Bergamo Harbinsons Energy Limited to set up 5 M W Solar –Hybrid Power Plant in Rajasthan
GL Mahajan
Bergamo Harbinsons Energy Limited to set up 5 M W Solar –Hybrid Power Plant in Rajasthan
19 Oct,HP: Bergamo Harbinsons Energy Limited (Indo –American joint venture) will set up its first five megawatt solar hybrid power project in Rajasthan in collaborations with Andri Urja Pvt Limited Delhi with total cost of 100 crore .The announcement was made by Sh Subhash Shishodia Chief Executive Officer Bergamo Harbinsons Energy Limited here today .
Sh Subhash Shishodia C.E.O Bergamo Harbinsons Energy Limited told that this is the first energy project of the company in India which has set up target to execute 600 MW six solar –hybrid plants in the country .He told that company has identified 30 acre land in Alwar district for setting up the plant ..He told that Bergamo Harbinsons Energy Limited will provide technical knowhow, latest technology ,total equipment qualified and expert manpower from the US to Andri Urja Pvt Limited to execute the project .
Sh Subhash Shishodia C.E.O Bergamo Harbinsons Energy Limited told that work on the project will be started in November 2010 and will be completed in ten month time .He said around 500 people of the area will be provide employement in the project through various means and added that electricity generated will be sold to the pvt distribution companies and govt agencies and added that negotiations with leading companies are in final stage . He told that Engineers India Limited (A govt of india enterprises) has shown its interest to act as EPC consultants to the project .
Andri urja pvt limited will pay 10% affront money of total cost of 21.5 million US dollars to Bergamo Harbinsons and rest money will be paid in installments till completion of the project
Sh Subhash Shishodia C.E.O told that a high level delegation of U S Energy multinational company Bergamo Acquisition Corporations under the chairmanship of Mr Hillard Herzog President and C E O will visit Indian by the November next to explore the possibilities of setting up energy projects in the country in collaborations with Indian companies.
Mr Hillard Herzog President and C E O Bergamo Acquisition Corporations was in the country recently and hold detailed discussions regarding transfer of latest technology and expertise in solar –hybrid energy sector to india with various state govts and the state govts and central energy agencies has shown keen interest in setting up such projects in Joint Ventures with the company and appreciated his efforts to enhance energy security of the country
Monday, 25 October 2010
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
SIKKIM: A hit outside Marwar
FROM THE TELEGRAPH
Gangtok, Sept. 13: After a successful week in Siliguri, Khoto Sikko, the first film in a language spoken by migrant Marwaris, is all set to be screened in Gangtok on September 21 and 23.
The Rs 22-lakh movie has been directed by Rakesh Somani and produced by his brother Rajesh Somani.
“This is the first film in the newly evolved Marwari language spoken by people who have migrated from Rajasthan over the years to all over the country and abroad. The language spoken by Marwaris living outside their traditional strongholds of Marwar in Rajasthan is totally different,” said Rakesh Somani.
Describing the the newly evolved dialect “migrated Marwari” or “common Marwari language”, the director said: “With the influence of different cultures and languages, particularly Hindi, a new face of Marwari language has emerged. The vocabulary and prosody is different when compared to the classical variants of the language spoken across Rajasthan. The differences are so marked that at times it becomes difficult for the migrated Marwaris to understand or relate to films made and released in Rajasthan. This is probably the reason why Marwari films do not do well outside the state. Khoto Sikko seeks to promote the versatile Marwari language and culture and prevent its gradual disappearance from the community.”
According him, the 2 hour 15 minute film is a family drama that revolves around the protagonist played by Rounak Somani. The movie has six songs.
Shooting for the film started in August last year.
“We completed the movie in January but we could not release it straightway as the distributors were unwilling to take risks on a film based on the new Marwari language for the first time,” said Rakesh.
In July, the film was screened for a week at a theatre in Siliguri. “We got good response during the 21 shows. Around 6,000 people watched and appreciated the movie,” he said.
After the screening in Gangtok on September 21 and 23, the film is scheduled to hit the theatres in Guwahati around mid-October.
“After Diwali we will screen the film in Jaipur and in Calcutta. Later we plan to show the movie in Delhi, Jodhpur and Ahmedabad as well,” Rajesh added.
