more land (in average 2‐3 acres per HH), but the SC & ST families depends on agriculture as well as on forest produces and daily wage labour work (in nearby sponze iron factory) for their daily livelihood. The STs & SCs have only 0.3 to 0.5 acre of agricultural land in average. So they depend on other earning sources for their daily livelihood. About 2% of the local youths were migrated to outside state for their livelihood earnings and working there in various private companies, brick kiln factories, etc. The village has a literacy rate of 68.82%,out of which the female literacy rate is 52.12% and Male literacy rate is 65.82%.
On dated 8th January‐2016, a Focused Group Discussion was organized by the SIA survey team of IRDMS at this village by involving local leaders, village heads, PRI members, AWW along with male and female participants from the affected as well as non‐affected households. During discussion it was found that the villagers were aware about the UMPP water pipeline corridor which is to be passing through their village. They also said that as per govt. notification, their village forests would be severely getting affected by the project. From that forest most of the HHs collects various minor forest produces for their daily livelihood. So they demand compensation to each of the HH depending on the forest for their daily livelihood.
As the land acquisition process is the new for the villagers, they are in confusion about the acquisition and compensation process. During the FGD, after the SIA team members clarify about the acquisition and compensation processes and rules, the villagers were agreed to give their land (as per Govt. notification) but they put their demands on Govt./Project authority for the purpose. These are summarized below.
¾ Rupees 2 crore cash compensation for 1 acre of land. ¾ Employment/Govt. jobs for the eligible persons of the affected families on priority basis. ¾ As village forest shall severely get affected by the said UMPP pipeline corridor, compensation should be paid to all the HHs of the village who are mainly depending on the nearby forest for their daily livelihood earnings. ¾ Pipeline construction work is not to be done during agricultural seasons or standing crops in the field.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 114
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
¾ Clear all the bounds of the agricultural fields and make it plain and then measure the land for the compensation purpose. ¾ Pay extra compensation amount for the structures and trees (if available in the plot to be acquired) ¾ Implementation of various social developmental schemes/programmes for their village by the company after running of the UMPP.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 115
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐8 Assessment of Social Impacts
8.1 Framework and Approach for Identifying the Impacts:
Based on the project details and the baseline environmental status, the aim is to predict/ forecast impacts of the activities and provide an estimate of the difference in environmental quality after the project is initiated. The Environmental Impact Assessment for quite a few disciplines is subjective in nature and cannot be quantified. Wherever possible, the impacts have been quantified. However, for intangible impacts, a qualitative assessment has been done. The basis for determining the change in future environmental quality is the current baseline data obtained from site survey. Impacts have been assessed for the Construction and Operation phases of the project and the effects on the environmental quality evaluated by comparing the results with the national standards where possible and background levels in other cases.
8.2. Description of impacts at various stages of the project cycle such as impacts on health and livelihoods and culture. For each type of impact, separate indication of whether it is a direct/indirect impact, differential impacts on different categories of affected families and where applicable cumulative impacts: 8.2.1. Impact on Water Environment a) Construction Phase Impact due to Effluents During construction phase, about 10,000 persons are likely to be employed. The total increase in population shall be around 20,000. A labour colony shall be constructed for providing accommodation to the labour and technical staff involved in construction activities. The facilities for meeting water requirement and sewage disposal and treatment shall be provided.
b) Operation Phase The following types of liquid wastes are expected in the project operation phase: ¾ Cooling water and boiler blow down ¾ Effluent from water treatment plant ¾ Sewage generation. ¾ Runoff from coal stack sites The water requirement for domestic use includes requirement for drinking, cleaning, etc. in the project area. The sewage generated from domestic sources in the proposed UMPP station shall be treated before disposal. The effluent generated from coal stack pile area containing high suspended solids and mildly acidic shall be treated before disposal.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 116
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
8.2.2. Impact on Noise Level (a) Construction phase The major sources of noise during construction phase are due to operation of various construction equipment. The increase in noise level at a distance of 1 km from the construction site will be only 1 dB (A). No adverse impacts are anticipated on noise levels in the construction phase of the proposed project. b) Operation phase The noise generated by various machineries is of a broad based variety with strong component in low frequency range. The increase in noise level at a distance of 500 mt from the site due to various rotating and moving equipment at power plant will be only 1 dB(A). There are no residential areas within 500 mt of proposed project site. Hence, no adverse impacts are anticipated on noise levels in the area due to operation of the proposed project.
8.2.3. Impact on Air Environment
(a) Construction phase The major pollutant in the construction phase is SPM being air‐borne due to various construction activities. The vehicular movement generates pollutants such as NOx, CO and HC. But, the vehicular pollution is not expected to lead to any major impacts. The fugitive emissions due to vehicular movement will be 8 to 12 kg/km travelled by the vehicle.
The short‐term increase in concentration has been predicted using Gaussian plume dispersion model. The maximum short‐term increase in SO2 is observed as 0.00119 μg/m3, which is at a distance of 200 m from the emission source. The maximum SPM concentration was 1.15 μg/m3 which is at a distance of 400 m from the emission source.
The incremental concentration is so low that it does not need any specific control measure. Thus, the operation of construction equipment is not expected to have any major impact on the ambient air quality as a result of the project.
b) Operation phase On the basis of process emission characteristics coal analysis and theoretical estimates from fuel being used in boilers or furnaces, the emission characteristics were calculated. The predicted incremental ground level concentration for PM10 was predicted in the range of 0.47 to 1.18 μg/m3; SO2 in the range of 17.64 to 44.19 μg/m3 and NOx levels in the range of 11.07 to 27.73 μg/m3.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 117
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
8.2.4. Impact on Ecology The direct impact of construction activity for any project is generally limited in the vicinity of the construction sites only. The construction sites include berthing, storage and infrastructure facilities. The total land requirement for this project is about 416.45 ha. About 24.29 acre (9.83ha) of forest land is proposed to be acquired for the project.
The forest land to be acquired has mainly plantations of trees and dense forest is not observed. No endemic, rare or threatened species are observed on the forest land to be acquired for the project. As a part of the project, greenbelt will be developed, which will improve the vegetal cover in the area. The critical concentration levels of SO2 and SPM are not likely to be attained in the vicinity of Sundargarh Ultra Mega Power Project as adequate control measures are proposed to mitigate pollution due to flue gas emissions.
8.2.5. Impact on Socio‐Economic Environment a) Construction phase Economic Impacts The construction of the proposed project would create a number of direct employment opportunities. However, indirect employment opportunities would also be generated which would provide great impetus to the economy of the local area. The construction and operation of the project will provide an impetus to the industrialization and urbanization in the area. Many of the agricultural lands or barren lands are likely to be put to non‐agricultural use. The power station would require lot of ancillary developments like shops, restaurant, workshops, etc. which will have a significant impact on the existing land use of the area. Besides, a variety of suppliers, traders, transporters, service providers, etc., are also likely to concentrate and likely to benefit immensely, as demand for almost all types of goods and services will increase significantly. The business community as a whole would be benefited. The locals would also avail these opportunities arising from the project and increase their income levels. Job opportunities will drastically improve in this area. At present most of the population sustains on agriculture and allied activities. There are no major industries or other avenues of occupation in the area. The project will open a large number of jobs to the local population during project construction phase.
8.2.6. Impact on Infrastructure Facilities
The facilities such as adequate water supply, sewage treatment, housing, health and education etc. shall be ensured beforehand and adequate measures shall be taken so that these infrastructure facilities do not pose problems during the construction phase.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 118
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
8.2.7. Impact Due to Immigrant Population and Labour Camps During construction phase about 10,000 labour and technical staff is likely to migrate into the area. The total increase in population shall be about 18,000. A labour camp or colony shall be developed for providing accommodation to the technical staff and labour population involved in construction activities. Facilities for potable water, sewage treatment facilities etc. shall be provided at the labour camp and at the construction site. The garbage comprising of waste materials, e.g. packaging, polythene or plastic materials are likely to be generated during project construction and operation phase at the power station shall be properly collected and disposed at designated sites.
8.3. Indicative list of impacts areas include: impacts on land, livelihoods and income, physical resources, private assets, public services and utilities, health, culture and social cohesion and gender based impacts:
Based on the land assessment, land records and field verification, the SIA provides an accurate estimate of the number of affected families and the number of displaced families among them. The SIA team enumerate all the affected families. A detailed assessment based on a thorough analysis of all relevant land records and data, field verification, review conducted. The assessment was determined on the aspects of (a) area of impact under the proposed project, including both land to be acquired and areas that will be affected by environmental, social or other impacts of the project;
8.3.1. Impact on Land Environment a) Construction Phase Impact due to land acquisition The preparatory activities like the use of existing of access roads, construction of storage sheds, staff quarters, etc. being spread over a large area would have no significant impact, except that as soon as the land is acquired, its use changes and the land ceases to be a productive unit. The land to be diverted for the proposed thermal power project is about 1,029 acres. To this an area of 10% is added as the edge effect, which brings the total area to about 460 ha, out of a total study area of about 31,416 ha. The area likely to be affected is around 1.5% of the study area. The power station would require lot of ancillary developments like shops, restaurant, workshops, etc.
The site preparation activities like clearing, stripping, levelling, construction of bunds, for protection from flooding and impounding of ash dump, altering slopes for transmission towers, earth filling and excavation for foundation, will result in loss of local plants and other biota and change of existing land use pattern. Only a small portion of the area is affected and no rare, endangered or threatened species is observed. Hence, no major impact is envisaged as a result of acquisition of land for the proposed Ultra Mega Power Project.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 119
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Livelihood. About 24.59 ha of private land is being acquired for water pipeline corridor under UMPP. Compensation levels need to be agreed through negotiated settlements and at rates several times higher than prevailing market prices. The project site is uninhabited. However, since there are economic activities affected by land acquisition and restricted access to public grazing land, the project is expected to have minimal livelihood impacts (Category B) that will be addressed through a livelihood restoration programme.
Social and Cultural Conflicts. To minimize conflicts between construction workers and local villagers, workers will be recruited mainly from adjacent villages to the extent possible, and necessary social infrastructure will be provided for them. Workers and professional personnel from outside will stay in temporary accommodation within the project area. The Project will create demand for construction workers totalling about 16,000 person‐years over the construction period of about five years. The Project will therefore create local employment opportunities and encourage small enterprises thereby augmenting existing household incomes.
8.4. Summary of Impacts The summary of impacts likely to accrue during project construction and operation phases is outlined in Tables 8.1 below.
Table‐8.1: Summary of Impacts likely to accrue during project operation phase of main plant
Aspect Impact Duration Reversibility Significance Land Acquisition of Long term Irreversible Significant impact, but Environment private Land compensation to be given as per the norms/ guidelines outlined in National Resettlement & Rehabilitation Act (2013) Change in land use Long term Irreversible Marginal impact, as Pattern the area likely to be affected is quite small Generation of solid Long term Irreversible Significant impact waste/ coal dust which is to be ash during coal and mitigated by ash handling and implementing
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 120
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Aspect Impact Duration Reversibility Significance other project appropriate related activities management measures. Water Impacts on water Long term Irreversible Significant impacts, Environment quality due to which are to be disposal of various managed by types of liquid appropriate wastes treatment of various types of effluents. The related effluents to be reused to the extent possible. Noise Noise generation Long term Irreversible Impacts on workers Environment due to operation of operating in high various noise, which is to be equipments / mitigated by adopting machineries in the appropriate thermal power management station measures Impacts on Long term Irreversible Impacts on workers workers operating operating in high in high noise areas noise, which is to be mitigated by adopting appropriate management measures Air Impacts on Long term Irreversible Emissions to be Environment ambient air quality controlled by due to stack gas commissioning ESP and providing stack of emissions adequate height. Ecology Impacts on Long term Irreversible Emissions to be vegetation due to controlled by commissioning ESP and SPM and SO2 providing stack of emissions adequate height. Impacts due to Long term Irreversible Compensation to be acquisition of 9.83 paid as per the norms ha of forest land outlined in Forest Conservation Act
(1980).
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 121
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Aspect Impact Duration Reversibility Significance Socioeconomic Impacts due to Long term Irreversible Significant impact, but Environment private land compensation to be acquisition given as per the norms/ guidelines outlined in National Policy for Resettlement & Rehabilitation (2007) Mushrooming of Long term Irreversible Significant positive allied activities in impact and around the project area
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 122
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Chapter‐9 Social Impact Management Plan (SIMP)
9.1. Background
In the preceding chapters of the report, a detailed discussion has been made on socio‐ economic profile of the area, the affected families and also the impacts along with perceptions and attitude of the people towards the proposed UMPP in Sundargarh district. Here a detailed Social Impact Management Plan (SIMP) has been outlined for mitigation of the adverse impacts on the local people and enhance the beneficial impacts of the project. From the analysis of the previous sections it can be derived that there is very less land acquisition for the water corridor of the UMPP. The quality of life of affected community needs to be strengthened so as to make them resilient enough to cope up after the loss of land and livelihood.
This approach will meet the requirement of guideline for sustainability issued for Central Public Sector Enterprises in 2014 (section 2.8). The guideline reinforces sustainability issues and advises the CPSEs to act in socially, economically and environmentally sustainable manner that is beneficial to both business and society.
It may be mentioned here that community is overall supportive to the present project and expect in their livelihood enhancement. Community perception is positive and aspires to live a better life. Perceptions both at individual and community level indicate a desire for an improved living condition and better livelihood opportunities. In addition to compensation and R&R entitlements, there is demand for better amenities and livelihoods opportunities.
Keeping all the above facts in view, the SIMP has been prepared with the following four basic objectives. 1. Reduce / Mitigate the adverse impacts, impoverishment risks. 2. Re‐capitalization of affected families. 3. Secure inclusive growth 4. Equitable development.
In the SIMP, a ten point strategy has been formulated, the details of which are presented below:
Social Impact Management Plan (SIMP)
Communication with Community
Land Acquisition and Compensation for acquired land
Income Restoration, Mitigation measures for Adverse Impacts
Infrastructure & Civic Amenities
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 123
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Social Interventions
Cultural Interventions
Environmental Interventions
Intervention for Vulnerable Groups
Interventions for Agricultural Labourers / Landless
Empowerment
9.2. Social Impact Management Plan 9.2.1. Communication with Community:
Majority of the affected community is unaware of the details of the project, its purpose and benefits to the local community and also about what are the new provisions, entitlements under new LA act, etc. As a result, there is spread of wrong and biased information and consequent resistance and demand of affected community for total displacement.
It was observed during FGD that many of the affected community are in a state of confusion about the future plans. To avoid this, first and foremost strategy suggested is to establish communication with affected community. For the purpose, a Social Management Team needs to be planned, whose job will be to be in constant touch with villagers at regular intervals and clearing all doubts, apprehensions and collect feedback from community. This will ease the entire process of land acquisition and also establishment of proposed project.
9.2.2. Land Acquisition and Compensation for Acquired Land
The present RFCTLARR Act, 2013 is a deviation from old LA At, 1894, as it ensures right of affected community to fair compensation and transparency at each and every stage of land acquisition process. Land acquisition is a job of District Administration and Government of Odisha and will be carried out in conformity with provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016 and notifications / guidelines issued by Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Odisha. A brief sketch of different steps of land acquisition and R&R under RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and Odisha RFCTLARR Rules 2016 is presented in subsequent pages.
However, some important issues linked to land acquisition and compensation, which was also raised by affected community during FGD and household interview are discussed in paragraph below.
Compensation Entitlements: Compensation is to be determined as per first schedule of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 that includes the following components.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 124
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Components of Remarks Compensation Market value of land This is to be determined as per the process described U/s 26 of RFCTLAR&R Act, 2013. The date of determination of market value shall be the date on which the notification has been issued u/s 11. Since the land is to be acquired in a rural area, this market value is to be multiplied by a factor on sliding scale as per R&DM Department, Government of Odisha notification no. LA(A)‐23/2014/9068 dated 19.03.2016. Value of trees and Keeping in view of demand of owners, valuation need to be made properly other assets as per guideline prescribed in section 23, Chapter III of Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016. Compensation Compensation towards damage need to be paid as per provisions u/s 28 towards Damage RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
Demurrage The compensation towards standing crops which may be on the land at the time of the Collector’s taking possession of land, need to be paid as per provision u/s 28 RFCTLARR Act, 2013. Solatium Solatium amount shall be in addition to the compensation and equivalent to one hundred percent of the compensation amount (u/s 30 RFCTLARR Act, 2013) Additional In addition to the market value of the land provided, the collector shall, in every case award an amount calculated at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on such market value for the period from SIA notification date u/s 4 till the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. (u/s 30(3) RFCTLARR Act, 2013)
Multiplier factor on sliding scale for assessment of land rate for compensation
(R&DM Department, Government of Odisha Notification No. LA(A)‐23/2014/9068 dated 19.03.2016)
Radial Distance from Urban area (in km) Multiplier factor From 0 km upto 10 km 1.00 More than 10 upto 20 1.20 More than 20 upto 30 1.40 More than 30 upto 40 1.80 More than 40 2.00
Compensation Entitlements for Livelihood Losers: In the present case, a total of 125 families have been enumerated, out of these few have very small landholding, which will be acquired by the project. In this situation these families needs livelihood support options. As per Rule 28(2) of Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016, the following compensation entitlements are available for these 13 families.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 125
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
• Agricultural labourer: a lump sum amount equivalent to the current minimum wages of two hundred days. • Leased Land Cultivation Holding Usufruct Right: A lump sum amount of rupees twenty five thousand per acre of the land they cultivate as tenant.
Rehabilitation entitlements: As per second schedule of RFCTLARR Act, 2013, each land loser family, whose livelihood is primarily dependent on acquired land are entitled to rehabilitation provisions. The rebahilitation entitlement is applicable to each of the core and extended family. To be more precise, each of the adult male and female and widows in the land loser family is treated as a separate family (extended family) as per section 3 (m) of RFCTLARR Act, 2013. In the present case, a total 125 families have been enumerated, who needs to be provided with rehabilitation entitlements limited to following two options.
Option A One time payment of five lakhs rupees per affected family Option B Annuity with minimum two thousand rupees per month per family for twenty years; with appropriate indexation to the Consumer Price Index for Agricultural Labourers.
It may be mentioned here that U/s 96 of RFCTLAR&R Act, 2013, all payments made in the present case to the affected families with regard to compensation and rehabilitation entitlements is free from income tax and stamp duty.
Special Provisions for SCs/STs: In addition to the Rehabilitation entitlements, each SC/ST families are entitled to the following two additional benefits in the present case.
• Payment of 1/3rd compensation initially as first instalment and the rest shall be paid after taking over of the possession of the land.
• Land for Land: As per the second schedule of RFCTLARR Act, 2013, each of the SC, ST families among land loser families will be provided land equivalent to land acquired or two and a one‐half acres whichever is lower. Since, the extent of land loss is very less, land need to be allotted preferably in the same village. Reasons are discussed below. A total 24.59 acres is required for the purpose. The above discussion on land for land entitlement is based on present assessment of SIA exercise and need to be finalized in consultation with affected SC/ST families during the time of actual land acquisition. Based on discussions made in this compensation entitlement and rehabilitation entitlement section, a provisional Entitlement Matrix for each of the affected family has been prepared, which is presented in Annexures. The final Entitlement Matrix will be prepared by Administrator, R&R as per rule 30 & 31, Chapter IV of Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016. R&R entitlements will be provided within a period of eighteen months from the date of the award.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 126
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Updating of land records, Restoration of titles and Settlement of rights: This is a key issue of the affected community and need to be addressed properly as per provisions in rule 4(2) and 5 of Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016. As per section 11(5), this exercise is to be conducted prior to notification u/s 19.