The movie has been shot extensively in Sikkim. Editing was done in Gangtok while the final mixing was done in Mumbai.
“The main plot of the film is based on a popular Marwari proverb: Khoto sikko aur kapoot adi mahi kaam aawe (a useless coin and a spoilt brat are both useful in times of adversity),” said B.P. Bajgai, the assistant director.
“It is the first movie that has the potential of being a truly Marwari film in the present Indian context. We have already got good response from the community,” said Rakesh.
FROM THE TELEGRAPH
Gangtok, Sept. 13: After a successful week in Siliguri, Khoto Sikko, the first film in a language spoken by migrant Marwaris, is all set to be screened in Gangtok on September 21 and 23.
The Rs 22-lakh movie has been directed by Rakesh Somani and produced by his brother Rajesh Somani.
“This is the first film in the newly evolved Marwari language spoken by people who have migrated from Rajasthan over the years to all over the country and abroad. The language spoken by Marwaris living outside their traditional strongholds of Marwar in Rajasthan is totally different,” said Rakesh Somani.
Describing the the newly evolved dialect “migrated Marwari” or “common Marwari language”, the director said: “With the influence of different cultures and languages, particularly Hindi, a new face of Marwari language has emerged. The vocabulary and prosody is different when compared to the classical variants of the language spoken across Rajasthan. The differences are so marked that at times it becomes difficult for the migrated Marwaris to understand or relate to films made and released in Rajasthan. This is probably the reason why Marwari films do not do well outside the state. Khoto Sikko seeks to promote the versatile Marwari language and culture and prevent its gradual disappearance from the community.”
According him, the 2 hour 15 minute film is a family drama that revolves around the protagonist played by Rounak Somani. The movie has six songs.
Shooting for the film started in August last year.
“We completed the movie in January but we could not release it straightway as the distributors were unwilling to take risks on a film based on the new Marwari language for the first time,” said Rakesh.
In July, the film was screened for a week at a theatre in Siliguri. “We got good response during the 21 shows. Around 6,000 people watched and appreciated the movie,” he said.
After the screening in Gangtok on September 21 and 23, the film is scheduled to hit the theatres in Guwahati around mid-October.
“After Diwali we will screen the film in Jaipur and in Calcutta. Later we plan to show the movie in Delhi, Jodhpur and Ahmedabad as well,” Rajesh added.
The movie has been shot extensively in Sikkim. Editing was done in Gangtok while the final mixing was done in Mumbai.
“The main plot of the film is based on a popular Marwari proverb: Khoto sikko aur kapoot adi mahi kaam aawe (a useless coin and a spoilt brat are both useful in times of adversity),” said B.P. Bajgai, the assistant director.
“It is the first movie that has the potential of being a truly Marwari film in the present Indian context. We have already got good response from the community,” said Rakesh.
Saturday, 26 June 2010
Arbitration & Kishenganga project
by Ramaswamy R. Iyer
It should not be extremely difficult to arrive at a negotiated settlement on the reconciliation of the conflicting interests of the Kishenganga and Neelum-Jhelum projects, as also on the extent of agricultural use that needs to be provided for, and on the ‘ecological flows' that must be maintained.
The Kishenganga Hydroelectric Project in Jammu & Kashmir is proceeding towards arbitration under the Indus Treaty 1960. This article is an attempt to explain the issues involved for the information of the general public, without expressing any personal opinions on the issues that are going before a judicial body.
While water-sharing in the Indus system stands settled by the Indus Treaty 1960, divergences are possible, and have occurred, over the question of the compliance of Indian projects on the western rivers with certain stringent provisions of the Treaty which were meant to take care of Pakistan's concerns as a lower riparian.
The Treaty recognises three categories of such divergence: ‘questions' to be discussed and resolved at the level of the Indus Commission, or at the level of the two governments; ‘differences' (that is, unresolved ‘questions') to be referred to a Neutral Expert (NE) if they are of certain kinds (that is, broadly speaking, differences of a technical nature); and ‘disputes' (going beyond ‘differences,' and perhaps involving interpretations of the Treaty) that are referable to a Court of Arbitration. In the Kishenganga case, both ‘difference' and ‘dispute' come into play. Pakistan has proposed the reference of certain technical issues to a Neutral Expert, and the submission of a couple of other issues to a Court of Arbitrators.