Public Consultation: Public consultation is one of the essences of new land acquisition act and need to be carried out properly so as to ensure transparency in the entire process. Three public hearings are required in the present case, as per the provisions of RFCTLARR Act, 2013, as detailed below.
Public Hearing on Draft SIA Report: This is to be conducted as per the process prescribed in rule 14 of Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016.
Public hearing on draft R and R Scheme: The Draft R&R scheme prepared b y Administrator, R&R as per provisions in rule 30, Chapter IV of Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016 shall be discussed in a public hearing in the affected village before final approval.
All proceedings in these public hearings are to be carried out in Odia language to ensure that the participants understand and express their views. Similarly, all documents are mandatorily to be made available in Odia language in the public domain and on the website for public scrutiny. All these exercises are to be carried out as per the prescribed procedure so as to ensure transparency and participation of one and all in the entire process.
Proper use of compensation amount: One of the key issues of any rehabilitation programme is proper spending of compensation amount for productive purposes. Past experiences in development projects indicate that in many cases affected families make unproductive expenses out of compensation and as a consequence impoverishment continues. Hence, it is suggested that the social Management Team should play an active role in motivating affected families to use the compensation for the productive purposes. The Social Management team should monitor activities of fraudulent chit fund companies, money circulation scheme and ensure that affected families don’t invest compensation amount in these fraudulent schemes.
9.2.3. Income Restoration, Mitigation Measures for Adverse Impacts The average extent of land loss for the proposed project is 24.59 acres, which will impact crop production, farm wage opportunities and family labour engagement pattern. To mitigate these adverse impacts it is planned to adopt improved agricultural practices with provision of irrigation for multiple cropping, inputs and mechanization for higher productivity. In addition, for unemployed youths, skill training and for women community income generation through SHGs have been planned. Following interventions has been planned to mitigate the adverse impact ‐ • Provision of irrigation for double cropping • Establishment of Agro Service Centre
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 127
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
• Training on improved agricultural practices • Promotion of fodder grasses • Formation of SHG and promotion of Income Generating Schemes • Provision of Modular employable skill training for unemployed youths • Priority in wage, sub‐contract opportunities to affected community
9.2.4. Infrastructure and Civic Amenities For decent living condition of the persons, amenities like safe drinking water, street lights, sanitation etc. are required and these are provided by Government under different development programmes. But there need to be interventions from project side to supplement the existing interventions by Government. Some of the amenities required by the community like street lights, community centre are beyond the scope of existing Government programmes. Keeping this in view, an attempt has been made in the present study to list out important community felt needs for infrastructure and amenities such as‐ • Installation of solar street lights • Infrastructure in village school • Provision of pipe water supply • Sensitization of community on use of toilets
9.2.5. Social Interventions As discussed earlier that adverse impact of proposed project on social and cultural life may be minimal. Only, apprehension is increase in alcohol use and deterioration of family culture and ethical values due to anticipated improvement in income and payment of compensation. Details of interventions suggested in this component are presented below. Measures to check spread of alcohol: It is planned to conduct monthly sensitization camps in the village to reduce the menace. It is also planned to tie up with District Police Administration for regular checking of drunken drivers at traffic points using breath analyzers. Similar intervention is also planned at construction site of the project. Following other interventions can be started for improving the social life in the affected villages: • Establishment of Community Library, which can cater to the needs of the villagers and provide Daily News Papers in Oriya and English language, competitive magazines for youths, etc. • Revival of Youth Club: Existing youth clubs can be renovated and revived with provisions of one building and supporting infrastructure like indoor games, dari, light, fan, tables, chairs etc. • Construction of New Community Centre: can be established as per the community needs and infrastructure support can be provided for be villages deficient in the amenities.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 128
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
9.2.6. Cultural Interventions In this component of SIMP, the following two interventions are suggested. Promoting dance / drama /cultural talents of the community: The community has good potential in the field of art, dance, drama, bhajan and kirtan. Similarly, village women have a good skill of wall painting depicting cultural art and traditions. Hence, it has been planned to sponsor cultural programmes and organize regular dance and art competition in the village. It is also planned to organize competition among women community on painting and up keep of walls of own house. This will give a good aesthetic look to the entire village.
Renovation of temples and religious structures: It has been planned to renovate the existing religious structures in the affected villages as per the discussion and needs of the villagers.
9.2.7. Environmental Interventions: As there will be least environmental impact from the proposed water corridor, it is proposed wherever required plantation activities will be taken up as per the need. Besides following interventions are proposed to improve the living environment in the villages: • Avenue plantation on the village roads • Plantation of fuel wood and NTFP producing trees in the vacant land in the village. • Distribution of seedlings of trees/fruit plants for plantation in homestead plots through SHGs. • Subsidized distribution of smokeless energy efficient chullah / Improved Cook Stoves (ICS) in the households. • Swachha Bharat Initiative: Monthly cleaning exercise of village streets, community places for sanitation and cleaning of village. Provision has to be made for supply for brooms, bleaching powder and T‐shirts to volunteers.
9.2.8. Intervention for Vulnerable Groups: In the affected community seven categories of vulnerable groups were identified during the present study – • Women • Children • Women Headed Household • Aged /Senior citizen • Disabled persons • Weaker sections (SC/ST OBC) • Out‐migrant population
Interventions for Women / Adolescent Girls:
• Promotion of education of girl child beyond middle class through awareness creation and regular monitoring. It may be mentioned here that education facility is available only up to middle class in the village. Sensitization of affected
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 129
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
families, mainly among weaker section, is required to send girl child to nearby schools for higher education.
• Preference to women in all income restoration programmes.
• Formation of new SHGs, its nurturing and promotion to start income generating scheme. It may be mentioned here that all SHGs formed earlier are defunct at present due to poor management. Hence, it is suggested that Social Management Team should regularly monitor and facilitate functioning of SHGs.
• Regular sensitization of women community on different development programmes / welfare schemes of government, immunization, maternal and child health and safe sanitation practices.
• Sensitization of adolescent girls on reproductive sexual health, safe sanitation practices.
Interventions for Children
• Supply of Test papers books of all Board Examinations to children of weaker sections. • Provision of coaching class/tuition facility for all Board Examinations to children of affected community. • Opening of game coaching facility in the village (Foot Ball, Hockey, Cricket, Judo, Karate,etc.) • Opening of one English Learning Centre to teach children above 10 years on communication and writing skill in English language. • Conducting of essay, debate, quiz and drawing competitions in village schools, promoting Annual Sports events and provisioning of playing materials. • Annual Prize to rank holders in class and Board examinations in the school. • Provision of Scholarship to poor and meritorious students for higher education. • Sponsoring exposure visit to other model schools in the district.
Intervention for Women Headed Household: Identified vulnerable women headed households in the affected community are entitled to receive compensation as well rehabilitation assistance of Rs. 5 lakhs. As the family is in a state of deprivation, preference should be given to the family in income generating schemes to be promoted by SHGs as detailed above.
Interventions for Aged / Senior citizen / Widows: • Free medical treatment facility in district area hospitals. • Opening of one Help Desk in the Social Management Unit to listen and act to the grievances.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 130
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
• Weekly meeting and discussion with aged / senior citizens / widows for confidence building and to prevent psychological depression. • Sensitization of family members to take care of aged/ senior citizens.
Interventions for Disabled Persons:
• Free medical treatment facility in district area hospitals. • Opening of one Disabled Help Desk in the Social Management Unit to listen and act to the grievances. • Weekly meeting and discussion for confidence building and to prevent psychological depression. • Sensitization of family members to take care of disabled.
Interventions for Weaker sections
For weaker sections, it is suggested to give preference in all income restoration schemes. Special provisions for SC/ST families as per RFCTLARR Act, 2013 are suggested. In addition to it, the following interventions are also suggested. • Regular monitoring to check school dropouts. • Preference in skill acquisition training/economic rehabilitation. • Awareness creation on health, education,sanitation,etc.
Interventions for out‐migrant population:
• Creation of employment opportunities for out migrating youths at the village level. • Opening of skill building centre in the vicinity to make local youths skilled in various tradesand occupations required by the UMPP and its ancillary units • Regular monitoring and intervention measure by the Social management Unit to check distress migration of young people in the affected villages.
9.2.9. Interventions for Agricultural labourers/landless Provision for compensation has been made for enumerated landless agricultural labourers, tenants holding usufruct rights as per norms under Odisha RFCTLARR Rules, 2016. In addition to it, these landless labourers are suggested to be given priority in wage work during construction work of the project. It is also suggested that women members of these landless families are included in income generation schemes promoted by SHGs. Such a measure will provide supplemental source of livelihood to these landless families.
9.2.10. Empowerment Empowerment of an individual or a community results in improvement of economic condition and ultimately better quality of life. All the suggested action plans, which were discussed in preceding sections under different social management plans, are part of empowerment component of a successful sustainable social development programme. In
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 131
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
this section, certain activity related to social security measures which is not covered in earlier sections has been covered. These include the following. • Cognizance to Right/Identity – Ownership of Adhar Cards, voter I‐cards, job cards, NFSA cards, caste certificates.
• Financial inclusion, insurance coverage, both life and accidental to all members of affected family.
• Empowerment of community on knowledge and attitude towards preventive and promotive aspects of health care, education and environment.
• Empowerment of community on knowledge about legal protections available on violation of human rights, safe and secured life.
• Cognizance to self esteem, self respect for a life with dignity, “Quality of Life” / Art of living.
• Empowerment of community on knowledge and skill to take advantage of the opportunities of industrialization of the project area.
9.3. Suggested Action Plan • Issue of Bio‐Metric ID Cards: Every affected family need to be issued a tamper proof Biometric ID Card. It needs to include a family dossier containing details of benefits received by individual families and progress made towards improving the quality of life can be tracked at regular intervals.
• Facilitating Cognizance to Rights / Identity: The Social Management Team need to extend facilitation services like collection, processing of application for adhaar UID enumeration, job cards, voter I‐Cards, NFSA cards etc., which the affected community many a time fail to do because of low education level and lack of time to pursue in different government offices.
• Financial Inclusion, Insurance Coverage: Though bank account is a must for disbursement of compensation, but the Social Management Team need to train illiterate and just literate affected families regarding safe use of ATM cards, bank accounts, etc. The Social Management Team need to facilitate enrolment of affected families under low cost accidental and life insurance schemes.
• Awareness Creation: The Social Management Team need to conduct regular legal awareness camps on human rights violation, prevention of domestic violence, RTI Act and extend required support services.
• Sensitization Camps: Sensitization camps, street plays need to be organized by Social Management Team on preventive aspects of health care and environment, RCH, HIV/AIDS and TB. Important days like Safe Motherhood Day, National Nutrition Day, World Anti Tobacco Day, etc. need to be celebrated every year to sensitize the community.
• Sensitization Camps in Collaboration with CBWE: As majority of affected community are wage earners in agricutural and non‐agricultural sector, collaboration with Central Board of
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 132
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Workers Education (CBWE) can be made for organising regular sensitization camps on “Quality of Life” /art of living.
9.4. Institutional Arrangement
Administrator, R&R have been appointed in each district to look after R&R interventions of the development projects. As per Revenue and Disaster Management Department notification RDM‐ RRC‐Policy‐0014‐2014/34160 dated 17.11.2014, Sub‐Collectors working in different districts have been assigned the duty of Administrator, R&R of all projects located within their area of jurisdiction.
In addition to the above, it has been planned to engage a Social Management Team for a period of minimum four years to implement this SIMP, and more as per the OIPL action plan. The Salary and contingency for the Social Management Team has been included in the SIMP budget. The staffing pattern of the team will be as detailed below.
While Administrator (R&R) will be responsible for preparation of R&R scheme and overall control and supervision of SIMP, actual implementation will be carried out by Social Management Team engaged by OIPL.
Proposed Staffing Pattern of Social Management Team
Designation Nos. Qualification Preference Salary Structure
Programme 1 MSW Minimum 10 years Rs. 30,000 Manager experience in per month implementing development programme at village level
Agriculture 1 B.Sc (Ag) Minimum 2 years Rs. 30,000 Expert experience in per month implementing development programme at village level
Office 1 B.Com, skilled in Minimum 5 years Rs. 12,000 Manager‐cum‐ computer experience in office per month Accountant operation, Tally management, preference package to local youths.
Community 3 Matriculation Local youths, one need to Rs. 8,000 per Organizers be a female month
Role and Responsibilities: Roles and responsibilities of concerned officers, agency is presented in table below.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 133
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Roles and Responsibilities of Officers / Agencies
Activity Officers / Agency Responsible SIA Study and preparation of Draft SIA Report SIA Conducting Agency: IRDMS, Bhubaneswar Nodal Officer: ADM, Sundargarh Coordinating Agency: NCDS, Bhubaneswar Public Hearing District Administration (LAO and the Administrator, R&R) Finalization of SIA Report IRDMS and NCDS Appraisal of SIA report by an Expert Group Expert Group formed by District Administration Updating of land records, Restoration of titles District Administration (Tahasildar and Sub‐ and Settlement of rights Registrar) Consultation with the Gram Sabha and obtaining District Administration (Tahasildar and LAO) consent Publication of Preliminary Notification by State R&DM Department, Government of Odisha. Government u/s 11. Preparation of Land Acquisition Award District Administration (LAO) Preparation of Draft R&R Scheme District Administration (Administrator, R&R) Public hearing on draft R&R scheme District Administration (Administrator, R&R) Finalization of R&R Scheme District Administration (Administrator, R&R) Publication of Declaration by State Government R&DM Department, Government of Odisha u/s 19 Passing of Land Acquisition Award and Payment District Administration (District Collector & LAO) of Compensation Pass of R&R Award and Payment of R&R District Administration (District Collector & Entitlements Administrator, R&R) Possession of land to be acquired U/s 38 District Administration (District Collector & LAO) Engagement of Social Management Team OIPL Implementation of SIMP Social Management Team and OIPL
9.5. Monitoring & Evaluation
There is provision in the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 for monitoring and review of the progress of implementation of the R&R Scheme and carry out post‐implementation social audit in consultation with Gram Sabha. In case of land acquisition of equal to or more than 100 acres for a project, there is requirement of formation of a Project Level Committee. In the present case, extent of land acquisition is only 24.59 acres; hence there is no possibility of formation of such a committee. Hence, it is suggested for internal monitoring by OIPL at fortnight interval and Administrator, R&R at monthly interval period. It is also suggested to conduct third party Social Audit after completion of 4 years implementation period.
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 134
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
9.6. Implementation Schedule An activity wise time plan / implementation schedule is presented in the table below. It has been planned to complete land acquisition and take possession of land within 2 years from submission of this draft SIA report. Social Impact Management Plan will be implemented during 4 years period. Activity Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 SIA Study & Public Hearing Appraisal of SIA report by an Expert Group Updating of land records, Restoration of titles and Settlement of rights Consultation with Gram Sabha and obtaining consent Publication of Preliminary Notification by State Government u/s 11 Preparation of Land Acquisition Award Preparation of Draft R&R Scheme Public hearing on draft R&R Scheme Finalization of R&R Scheme Publication of Declaration by State Government u/s 19 Pass of Land Land Acquisition Award and Payment of Compensation Pass of R&R Award and Payment of R&R Entitlements Possession of land to be acquired U/s 38 Engagement of Social Management Team Implementation of SIMP
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 135
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Annexure-1
NOTIFICATION
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 136
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 137
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 138
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Annexure-2 Land status of 6 affected villages
Sl. Village Affected Total Total Total affected land by the project No HHs Land affected owned plot Project Migrated Not Total Affected responded land 1 Bhasma 46 313.99 40.04 8.65 0.31 0 8.96 2 Deuli 17 74.88 22.25 3.39 0.65 1.9 5.94 3 Kaintara 24 269.94 21.31 2.93 0.81 0 3.74 4 Kudabaga 13 79.04 17.37 2.12 0 0.91 3.03 5 Kundukela 18 67.71 4.09 1.52 0 0 1.52 6 Podbahal 7 34.03 13.26 1.4 0 0 1.4 Total 125 839.59 118.32 20.01 1.77 2.81 24.59
Annexure-3 Homestead land
Sl.No Name of the HHs Name of the Total Khata No Total Total loosing homestead village amount of Project area land land owned Affected of the area plot 1 Bijaya mahananada Kundukela 0.04 132/39 0.04 0.04 2 Mani Majhi Kundukela 0.04 132/40 0.04 0.04 3 Rebati Mahananda Kundukela 0.04 132/41 0.04 0.04 4 Kartika Naik Kundukela 0.04 132/52 0.04 0.04 5 Sikandar Munda Kundukela 0.04 132/75 0.04 0.04 6 Pushu munda Kundukela 0.04 132/76 0.04 0.04 7 Pandia Munda Kundukela 0.04 132/77 0.04 0.04 8 Mangalu Munda Kundukela 0.04 132/78 0.04 0.04 9 Upasi Lahore Kundukela 0.04 132/79 0.04 0.04 10 Uttara Naik Kaintara 10.5 42 0.05 0.05 11 Kuldeep Naik Kaintara 4.57 42 0.05 0.05 12 Sibalal Munda Kudabaga 0.04 143/137 0.04 0.04 13 Ms. Kalinga Steel Kudabaga 0.73 143/146 0.15 0.15 14 Pvt.:Ltd. 0.1 143/147 0.04 0.1 Total 16.3 0.69 0.75