The Kishenganga is a tributary of the Jhelum. It originates in J&K, crosses the Line of Control, runs for some 150 km in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, and joins the Jhelum (in PoK). India proposes to build a dam on the Kishenganga shortly before it crosses the LoC, divert a substantial part of the waters of the river through a tunnel to the hydroelectric project (330 MW, that is, 110 MW x 3) located near Bonar Nala, another tributary of the Jhelum, and then return the diverted waters, after they have passed through the turbines, to the Jhelum via the Wular Lake.
The ‘differences' to be referred to a Neutral Expert will be regarding the compliance of the project features with the conditions and restrictions laid down in the Treaty (design of the project, quantum of pondage, need for gated spillways, placement of the gates, etc.). This reference, which will be somewhat similar to the reference to the NE in the Baglihar case, will not be discussed further in this article.
The main ‘dispute' to be referred to a Court of Arbitration is on the issue of whether the diversion of waters from one tributary of Jhelum to another is permissible under the Treaty. Art. III (2) of the Treaty requires India to let flow all the western rivers to Pakistan and not permit any interference with those waters, and Art. IV (6) calls for the maintenance of natural channels. If we go by these provisions, the diversion of waters from one tributary to another seems questionable. On the other hand, there is another provision (Ann. D, paragraph 15 (iii)) which specifically envisages water released from a hydroelectric plant located on one tributary of the Jhelum being delivered to another tributary; this seems to permit inter-tributary diversion. The correct understanding of these provisions and the determination of the conformity of the Kishenganga Project to the Treaty is a matter for the two governments to agree upon, or for the Court of Arbitration to decide.
Any diversion of waters from a river is bound to reduce the flows downstream of the diversion point. It is true that the diverted waters will be returned to the Jhelum, but there will certainly be a reduction of flows in the stretch of the Kishenganga (some 150 km) before it joins the Jhelum. This will affect not merely certain uses of the waters but also the river regime itself and the ecological system. It may be true that only a small part of the waters (30 per cent or so) flows from the Indian part to the Pakistani part and that the rest (70 per cent) of the flows arise after the river crosses the LoC. However, the diversion of a substantial part of the former by India will undoubtedly have some impacts downstream.
Assuming that diversion from the Kishenganga to another tributary is found permissible, there is a condition attached: the existing agricultural use and use for hydro-electric power generation on the Kishenganga in Pakistan must be protected. There is indeed some existing agricultural use along the Kishenganga (Neelum) in PoK. Pakistan is also planning the Neelum-Jhelum hydroelectric project at a point on the Neelum before it joins the Jhelum. These claims of existing uses will probably be contentious issues between the two countries, with reference to (a) the crucial date for determining ‘existing use' and (b) the quantum of existing use.
Arbitration is action under the Treaty and is therefore not a matter for concern. In this case, the arbitration process has already been initiated. However, it seems to this writer that even at this stage an effort should be made to reach an agreed settlement on this project. The reasons for saying so are as follows:
First, arbitration by a court of seven arbitrators of the highest international standing will be a very expensive process; it may also take a long time — possibly several years.
Secondly, arbitration is essentially an adversarial process. Each side will try to make the strongest possible presentation of its own case, and question the other's. The media in both countries will keep reporting developments in the case, probably in a partisan manner. All this will definitely cause an accentuation of strained relations between the two countries.
Thirdly, the outcome of the process is uncertain. There are three possibilities: a clear negative finding (that is, the diversion of waters is impermissible under the Treaty), in which case the project will have to be abandoned; or a clear positive finding (that the diversion is permissible) in which case, the project can go ahead as planned; or a mixed finding that the diversion is permissible but must be such as to minimise adverse downstream impacts, in which case India may have to reduce the planned diversion and let a larger quantum of waters flow down. It would be very rash to predict the outcome of the process, but undertaking that rashness, the author would venture to suggest that a mixed finding seems more likely than a categorical one (positive or negative).
If that tentative forecast seems plausible, is it really necessary to go through a costly and time-consuming process of arbitration to arrive at that result? Is it not possible — and more sensible — for the two countries to try for an agreed settlement of the dispute even at this stage? It should not be extremely difficult to arrive at a satisfactory, negotiated settlement on the reconciliation of the conflicting interests of the Kishenganga and Neelum-Jhelum projects, as also on the extent of agricultural use that needs to be provided for, and on the ‘ecological flows' that must be maintained.
A second issue that Pakistan proposes to refer to the Court of Arbitration is the legitimacy of drawdown flushing of the reservoir for sediment-control. This is not specific to the Kishenganga project but is a general issue applicable to all future projects. In the case of Baglihar, the Neutral Expert had strongly recommended periodical drawdown flushing of the reservoir as a means of sediment control, which (in his view) was part of proper maintenance, and had observed that while the dead storage could not be used for operational purposes, there was no objection to its use for maintenance purposes. Pakistan has been unhappy with that recommendation, but could not challenge it as the NE's findings are final and binding. It is now raising this as a general issue before the Court of Arbitration. Three questions arise:
(i) Can an issue on which a NE has given a final and binding finding be raised again before another NE or a Court of Arbitration?
(ii) If the NE's finding is applicable only to the particular project in question and not to others, should we accept the position that there can be substantially different (even contradictory) principles (laid down by different NEs) applying to different projects?
(iii) If drawdown flushing is ruled out, then must the corollary of heavy siltation and reduction of project life (as in the case of Salal) be accepted as inevitable? If so, does this not amount to ignoring the words “consistent with sound and economical design and satisfactory construction and operation” and again “unless sediment control or other technical considerations necessitate this” in the Treaty?
These questions will no doubt be argued before the Court by the two countries.
Keywords: Kishenganga Project, Indus Water Treaty
by Ramaswamy R. Iyer
It should not be extremely difficult to arrive at a negotiated settlement on the reconciliation of the conflicting interests of the Kishenganga and Neelum-Jhelum projects, as also on the extent of agricultural use that needs to be provided for, and on the ‘ecological flows' that must be maintained.
The Kishenganga Hydroelectric Project in Jammu & Kashmir is proceeding towards arbitration under the Indus Treaty 1960. This article is an attempt to explain the issues involved for the information of the general public, without expressing any personal opinions on the issues that are going before a judicial body.
While water-sharing in the Indus system stands settled by the Indus Treaty 1960, divergences are possible, and have occurred, over the question of the compliance of Indian projects on the western rivers with certain stringent provisions of the Treaty which were meant to take care of Pakistan's concerns as a lower riparian.
The Treaty recognises three categories of such divergence: ‘questions' to be discussed and resolved at the level of the Indus Commission, or at the level of the two governments; ‘differences' (that is, unresolved ‘questions') to be referred to a Neutral Expert (NE) if they are of certain kinds (that is, broadly speaking, differences of a technical nature); and ‘disputes' (going beyond ‘differences,' and perhaps involving interpretations of the Treaty) that are referable to a Court of Arbitration. In the Kishenganga case, both ‘difference' and ‘dispute' come into play. Pakistan has proposed the reference of certain technical issues to a Neutral Expert, and the submission of a couple of other issues to a Court of Arbitrators.
The Kishenganga is a tributary of the Jhelum. It originates in J&K, crosses the Line of Control, runs for some 150 km in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, and joins the Jhelum (in PoK). India proposes to build a dam on the Kishenganga shortly before it crosses the LoC, divert a substantial part of the waters of the river through a tunnel to the hydroelectric project (330 MW, that is, 110 MW x 3) located near Bonar Nala, another tributary of the Jhelum, and then return the diverted waters, after they have passed through the turbines, to the Jhelum via the Wular Lake.
The ‘differences' to be referred to a Neutral Expert will be regarding the compliance of the project features with the conditions and restrictions laid down in the Treaty (design of the project, quantum of pondage, need for gated spillways, placement of the gates, etc.). This reference, which will be somewhat similar to the reference to the NE in the Baglihar case, will not be discussed further in this article.
The main ‘dispute' to be referred to a Court of Arbitration is on the issue of whether the diversion of waters from one tributary of Jhelum to another is permissible under the Treaty. Art. III (2) of the Treaty requires India to let flow all the western rivers to Pakistan and not permit any interference with those waters, and Art. IV (6) calls for the maintenance of natural channels. If we go by these provisions, the diversion of waters from one tributary to another seems questionable. On the other hand, there is another provision (Ann. D, paragraph 15 (iii)) which specifically envisages water released from a hydroelectric plant located on one tributary of the Jhelum being delivered to another tributary; this seems to permit inter-tributary diversion. The correct understanding of these provisions and the determination of the conformity of the Kishenganga Project to the Treaty is a matter for the two governments to agree upon, or for the Court of Arbitration to decide.