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 139
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Annexure-4 Entitlement Matrix Village: Bhasma
Area to Typ Educationa Total Area be e of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Age Total land Khata Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste l Qualifica- Plot no of the plot acquire lan No. Name Name with head (In Yrs.) owned no. loss loss tion* (In Acre) d (In d Acre) loss Pancha Rohidas Labani Rohidas Self SC Chamar 48 4 Labani Chamar, S/o- Ba. 1 Bhasma Pradip Rohidas Labani Rohidas Brother SC Chamar 1.17 106 233(P) 0.1 0.01 Agricultural 0.85 Bhajal Chamar Sa Bhakta Rohidas Labani Rohidas Brother SC Chamar Chintamani Mishra, Shantilata Mishra Banamali Mishra Self Gen Brahmin 75 2 Banamali Mishra, Ma. 2 Bhasma Brother-In- 4.2 30 229(P) 0.57 0.14 Agricultural 3.33 Makunda Mishra, S/o- Mukunda Mishra Debadhi Mishra Gen Brahmin Sa law Debadhi Mishra Anantaram Naik, S/o- Ahalya Patel W/o-Kishor Patel Self OBC Agria 65 5 Balamukunda Naik, Ramesh Ch. Naik Grandson OBC Agria 82/1472 Ba. 3 Bhasma 3.95 5 0.72 0.29 Agricultural 7.34 Banchhanidhi Naik, Pukhu Naik Grandson OBC Agria (P) Sa S/o-Harachand Naik Chandra Sekhar Naik Grandson OBC Agria Sarathi Chamar, Shovas Rohidas Hamir Rohidas SC Chamar 50 1 Ba. 4 Bhasma Saranga Chamar, S/o- Putul Rohidas Tularam Rohidas SC Chamar 46 2 3.04 117 234 0.06 0.06 Agricultural 1.97 Sa Manasudan Chamar Subash Rohidas SC Chamar 50 1 Ba. 82 1.76 0.91 Agricultural Sa Ba. 83 0.15 0.15 Agricultural Gangadhara Goud, Sa 5 Bhasma Dayanidhi Makar Gangadhar Gouda Self OBC Goud 70 1 4 18 27.75 S/o-Laba Goud 140 0.08 0.03 Adi Agricultural God 81 0.52 0.02 Agricultural a-2 Total 2.51 1.11
Anaitha Rohidas, S/o- 227/147 6 Bhasma Samvari Rohidas Aeintha Rohidas Self SC Chamar 90 1 3.5 133/11 0.25 0.18 Agricultural 5.14 Raidhara Rohidas 5
Ganda Rohidas Ahicharan Chamar Self SC Chamar 80 1 Ahicharan Chamar, Ba. 7 Bhasma 1.45 8 237(P) 0.37 0.09 Agricultural 6.21 S/o-Gansu Chamar Damayanti Rohidas SC Chamar Sa
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 140
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area to Typ Educationa Total Area be e of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Age Total land Khata Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste l Qualifica- Plot no of the plot acquire lan No. Name Name with head (In Yrs.) owned no. loss loss tion* (In Acre) d (In d Acre) loss Baladev Soren Ratia Soren Self ST Khadia 30 4 Kishore Soren Dhaniram Soreng Brother ST Khadia Bando Khadia, Sani Purna Chandra Soren Dhaniram Soreng Brother ST Khadia Khadia, S/o-Chamra Rabi Soren Brother ST Khadia Khadia, Panibudi Suresh Brother ST Khadia Khadia, Nidhala Ma. 8 Bhasma Bhuban Budunu Soreng Brother ST Khadia 40 1 4.61 67 158(P) 1.2 0.05 Agriculture 1.08 Khadia, Laxmi Khadia, Pani Budhi Khadia Samra Khadia Self ST Khadia 80 1 Sa S/o-Samra Khadia, Padmabati Khadia Sister-in law ST Khadia 45 2 Bhulki Khadia, W/o- Bisi Makar Nephew ST Khadia Samra Khadia sani Khadia Chamar Khadia ST Khadia 75 1 Bishikeshan ST Khadia Ma. 150(P) 0.35 0.2 Agriculture Sa Ba. 151(P) 0.04 0.04 Agriculture Sa Ba. Mitu Khadia, S/o-Bhulu 152(P) 0.2 0.13 Agriculture 9 Bhasma Kanhu Khadia Mitu Khadia Self ST Khadia 65 1 1.96 99 Sa 21.43 Khadia Ma. 153 0.04 0.04 Agriculture Sa Ba. 154(P) 0.08 0.01 Agriculture Sa Total 0.71 0.42 Hemalu Behera Chamar Behera Self OBC Sundhi 53 3 Chamara Behera, Sankar Behera Chamar Behera Brother OBC Sundhi 45 4 Raidhar Behera, Bansi Chandrasekhar Behera Chintamani Behera C.Brother OBC Sundhi 55 3 Behera, S/o-Tikunu Behera, Chhayabati Behera, W/o- Ba. 10 Bhasma Chintamani Behera, 9.17 29 401(P) 0.47 0.21 Agriculture 2.29 Sa Sukanti Behera, Koili Behera, Rajesh Behera Chintamani Behera C. Brother OBC Sundhi Chandrasekhar Behera, S/o- Chintamani Behera
11 Bhasma Nilabati Choudhury, Sundarmani Keshab chandra Self OBC Agria 76 6 29.47 50 367(P) 2.04 0.44 Be. Agriculture 1.49
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 141
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area to Typ Educationa Total Area be e of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Age Total land Khata Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste l Qualifica- Plot no of the plot acquire lan No. Name Name with head (In Yrs.) owned no. loss loss tion* (In Acre) d (In d Acre) loss W/o-Balaram Choudhury Choudhury Sa Choudhury Hemanta Naik Bidyadhar Naik Self OBC Agria 66 7 Rajkishore Naik Brother OBC Agria 64 5 Monaj Naik Brother OBC Agria 55 5 Tarun Naik Brother OBC Agria 43 6
Sarojini Naik Sister OBC Agria 62 4
Benudhara Be. 12 Bhasma Choudhury, S/o- Benudhar Choudhury Ramahari Choudhuri Self OBC Agria 8 7.47 104 365(P) 0.31 0.11 Agriculture 1.47 Sa Ramahari Choudhury Be. Satrughana Netramani Choudhury Keshab Chandra Self OBC Agria 63 5 364 1.5 0.26 Agriculture Choudhuri, Netramani Sa Choudhuri, Rajib Be. 13 Bhasma Satrughana Choudhury Keshab Chandra Brother OBC Agria 60 5 7.93 124/81 359 0.74 0.13 Agriculture 4.92 Choudhuri, S/o- Sa Keshab Chandra Rajib Choudhury Keshab Chandra Brother OBC Agria 58 4 Total 2.24 0.39 Choudhuri Saraswati Choudhury Keshab Chandra Sister OBC Agria 66 8 Purusottam Naik Rajendra Self SC Ganda 38 4 Jayanta Naik Rajendra Brother SC Ganda Bhola Naik, Rajendra Ba. 14 Bhasma Thomas Naik Bhola C.Brother SC Ganda 31 5 2.88 88 389(P) 2.1 0.39 Agriculture 13.54 Naik, S/o-Madri Kalo Sa Naresh Naik Brother SC Ganda Lokanath Naik Brother SC Ganda Indumati Choudhuri, W/o-Prasanta Kumar Choudhuri, Malaya Ma. 15 Bhasma Malaya Choudhury Durga Prasad Self OBC Agria 55 7 3.9 49 346(P) 4.85 0.55 Agriculture 14.10 Kumar Choudhuri, S/o- Sa Durga Prasad Choudhuri Braja Gouda, Dhani Be. Subash Gouda Nilambar Self OBC Goud 43 4 225 0.35 0.09 Agriculture Gouda, Dhaneswara Sa Gouda, S/o-Dugu Be. Bijayaram Gouda Dhani Gouda OBC Goud 65 1 355(P) 2.07 0.52 Agriculture Gouda, Nilambara Sa Gouda, S/o- Ba. 16 Bhasma Satyananda Gouda Braja Gouda OBC Goud 65 4 13.91 69 430(P) 0.95 0.12 Agriculture 5.25 Manadhara Gouda, Sa Bhanumati Gouda Madhab Gouda Dhaneswar OBC Goud 65 2 W/o-Manadhara Total 3.37 0.73 Gouda, Dibya Gouda, Kodanada Gouda Debanada Baisal OBC Goud 31 7 Debananda Gouda,
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 142
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area to Typ Educationa Total Area be e of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Age Total land Khata Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste l Qualifica- Plot no of the plot acquire lan No. Name Name with head (In Yrs.) owned no. loss loss tion* (In Acre) d (In d Acre) loss S/o-Parameswara Gouda, Sobhabati Gouda, W/o- Parameswara Gouda Dulari Ganda, D/o- 367/140 Be. 17 Bhasma Dulari Ganda Ghanashyam Ganda Self SC Ganda 49 2 1.94 48 0.79 0.07 Agriculture 3.61 Ghanashyam Ganda, 4 (P) Sa Tarinisen Patel Dasrathi Patel Self OBC Agria 56 5 Jaybihari Patel, Latika Patel Dasrathi Patel Sister OBC Agria Taranisen Patel, Dillip Mousumi Patel Dasrathi Patel Sister OBC Agria Be. 18 Bhasma Kumar Patel, Lalita 19.92 32 366 (P) 0.25 0.08 Agriculture 0.40 Sa Patel, Father- Dasarathi Patel Mamita Patel Dasrathi Patel Sister OBC Agria
Dhanu Rohidas, S/o- Ba. 19 Bhasma Dhanu Rohidasa Bhukhala Rohidasa Self SC Chamar 60 1 0.46 124/16 243(P) 0.17 0.02 Agriculture 4.35 Bhukhal Rohidas Sa
Mahendra Chaudhury Banamali Chaudhury Self OBC Agria 58 5 Harachanda Banamali Choudhury, Banamali Chaudhury Brother OBC Agria Chaudhury Be. 20 Bhasma S/o-Raghunath 7 68 368(P) 0.37 0.07 Agriculture 1.00 Bipin Bihari Chaudhury Banamali Chaudhury Brother OBC Agria Sa Choudhury Sushil Chandra Banamali Chaudhury Brother OBC Agria Chaudhury Be. 69 (P) 0.45 0.07 Agriculture Sa Indramani Sa, S/o- 21 Bhasma Arjun Sa Indramani Self OBC Bhunia 48 5 7.95 9 Be. 1.13 Sidhe Sa 55 0.08 0.02 Agriculture Sa Total 0.53 0.09 Ba. 429(P) 0.21 0.07 Agriculture Padmabati Mishra, Sa 22 Bhasma D/o-Monabodha Padmabati Mishra Manobadha Mishra Self Gen Brahmin 75 2 3.47 55 Ma. 3.46 230(P) 0.55 0.05 Agriculture Mishra Sa Total 0.76 0.12 Sripal Dharua, S/o- 152/139 Ba. 23 Bhasma Harichand Dharua Sreepal Dharua Self SC Ganda 55 5 8.81 121 0.18 0.12 Agriculture 1.36 Raidhar Dhurua 3(P) Sa Debarchan Patel Satyabadi Patel Self OBC Agria 65 3 Harihar Patel S/o- Ba. 24 Bhasma Prahallad Patel Uncle OBC Agria 9.3 124 238(P) 0.55 0.18 Agriculture 1.94 Banamali Patel Sa Minaketan Patel Uncle OBC Agria