Any diversion of waters from a river is bound to reduce the flows downstream of the diversion point. It is true that the diverted waters will be returned to the Jhelum, but there will certainly be a reduction of flows in the stretch of the Kishenganga (some 150 km) before it joins the Jhelum. This will affect not merely certain uses of the waters but also the river regime itself and the ecological system. It may be true that only a small part of the waters (30 per cent or so) flows from the Indian part to the Pakistani part and that the rest (70 per cent) of the flows arise after the river crosses the LoC. However, the diversion of a substantial part of the former by India will undoubtedly have some impacts downstream.
Assuming that diversion from the Kishenganga to another tributary is found permissible, there is a condition attached: the existing agricultural use and use for hydro-electric power generation on the Kishenganga in Pakistan must be protected. There is indeed some existing agricultural use along the Kishenganga (Neelum) in PoK. Pakistan is also planning the Neelum-Jhelum hydroelectric project at a point on the Neelum before it joins the Jhelum. These claims of existing uses will probably be contentious issues between the two countries, with reference to (a) the crucial date for determining ‘existing use' and (b) the quantum of existing use.
Arbitration is action under the Treaty and is therefore not a matter for concern. In this case, the arbitration process has already been initiated. However, it seems to this writer that even at this stage an effort should be made to reach an agreed settlement on this project. The reasons for saying so are as follows:
First, arbitration by a court of seven arbitrators of the highest international standing will be a very expensive process; it may also take a long time — possibly several years.
Secondly, arbitration is essentially an adversarial process. Each side will try to make the strongest possible presentation of its own case, and question the other's. The media in both countries will keep reporting developments in the case, probably in a partisan manner. All this will definitely cause an accentuation of strained relations between the two countries.
Thirdly, the outcome of the process is uncertain. There are three possibilities: a clear negative finding (that is, the diversion of waters is impermissible under the Treaty), in which case the project will have to be abandoned; or a clear positive finding (that the diversion is permissible) in which case, the project can go ahead as planned; or a mixed finding that the diversion is permissible but must be such as to minimise adverse downstream impacts, in which case India may have to reduce the planned diversion and let a larger quantum of waters flow down. It would be very rash to predict the outcome of the process, but undertaking that rashness, the author would venture to suggest that a mixed finding seems more likely than a categorical one (positive or negative).
If that tentative forecast seems plausible, is it really necessary to go through a costly and time-consuming process of arbitration to arrive at that result? Is it not possible — and more sensible — for the two countries to try for an agreed settlement of the dispute even at this stage? It should not be extremely difficult to arrive at a satisfactory, negotiated settlement on the reconciliation of the conflicting interests of the Kishenganga and Neelum-Jhelum projects, as also on the extent of agricultural use that needs to be provided for, and on the ‘ecological flows' that must be maintained.
A second issue that Pakistan proposes to refer to the Court of Arbitration is the legitimacy of drawdown flushing of the reservoir for sediment-control. This is not specific to the Kishenganga project but is a general issue applicable to all future projects. In the case of Baglihar, the Neutral Expert had strongly recommended periodical drawdown flushing of the reservoir as a means of sediment control, which (in his view) was part of proper maintenance, and had observed that while the dead storage could not be used for operational purposes, there was no objection to its use for maintenance purposes. Pakistan has been unhappy with that recommendation, but could not challenge it as the NE's findings are final and binding. It is now raising this as a general issue before the Court of Arbitration. Three questions arise:
(i) Can an issue on which a NE has given a final and binding finding be raised again before another NE or a Court of Arbitration?
(ii) If the NE's finding is applicable only to the particular project in question and not to others, should we accept the position that there can be substantially different (even contradictory) principles (laid down by different NEs) applying to different projects?
(iii) If drawdown flushing is ruled out, then must the corollary of heavy siltation and reduction of project life (as in the case of Salal) be accepted as inevitable? If so, does this not amount to ignoring the words “consistent with sound and economical design and satisfactory construction and operation” and again “unless sediment control or other technical considerations necessitate this” in the Treaty?
These questions will no doubt be argued before the Court by the two countries.