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 143
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area to Typ Educationa Total Area be e of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Age Total land Khata Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste l Qualifica- Plot no of the plot acquire lan No. Name Name with head (In Yrs.) owned no. loss loss tion* (In Acre) d (In d Acre) loss Ma. Devkumar Patel kandarpa Patel OBC Agria 46 5 192 (P) 1.8 0.54 Agriculture Sa Ma. Dambarudhar Patel Parsuram Patel OBC Agria 52 5 202(P) 1.23 0.11 Agriculture Sa Duryadhan Patel, S/o- 25 Bhasma 4.66 43 Ma. 20.82 Krushna Patel Rajkumar Patel Kandarpa Patel OBC Agria 44 5 204(P) 1.35 0.22 Agriculture Sa Be. Prakash Patel Nrupamani Patel OBC Agria 40 4 205(P) 0.28 0.1 Agriculture Sa Total 4.66 0.97 Kumbendu Kumar Kumbendu ku patel Dileswar patel Self OBC Agria 60 12 Ma. 26 Bhasma Parel, Mokshya Kanta 5 33 207(P) 0.28 0.03 Agriculture 0.60 Mokshyakanta Patel Dileswar patel Brother OBC Agria 55 6 Sa Patel, S/o-Dileswar *Educational Qualification- Illiterate-1, Just Literate-2, Primary-3, Highschool-4, Matric Pass-5, Intermidiate-6, Graduation-7, Post Graduation-8, Tech. Degree-9, Diploma-10, I.T.I.-11, Professional Degree (M.B.A.)-12
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 144
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village: Deuli
Area to Total Educationa be Type of Sl. Father/ Husband Relation with Sub- Age Total land Khata Area of Nature of % of village Head/ RoR holder Name Entitled PAP Caste l Qualifica- Plot no acquire land No. Name head Caste (In Yrs.) owned no. the plot loss loss tion* d (In loss (In Acre) Acre)
Chhabila 50 278(P) 0.34 Be.Sa Agriculture 1 Deuli Chhabila Chaudhury Braja Chaudhury Self OBC Agria 70 1 5.51 0.03 0.54 Chaudhury 51 0.46 Bibhuti bhusana 569/ 2 Deuli Bibhuti bhusana Naik Gaoranga Naik Self OBC Agria 35 7 3.6 13 0.25 0.17 Ma.Sa Agriculture 4.72 Naik 871(P) 3 Deuli Dileswara Patel Dileswara Patel Chhabila Patel Self OBC Agria 68 4 8 19 219(P) 0.81 0.21 Ba.Sa Agriculture 2.63 Narendra 4 Deuli Narendra Chaudhury Rajib Chaudhury Self OBC Agria 38 5 1.96 72/25 272(P) 1 0.51 Ma.Sa Agriculture 26.02 Chaudhury
Ma.Sa, 5 Deuli Basanta Ku Patel Basanta Ku Patel Jadumani Patel Self OBC Agria 75 6 6.96 72/67 212, 213 1.13 0.71 Agriculture 10.20 Be. Sa 6 Deuli Abhimnyu Patel Abhimnyu Patel Jadumani Patel Self OBC Agria 5.94 72/66 213/1001 0.71 0.08 Be.Sa Agriculture 1.35
Madan Mohan Mukhybati Madana mohana 7 Deuli Choudhury, S/o-Kirtiram Self OBC Agria 85 1 11 130 1309(P) 0.74 0.15 Ba.Sa Agriculture 1.36 Chaudhury Chadhury Choudhury
Pradeep Madana mohana Self OBC Agria 42 5 Chaudhury Chadhury Kshetra Majhi, S/o-Krupa 8 Deuli 2 25 1543/2844 0.05 0.05 Be.Sa Agriculture 2.50 Majhi Sangram Pradeep Son OBC Agria 24 6 Chaudhury
Mayadhara Khanda, Uma Khanda Myadhara Khanda Self OBC Gouda 60 2 1552 0.46 0.03 Be.Sa Agriculture Gariba Khanda, S/o- Sundarmani Khanda, Laxmi Khanda, W/o- Sundaramani 9 Deuli Gobinda Khanda Brother-In law OBC Gouda 7.64 142 1553 0.88 0.5 Be.Sa Agriculture 7.85 Sundarmani, Indramani Khanda Khanda, S/o-Krushna Khanda, Chamara Sundaramani Gariba Khanda Brother-In law OBC Gouda 65 1 1554 1.18 0.07 Be.Sa Agriculture Khanda, Chhaladhara Khanda
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 145
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area to Total Educationa be Type of Sl. Father/ Husband Relation with Sub- Age Total land Khata Area of Nature of % of village Head/ RoR holder Name Entitled PAP Caste l Qualifica- Plot no acquire land No. Name head Caste (In Yrs.) owned no. the plot loss loss tion* d (In loss (In Acre) Acre) Khanda, Kamala Khanda S/o-Tikunu Khanda Sribastya Khanda Indramani Khanda Brother-In law OBC Gouda
Nakula Khanda Indramani Khanda Brother-In law OBC Gouda 60 2 Total 2.52 0.6 Shantilata Khanda Sister Inlaw OBC Gouda Chhanda dhara Tikun Khanda Father Inlaw OBC Gouda Khanda
Bhubana Gajadhara Self OBC Agria 53 2 Chaudhury Chaudhury Gangadhar Chaudhury, 10 Deuli 6.89 26 1545/2846 0.2 0.08 Ma.Sa Agriculture 1.16 S/o-Bharat Rukmuni Dillip Chaudhury Nephew OBC Agria 30 5 Chaudhury
Chhabila Chaudhury, S/o- Chhabila Let Baidyanath 100.0 11 Deuli Self OBC Agria 75 1 0.21 45 1528/2843 0.21 0.21 Ba.Sa Agriculture Baidyanath Chaudhury Chaudhury Chaudhury 0
Debarchana Patel, S/o- 12 Deuli Ganesh ram Patel Debarchan Patel Self OBC Agria 48 5 5.94 68 1331(P) 1.34 0.32 Ba.Sa Agriculture 5.39 Dasaratha Patel 1324 (P) 0.85 0.18 Ba.Sa Agriculture Binod Chandra Patel, S/o- Binod Chandra 202/18 13 Deuli Debarchan Patel Self OBC Agria 52 6 2.88 1332(P) 0.62 0.11 Ba.Sa Agriculture 10.07 Debarchan Patel Patel 7 Total 1.47 0.29 *Educational Qualification- Illiterate-1, Just Literate-2, Primary-3, Highschool-4, Matric Pass-5, Intermidiate-6, Graduation-7, Post Graduation-8, Tech. Degree-9, Diploma-10, I.T.I.-11, Professional Degree (M.B.A.)-12
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 146
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village: Kaintara
Area Total Age Educational Total to be Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Relation with Khata Area of Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste (In Qualifica- land Plot no acquir land No. Name Husband Name head no. the plot loss loss Yrs.) tion* owned ed (In loss (In Acre) Acre)
Bikram Nayak Nilamani Nayak Self OBC Agria 65 6 527(P) 0.2 0.13 Ma.Sa Agricultural Dubaraj Nayak Nilamani Nayak Brother OBC Agria 568(P) 0.22 0.01 Goda-1 Agricultural Nilamani Naik, S/o- 1 Kaintara Aswini Nayak Uncle OBC Agria 20.92 33 696(P) 0.23 0.02 Ma.Sa Agricultural 0.76 Keshaba Naik Bhumati Nayak Brother OBC Agria Total 0.65 0.16
Sradhakar Bag Indramani Bag Self SC Gonda 51 8 321(P) 0.96 0.31 Ma.Sa Agricultural
Sibanath Baag, S/o- Ramchandra 2 Kaintara Indramani Bag Brother SC Gonda 62 5 63.75 67 522(P) 0.4 0.02 Ma.Sa Agricultural 0.52 Bhikari Baag Baag Banamali Baag Indramani Bag Brother SC Gonda 60 4 Total 1.36 0.33
569(P) 0.25 0.09 Ma.Sa Agricultural Chitrasen Naik, S/o- 3 Kaintara Chitrasen Naik Chaitanya Naik Self OBC Agria 4.81 18 3.95 Chaitanya Naik 515/868(P) 0.66 0.1 Ma.Sa Agricultural Total 0.91 0.19
Sarada Patel Basanta Naik Self OBC Agria 48 8 564 0.09 0.09 Goda-1 Agricultural Arati Choudhury, W/o- Kunjabihari Choudhury, Arati Chaudhury Sister OBC Agria 570(P) 2.45 0.22 Ba.Sa Agricultural Bharati Patel, W/o- 4 Kaintara 7.95 40 5.16 Upendra Patel, Sarada Ranjita Niece OBC Agria 704/896 (P) 0.26 0.1 Be.Sa Agricultural Patel, W/o-Sunil Kumar Patel … … … … … Total 2.8 0.41
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 147
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area Total Age Educational Total to be Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Relation with Khata Area of Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste (In Qualifica- land Plot no acquir land No. Name Husband Name head no. the plot loss loss Yrs.) tion* owned ed (In loss (In Acre) Acre)
Durga charan Sadhab Self OBC Agria 65 7 220(P) 0.89 0.01 Be.Sa Agricultural Chaudhury Chaudhury
Rajib Choudhury, S/o- Narendra Sadhab 5 Kaintara Brother OBC Agria 2.45 72/61 273(P) 0.48 0.31 Be.Sa Agricultural 13.06 Sadhaba Choudhury Choudhury Chaudhury
Ekalabya Sadhab Brother OBC Agria Total 1.37 0.32 Choudhury Chaudhury Dalimba Chaudhuri, W/o-Rama Chaudhury, S/o-Kitiram Choudhuri, Bijeram Choudhuri, S/o-Narayana Choudhuri, Chhabila Manoranjan Choudhuri, S/o- Chaudhury (Wife- Madhaba Self OBC Agria 80 1 270(P) 0.33 0.09 Ma.Sa Agricultural Brajanath Choudhuri, Satasila Chaudhury Akbar Choudhuri, Hari Chaudhury) Choudhuri, S/o- Asharam Choudhuri, Prafulla Choudhuri, S/o-Harsh Choudhuri, 6 Kaintara Rushi Choudhuri, 4.1 51 3.17 Prahallad Choudhuri, Haraprasad Manoranjana Santosh Choudhuri, Son OBC Agria 46 6 271(P) 0.46 0.04 Ma.Sa Agricultural Chaudhury Chaudhury Sishu Choudhuri, S/o- Chhabila Choudhuri, Mini Choudhuri, S/o- Mukund Choudhuri, Sadashiba Choudhuri, Jagadish Choudhuri, Total 0.79 0.13 S/o-Baladeb Choudhuri, Saheb Choudhuri, S/o- Ramachandra Choudhuri