Keywords: Kishenganga Project, Indus Water Treaty
Friday, 7 May 2010
NEPAL: Thousands rally in Kathmandu to demand end to shutdown
The rally was organised by the business community and other civil society groups
KATHMANDU: About 35,000 people rallied in Kathmandu on Friday to demand an end to a five-day shutdown of the Nepalese capital enforced by Maoists that has crippled business and other city life, police said.
The rally was organised by the business community and other civil society groups to demand that the coalition government and the Maoists find a solution to bring an end to the impasse.
The Maoists, who have the largest number of seats in parliament, are demanding the resignation of the prime minister and the formation of a new national unity government under Maoist administration.
“We have given the political parties and the Maoists a two-day deadline to come to a consensus and end the strike,” Kush Kumar Joshi, organiser of the meeting and president of the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, told AFP.
“The strikes have been crippling the business industry and all sectors have been adversely affected. Nepal is losing 2.25 billion rupees (30 million dollars) every day,” he said.
Although talks between the Maoists and the political parties have been continuing since Sunday, there is no sign yet of breaking the deadlock which has seen all businesses shut and people confined to their homes.
There was no violence at the rally, police said, but at one point officers fired tear gas to avoid a possible confrontation between Maoist supporters and rally participants.
There were also sporadic clashes between anti-Maoist demonstrators and Maoist supporters elsewhere in the capital, but police said the situation was under control.
The United States called Thursday on the Maoists to end the strike, voicing fear that the standoff could spiral into violence.
Robert Blake, the assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs, encouraged all sides to try to resolve differences peacefully as hopes fade that Nepal will meet a May 28 deadline to complete a new constitution.
Blake, who visited the Himalayan nation last month, said that the general strike called by the Maoists “is creating serious hardships for the people of Nepal and the risk of dangerous confrontation is growing.”
Maoist guerrillas fought a bloody insurgency against the state for 10 years before a peace deal was signed in 2006. The left-wing former rebels then won elections in 2008 before falling from power last year.
source;AFP also Barun roy
The rally was organised by the business community and other civil society groups
KATHMANDU: About 35,000 people rallied in Kathmandu on Friday to demand an end to a five-day shutdown of the Nepalese capital enforced by Maoists that has crippled business and other city life, police said.
The rally was organised by the business community and other civil society groups to demand that the coalition government and the Maoists find a solution to bring an end to the impasse.
The Maoists, who have the largest number of seats in parliament, are demanding the resignation of the prime minister and the formation of a new national unity government under Maoist administration.
“We have given the political parties and the Maoists a two-day deadline to come to a consensus and end the strike,” Kush Kumar Joshi, organiser of the meeting and president of the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, told AFP.
“The strikes have been crippling the business industry and all sectors have been adversely affected. Nepal is losing 2.25 billion rupees (30 million dollars) every day,” he said.
Although talks between the Maoists and the political parties have been continuing since Sunday, there is no sign yet of breaking the deadlock which has seen all businesses shut and people confined to their homes.
There was no violence at the rally, police said, but at one point officers fired tear gas to avoid a possible confrontation between Maoist supporters and rally participants.
There were also sporadic clashes between anti-Maoist demonstrators and Maoist supporters elsewhere in the capital, but police said the situation was under control.
The United States called Thursday on the Maoists to end the strike, voicing fear that the standoff could spiral into violence.
Robert Blake, the assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs, encouraged all sides to try to resolve differences peacefully as hopes fade that Nepal will meet a May 28 deadline to complete a new constitution.
Blake, who visited the Himalayan nation last month, said that the general strike called by the Maoists “is creating serious hardships for the people of Nepal and the risk of dangerous confrontation is growing.”
Maoist guerrillas fought a bloody insurgency against the state for 10 years before a peace deal was signed in 2006. The left-wing former rebels then won elections in 2008 before falling from power last year.
source;AFP also Barun roy
Khap panchayat: signs of desperation?
by Jagmati Sangwan
The Hindu An All castes (Khap) Maha Panchayat in progress in Kurukshetra.
The number of cases in which the totally unconstitutional caste panchayats have openly defied the law of the land by issuing illegal diktats has increased manifold.