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 148
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area Total Age Educational Total to be Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Relation with Khata Area of Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste (In Qualifica- land Plot no acquir land No. Name Husband Name head no. the plot loss loss Yrs.) tion* owned ed (In loss (In Acre) Acre)
Digambara Jasabanti Naik Self OBC Agria Pande Chitrasen Naik, S/o- 7 Kaintara Duryadhana Naik Brother inlaw OBC Agria 5.96 17 563(P) 0.13 0.03 Goda-1 Agricultural 0.50 Lambodara Naik Suresh Naik Brother inlaw OBC Agria
Dushila Naik Abhimanyu Naik Self OBC Agria 520(P) 0.7 0.14 Ma.Sa Agricultural
Sriya Sister OBC Agria 523(P) 0.08 0.06 Ma.Sa Agricultural Abhimanyu Naik, S/o- 8 Kaintara 7.46 2 3.35 Lambodar Naik Koushalya Sister OBC Agria 563/870(P) 0.12 0.05 Goda-1 Agricultural Parbati Sister OBC Agria Total 0.9 0.25 Saroja Sister OBC Agria
Binod chandra Sobhakar Patel Self OBC Agria 553(P) 2.62 0.05 Be.Sa Agricultural Patel Bhagirathi Patel, Mohana Chandra Rangabati Patel, Bhagirathi Patel Uncle OBC Agria 75 3 554(P) 0.39 0.05 Ma.Sa Agricultural 9 Kaintara Patel 6.09 47 1.64 Tarabati Patel, Father- Bhuban Patel Bisweswar Patel Uncle OBC Agria Total 3.01 0.1 Chittaranjan Patel Brother OBC Agria Ratneswara Rohit Naik Self OBC Agria 39 4 Ratneswar Naik, Naik Pabitra Naik, Biranchi Ashok Naik Brother OBC Agria 10 Kaintara 24.09 58 573(P) 0.19 0.01 Goda-1 Agricultural 0.04 Naik, S/o- Dibyalochan Naik Radheswar Brother OBC Agria 48 4 Chandrasekhar Naik Gangadhar Naik Brother OBC Agria
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 149
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area Total Age Educational Total to be Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Relation with Khata Area of Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste (In Qualifica- land Plot no acquir land No. Name Husband Name head no. the plot loss loss Yrs.) tion* owned ed (In loss (In Acre) Acre)
Uttara Naik Self OBC Agria 43 5 Manidhara Naik, Chitrasen Naik, Gouranga Naik, S/o- Chaitanya chandra Kuldeep Naik Manidhara Naik Self OBC Agria Naik, Arati Choudhuri, Gharab 11 Kaintara 10.47 42 524(P) 0.1 0.1 Home stead 0.96 W/o-Kunjabihari ari Mohana Chandra Choudhuri, Bhari Patel, Bhagirathi patel Self OBC Agria 75 3 Patel W/o-Upendra Patel, Sarada Patel, W/o- Sunil Kumar Patel Bisweswar Patel Uncle OBC Agria
Binod chandra Uncle OBC Agria Patel Tarini Naik Sudarsan Naik Self OBC Agria 60 3 529(P) 0.09 0.02 Ma.Sa Agricultural Sudarshan Naik, S/o- 12 Kaintara Sushil Naik Brother OBC Agria 50 3 4.57 68 565(P) 0.07 0.07 Goda-1 Agricultural 1.97 Chandra Sekhar Total 0.16 0.09
Krutibas Patel, Umesh ch. Patel Indramani Patel Self OBC Agria 55 4 Indramani Patel, S/o- Shyam Sundar Patel, 13 Kaintara Santosh Patel Brother OBC Agria 0.98 7 308(P) 0.91 0.01 Ma.Sa Agricultural 1.02 Raysingh Patel, Dhanisingh Patel, S/o- Abhiram Patel Bholanath Patel Brother OBC Agria
528(P) 0.1 0.1 Ma.Sa Agricultural Dhaneswara Naik, 14 Kaintara Jogeswara Naik, S/o- Jogeswara Naik Purusottam Naik Self OBC Agria 70 3 5.44 30 567(P) 0.2 0.05 Goda-1 Agricultural 2.76 Purusottam Naik Total 0.3 0.15 Surendra Kumar Naik, 15 Kaintara Surendra ku Naik Nandaram Naik Self OBC Agria 43 12 1.36 72/70 526 (P) 0.26 0.15 Ma.Sa Agricultural 11.03 S/o-Nandaram
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 150
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area Total Age Educational Total to be Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Relation with Khata Area of Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste (In Qualifica- land Plot no acquir land No. Name Husband Name head no. the plot loss loss Yrs.) tion* owned ed (In loss (In Acre) Acre)
566(P) 0.09 0.01 Goda-1 Agricultural
Bishikeshan Naik, S/o- 572(P) 0.07 0.02 Goda-1 Agricultural 16 Kaintara Gunanidhi Naik Nandaram Naik Self OBC Agria 41 6 7 44 2.00 Chandrasekhar Naik 704(P) 0.31 0.11 Be.Sa Agricultural Total 0.47 0.14 Basanti Barik let Baghia Barik Self OBC Bhandari Shyamasundar Ghasia barik, Maghu Ghasia Barik Self OBC Bhandari 85 2 17 Kaintara Barik, S/o- Barik 0.71 70 219/920 0.71 0.24 Be.Sa Agricultural 33.80 Shyamsundar Barik Shyamasundar Maghu Barik Brother OBC Bhandari Barik *Educational Qualification- Illiterate-1, Just Literate-2, Primary-3, Highschool-4, Matric Pass-5, Intermidiate-6, Graduation-7, Post Graduation-8, Tech. Degree-9, Diploma-10, I.T.I.-11, Professional Degree (M.B.A.)-12
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 151
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village: Kudabaga
Area to Educational Total Total Area Type of Sl. Head/ RoR Father/ Husband Relation Sub- Age Khata be Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Qualifica- land Plot no of the plot land No. holder Name Name with head Caste (In Yrs.) no. acquired loss loss tion* owned (In Acre) loss (In Acre)
Ratnakar Naik Chintamani Naik Self OBC Agria 90 2 Ratnakara Naik, Radhashyam Naik Ratnakara Naik Son OBC Agria 51 5 1 Kudabaga S/o-Chintamani 5 117 1682/2060 1.85 0.19 Ma.Sa Agricultural 3.80 Naik Babulal Naik Ratnakara Naik Son OBC Agria Ghanashyam Naik Ratnakara Naik Son OBC Agria 23 5
Trinath Naik Karunakar Naik Self OBC Agria 45 4 1652(P) 3.22 0.17 Goda-1 Agricultural Karunakara Naik, Abhinna Naik Brother OBC Agria 42 1 1681(P) 2.25 0.24 Be.Sa Agricultural Ratnakara Naik, Purnachandra Total 5.47 0.41 Nishakara Naik, OBC Agria 65 1 2 Kudabaga Sobhakara Naik, Hemalata Naik Patel 5.41 18 7.58 S/o-Chintamani Sobhakar Naik Chintamani Naik OBC Agria 75 2 Naik, Sumitra Naik Ratnakar Naik Chintamani Naik OBC Agria 90 2
Bhupati Naik OBC Agria Bhanda Munda, Lalamani Munda, Paltu Munda Bagi Munda Self ST Munda 58 2 1676 (P) 0.37 0.06 Ma.Sa Agricultural Sunari Munda, Father-Ratha Munda, Kunja Munda, Bhola 3 Kudabaga Munda, Chaitanya Thia Munda Bagi Munda Self ST Munda 8.34 96 1677(P) 1.35 0.44 Be.Sa Agricultural 6.83 Munda, Suru Munda, Godan Munda, Kumara Munda, Father- Bhabani Munda Bagi Munda Self ST Munda 64 1 1679(P) 1.24 0.07 Ma.Sa Agricultural Nanda Munda, Saniyar Munda,
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 152
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Area to Educational Total Total Area Type of Sl. Head/ RoR Father/ Husband Relation Sub- Age Khata be Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Qualifica- land Plot no of the plot land No. holder Name Name with head Caste (In Yrs.) no. acquired loss loss tion* owned (In Acre) loss (In Acre)
W/o-Nanda Total 2.96 0.57 Munda, Panibudi Munda, Bagi Jagatram Munda Panibudhi Munda Self ST Munda Munda, Petu Munda, Father- Lodo Munda,
Tetengu Munda, Santosh Munda Petu Munda Self ST Munda 58 2 Father-Lega Munda Binod Munda Brother ST Munda Badhei Munda Brother ST Munda 1639 (P) 0.27 0.12 Ma.Sa Agricultural Ganesh Sa, S/o- Chandravanu Sa 4 Kudabaga Ganesh Sa Self SC Ganda 58 1 2.5 30 1640(P) 0.47 0.08 Ma.Sa Agricultural 8.00 Pandu (Wife-Surama Sa) Total 0.74 0.2 Nandalal Naik, Narayan Naik Nandalal Naik Self OBC Agria 49 6 5 Kudabaga S/o-Janardan 7 64 1623(P) 0.65 0.19 Goda-2 Agricultural 2.71 Naik Biranchi Naik Nandalal Naik Brother OBC Agria 40 5 Daimati Patel, 6 Kudabaga S/o-Gobardhan Aditya Patel Daimati Patel Self OBC Agria 51 5 15 132 1633 (P) 2.98 0.52 Ba.Sa Agricultural 3.47 Nayak
Shibalal Munda, Sibalal Munda let Kanda Munda Self ST Munda 38 5 Gharab 7 Kudabaga S/o-Kanda 0.04 143/137 1727/2064 0.04 0.04 Gharabari 100.00 Munda, Sushama ari Munda, W/o- Sushama Munda let Kanda Munda Sister ST Munda 27 4 Shiblal Munda Biranchi Naik, Biranchi Naik Nandalal Naik Self OBC Agria 40 5 1623/89 8 Kudabaga 7 0.9 0.095 1.36 S/o-Nandalal 9 Narayan Naik Nandalal Naik Brother OBC Agria 49 6 *Educational Qualification- Illiterate-1, Just Literate-2, Primary-3, Highschool-4, Matric Pass-5, Intermidiate-6, Graduation-7, Post Graduation-8, Tech. Degree-9, Diploma-10, I.T.I.-11, Professional Degree (M.B.A.)-12
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 153
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village: Kundukela