In Haryana today, rapid capitalist transformation is accompanied by a regressive feudal consciousness. As education and political awareness spread among Dalits, women and backward sections, alongside there is a massive consolidation of caste (khap) panchayats in defence of the status quo. The number of cases in which the totally unconstitutional caste panchayats have openly defied the law of the land by issuing illegal diktats has increased manifold. Attacks on young couples, Dalits and progressive-minded people have become frequent.
A recent landmark judgment by the Additional Sessions Court at Karnal in the Manoj-Babli “honour” killing case, in which five accused were given the death sentence, sent shock waves among caste panchayat leaders, as it reminded them that they were not above the Constitution. The court took serious note of the fact that the policemen deployed for the security of Manoj and Babli actually facilitated the accused in perpetrating the crime.
Though geographically small, Haryana is socially and culturally heterogeneous. For example, in some areas and among certain castes, marriages within the village and even intra-gotra marriages are not uncommon. At the same time, such marriages are treated as incest in certain other areas, and among other castes. Even the caste or khap panchayat is not a feature prevalent throughout the State, as many believe, but is confined to a particular region. Thus, a section of people of one particular caste proclaims itself as the cultural representative of Haryana, refusing to acknowledge the customs and traditions practised by others in their own neighbourhood.
A look at the demography of the State and its development statistics would help to contextualise the problem. The State that stood second in per capita income in the country has one of the lowest sex ratios (821 in the 0-6 age group). Female foeticide is rampant, and the situation is so bad that wives are being brought from far off States. Not once have these panchayats called a maha-panchayat to pass a resolution against female foeticide or dowry or even in connection with the crisis in agriculture — problems staring the people of Haryana in the face.
After the judgment in the Manoj-Babli case, however, a congregation of caste panchayats representing the Jat neighbourhoods from Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan was called at Kurukshetra on April 13. It was decided that panchayats would now fight for legal status to legitimately maintain the “social order.” One of the main agendas of this sarv-khap panchayat was to push for amendments to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 that would ban marriages within the same gotra (clan within which men and women are considered siblings and hence cannot marry). Under this Act, marriages between certain lineages from the paternal and maternal sides are already barred.
Most of the khap panchayat diktats are against couples who are not from the same gotra. In fact, not more than one case of honour killing has been of a couple within the same gotra. By creating the false impression that all marriages of choice between young couples are incestuous, what the khaps are actually opposing is the right to choose a marriage partner. Among the several instances of khaps issuing fatwas in Jaundhi, Asanda, Dharana, Singhwal, Hadaudi, Maham-kheri, Ludana and other villages, not a single one was an intra-gotra marriage, yet the married couples were declared siblings, and families made to suffer boycotts and excommunication from their villages.
A sad example of the gotra row is that of Ved Pal Moan, brutally beaten to death last year when he tried to secure his wife who was confined by her parents at Singhwal village in Jind district. He was escorted by a police party and a warrant officer of the High Court. Ved Pal had married neither within his gotra nor within the same village. In this case, another absurd code was invoked by the khap: that the couple violated the custom of not marrying in the neighbouring village as it forms part of bhaichara (brotherhood). A khap congregation held in March 2009 publicly pronounced the death sentence for Ved Pal, and it succeeded in executing it in June. As couples are selectively targeted, it is clear the real motive is to control women's sexuality to ensure that property remains within the patriarchal caste domain (mainly Jats in Haryana).
The sarv khap panchayat also called for social boycott of individuals who raised their voice against the caste panchayats. A former police chief of Haryana, himself a self-styled caste leader, went on record threatening khap-critics. How can a former DGP publicly threaten law-abiding citizens, and yet continue to enjoy the hefty perks and pension out of the public exchequer?
The caste panchayat leaders have decided to stifle any voice of assertion from the backward sections. On April 21 more than 20 houses of Dalits were burnt down at Mirchpur village, in the presence of a police force, allegedly by thugs belonging to a dominant caste, resulting in the death of an 18-year-old handicapped girl and her ailing father. A panchayat of khaps convened at Mirchpur three days after the carnage not only declared all arrested persons innocent but also issued an ultimatum to the government for their release! This was exactly the pattern adopted by caste panchayats in the Gohana (2005) and Duleena (2002) incidents, where brutal attacks on Dalits took place.