Total Area to Educational Total Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Sub- Age Khata Area of be Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Qualifica- land Plot no land No. Name Name with head Caste (In Yrs.) no. the plot acquired loss loss tion* owned loss (In Acre) (In Acre)
Suresh Chandra Upendra Patel Self OBC Agria 66 5 Patel Subash chandra Upendra Patel, S/o- Upendra Patel Brother OBC Agria 64 10 1 Kundukela Patel 5.58 10 472 1.08 0.4 Goda-2 Agricultural 7.17 Bhagirathi Patel Bhabani Shankar Upendra Patel Brother OBC Agria Patel
Tarakanta Patel Harchand Patel, S/o- Hara chanda Patel Self OBC Agria 60 4 2 Kundukela (Wife-Jena) 5 128 472/1762 1.28 0.48 Goda-2 Agricultural 9.60 Bharat Chandra Patel Birendra Patel Hara chanda Patel Brother OBC Agria 66 6
Bisikesana Kumura Sradhhakara Self SC Ganda Bisikeshan Kumura, S/o-Sradhhakara 3 Kundukela Kumura, Malabati Jagadish Kumura Bisikesana Kumura Son SC Ganda 8 81 319(P) 0.38 0.08 Ma.Sa Agricultural 1.00 Kumura, W/o- Sradhhakara Kumura Shisira Kumura Bisikesana Kumura Son SC Ganda
Ghanasyam Jashbant Kumura Self SC Ganda Kumura Ghanasyam Satyabadi Kumura, Harish Kumura Brother SC Ganda 4 Kundukela Kumura 15.63 112 320 0.25 0.05 Ma.Sa Agricultural 0.32 S/o-Basudeb Kumura Ghanasyam Sudhanshu Kumura Brother SC Ganda 48 3 Kumura Hrudananda Kumura Satyabadi Kumura Self SC Ganda 75 5 5 Kundukela Sumitra Samantha Sumitra Samantha Self SC Ganda 55 2 256 465 0.18 0.18 Jagannath Mahanandia, S/o- Jagannatha Subudhi Gharab Homestea 100.0 6 Kundukela Subudhhi Self SC Ganda 45 3 0.04 132/39 469/1830 0.04 0.04 Mahanandia Mahanandia ari d 0 Mahanandia, Rekha Mahanandia, W/o-
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 154
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Total Area to Educational Total Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Sub- Age Khata Area of be Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Qualifica- land Plot no land No. Name Name with head Caste (In Yrs.) no. the plot acquired loss loss tion* owned loss (In Acre) (In Acre)
Jagannath Mahanandia Rekha Mahanandia W/o-Jagannath Wife SC Ganda 40 2
Pushu Munda, S/o- Lipu Munda, Ledi Pushu Munda Lipu Munda Self ST Munda 45 1 Gharab Homestea 100.0 7 Kundukela 0.04 132/76 469/1873 0.04 0.04 Munda, W/o-Pushu ari d 0 Munda Ledi Munda Pushu Munda Wife ST Munda 40 1
Trilochan Lohar, S/o- Chintamani Lohar, Trilochan Lohar Chintamani Lohar Self ST Kandha Gharab Homestea 100.0 8 Kundukela 0.04 132/79 469/1876 0.04 0.04 Upasi Lohar, W/o- ari d 0 Trilochan Lohar Upasi Lohar Trilochan Lohar Wife ST Kandha 64 1
Rebati Mahananda, Rebati Mahananda Daulat Mahananda Self SC Ganda 35 6 S/o-Daulat Gharab Homestea 100.0 9 Mahananda, Sorajini 0.04 132/41 469/1832 0.04 0.04 ari d 0 Mahananda, W/o- Rebati Mahananda Sarojini Mahananda Rebati Mahananda Wife SC Ganda 31 4
Mangulu Munda, S/o- Mangulu Munda Etua Munda Self ST Munda 50 1 Etua Munda, Sumitra Gharab Homestea 100.0 10 Kundukela 0.04 132/78 469/1874 0.04 0.04 Munda, W/o- Mangulu ari d 0 Munda Sumitra Munda Mangulu Munda Wife ST Munda 45 3
Pandia Munda, S/o- Gharab Homestea 100.0 11 Kundukela Pandia Munda Lipu Munda Self ST Munda 53 1 0.04 132/77 469/1874 0.04 0.04 Lipu Munda, Gurubari ari d 0 Munda, W/o-Pandia
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 155
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Total Area to Educational Total Type of Sl. Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Sub- Age Khata Area of be Nature of % of village Entitled PAP Caste Qualifica- land Plot no land No. Name Name with head Caste (In Yrs.) no. the plot acquired loss loss tion* owned loss (In Acre) (In Acre)
Munda Gurubari Munda W/o-Pandia Munda Wife ST Munda
Sikandar Munda, S/o- Sikandar Munda Lipu Munda Self ST Munda 45 2 Lipu Munda, Gharab Homestea 100.0 12 Kundukela 0.04 132/75 469/1872 0.04 0.04 Rajkumari Munda, ari d 0 W/o-Sikandar Munda Rajkumari Munda Sikandar Munda Wife ST Munda 41 1
Kartika Naik Karunakara Naik Self SC Ganda 50 2 Kartika Naik, S/o- Gharab Homestea 100.0 13 Kundukela 0.04 132/52 469/1850 0.04 0.04 Karunakara Naik, ari d 0 Belamati Nayak, W/o- Belamati Nayak Kartika Naik Wife SC Ganda 45 1 Kartika Nayak
Mani Majhi Chhabila Majhi Self SC Majhia 35 2 Mani Majhi, S/o- Gharab Homestea 100.0 14 Kundukela 0.04 132/40 496/1831 0.04 0.04 Chhabila Majhi, ari d 0 Sulochana Majhi, Sulochana Majhi Mani Majhi Wife SC Majhia 30 1 W/o-Mani Majhi *Educational Qualification- Illiterate-1, Just Literate-2, Primary-3, Highschool-4, Matric Pass-5, Intermidiate-6, Graduation-7, Post Graduation-8, Tech. Degree-9, Diploma-10, I.T.I.-11, Professional Degree (M.B.A.)-12
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 156
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Village: Podbahal
Total Area to Educational Total Type of Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Age Khata Area of be Nature of % of Sl. No. village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste Qualifica- land Plot no land Name Name with head (In Yrs.) no. the plot acquired loss loss tion* owned loss (In Acre) (In Acre)
345(P) 0.37 0.22 Ma.Sa Agricultural Shantilata Patel, 1 Podbahal Shantilata Patel Satybadi Patel Self OBC Agria 62 4 11 13 2.73 W/o-Gadiraj Patel 346(P) 0.15 0.08 Ma.Sa Agricultural
Total 0.52 0.3
Natabara Patel Late Sansara Patel Self OBC Agria 349(P) 0.3 0.04 Ma.Sa Agricultural
Ekadashia Patel Late Ramsingh Patel Self OBC Agria 65 5 347 0.1 0.1 Goda-1 Agricultural Sansara Patel, Dhanisingh Patel, 2 Podbahal Basanta Patel Brother OBC Agria 10.03 14 350 0.23 0.05 Goda-1 Agricultural 5.68 Ramsingh Patel, S/o- Daya Patel Rupadhara Patel Brother OBC Agria 326(P) 1.26 0.38 Be.Sa Agricultural
Mugala Patel Brother OBC Agria Total 1.89 0.57
343(P) 0.37 0.08 Goda-1 Agricultural
Tilottama Patel, W/o- 3 Podbahal Tilottama Patel W/o-Natabara Patel Self OBC Agria 75 4 4.53 7 344(P) 1.52 0.01 Ma.Sa Agricultural 6.84 Natabara Patel 348(P) 0.64 0.22 Ma.Sa Agricultural
Total 2.53 0.31
Dasarathi Bagra, Tikenanada Bagra Dasarathi Bagara Self OBC Goud 53 6 7.5 22 313(P) 2.04 0.15 Be.Sa Agricultural 2.00 Manish Bagra, 4 Podbahal Somad Bagra, S/o- Sanu Bagra, Sagar Bagra Brother OBC Goud 2 29/6 312(P) 0.13 0.07 Ma.Sa Agricultural 3.50
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 157
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Total Area to Educational Total Type of Head/ RoR holder Father/ Husband Relation Age Khata Area of be Nature of % of Sl. No. village Entitled PAP Caste Sub-Caste Qualifica- land Plot no land Name Name with head (In Yrs.) no. the plot acquired loss loss tion* owned loss (In Acre) (In Acre)
Minaketan Bagra, Gokulananda Brother OBC Goud Chamaren Bagra, Bagra Dhanabati Bagra, Jaya kumar Nidrabati Bagra, Manisha Bagara Self OBC Goud 42 5 Father-Jibandhan Bagara Bagra Sumoda Bagara Sanu Bagara Self OBC Goud
Minaketana Jibanadhana Bagara Self OBC Goud 90 1 Bagara
Chamaren Bagra Jibanadhana Bagara Sister OBC Goud
Dhanabati Bagra Jibanadhana Bagara Sister OBC Goud
*Educational Qualification- Illiterate-1, Just Literate-2, Primary-3, Highschool-4, Matric Pass-5, Intermidiate-6, Graduation-7, Post Graduation-8, Tech. Degree-9, Diploma-10, I.T.I.-11, Professional Degree (M.B.A.)-12
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 158
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Annexure-5 MAPS
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 159
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 160
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 161
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 162
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 163
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 164
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 165
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 166
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 167
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 168
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 169
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Photographs of Survey Activities in Study Villages
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 170
Social Impact Assessment Water Pipeline Corridor, UMPP, Sundargarh
Photographs of Survey Activities in Study Villages
IRDMS, Bhubaneswar 171