Even elders from socially and economically weaker families are not spared. At Khedi Meham in December 2009, the father of a newly wed groom was forced to hold a shoe in his mouth in front of the whole village by the panchayatis. Ordinary citizens are caught in the contradiction between two sets of values — the blind consumerism of the neo-liberal dispensation, and the outdated feudal values represented by the khaps. The first is no replacement for the second, and indeed, pseudo-modernism only strengthens the forces of revivalism. The alternative to both types of distortions lies in the spread of healthy and progressive values that can be unleashed through only a new social reform movement in the entire Hindi belt.
Limited but crucial role
The judiciary does have a crucial role to play but has its limitations too. On June 23, 2008 Justice K.S. Ahluwalia of the Punjab and Haryana High Court made a revealing observation while simultaneously hearing 10 cases pertaining to marriages between young couples aged 18 - 21: “The High Court is flooded with petitions where … judges of this Court have to answer for the right of life and liberty to married couples. The State is a mute spectator. When shall the State awake from its slumber [and] for how long can Courts provide solace and balm by disposing of such cases?” A legislature with little political will and a pliant executive will have to be made responsive under pressure of a mass movement.
The voices of dissent are also getting consolidated under the umbrella of organisations like the AIDWA and other democratic forces. The younger generation must stand forth as responsible social activists and lead the struggle for change in an otherwise feudal society that lives by the dictum “Jiski lathi uski bhains” (the powerful call the shots). In Haryana each passing day is costing the lives of innocent women and men.
(The author is Director, Women's Study Centre, Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, and State President of AIDWA, Haryana.)
by Jagmati Sangwan
The Hindu An All castes (Khap) Maha Panchayat in progress in Kurukshetra.
The number of cases in which the totally unconstitutional caste panchayats have openly defied the law of the land by issuing illegal diktats has increased manifold.
In Haryana today, rapid capitalist transformation is accompanied by a regressive feudal consciousness. As education and political awareness spread among Dalits, women and backward sections, alongside there is a massive consolidation of caste (khap) panchayats in defence of the status quo. The number of cases in which the totally unconstitutional caste panchayats have openly defied the law of the land by issuing illegal diktats has increased manifold. Attacks on young couples, Dalits and progressive-minded people have become frequent.
A recent landmark judgment by the Additional Sessions Court at Karnal in the Manoj-Babli “honour” killing case, in which five accused were given the death sentence, sent shock waves among caste panchayat leaders, as it reminded them that they were not above the Constitution. The court took serious note of the fact that the policemen deployed for the security of Manoj and Babli actually facilitated the accused in perpetrating the crime.
Though geographically small, Haryana is socially and culturally heterogeneous. For example, in some areas and among certain castes, marriages within the village and even intra-gotra marriages are not uncommon. At the same time, such marriages are treated as incest in certain other areas, and among other castes. Even the caste or khap panchayat is not a feature prevalent throughout the State, as many believe, but is confined to a particular region. Thus, a section of people of one particular caste proclaims itself as the cultural representative of Haryana, refusing to acknowledge the customs and traditions practised by others in their own neighbourhood.
A look at the demography of the State and its development statistics would help to contextualise the problem. The State that stood second in per capita income in the country has one of the lowest sex ratios (821 in the 0-6 age group). Female foeticide is rampant, and the situation is so bad that wives are being brought from far off States. Not once have these panchayats called a maha-panchayat to pass a resolution against female foeticide or dowry or even in connection with the crisis in agriculture — problems staring the people of Haryana in the face.
After the judgment in the Manoj-Babli case, however, a congregation of caste panchayats representing the Jat neighbourhoods from Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan was called at Kurukshetra on April 13. It was decided that panchayats would now fight for legal status to legitimately maintain the “social order.” One of the main agendas of this sarv-khap panchayat was to push for amendments to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 that would ban marriages within the same gotra (clan within which men and women are considered siblings and hence cannot marry). Under this Act, marriages between certain lineages from the paternal and maternal sides are already barred.
Most of the khap panchayat diktats are against couples who are not from the same gotra. In fact, not more than one case of honour killing has been of a couple within the same gotra. By creating the false impression that all marriages of choice between young couples are incestuous, what the khaps are actually opposing is the right to choose a marriage partner. Among the several instances of khaps issuing fatwas in Jaundhi, Asanda, Dharana, Singhwal, Hadaudi, Maham-kheri, Ludana and other villages, not a single one was an intra-gotra marriage, yet the married couples were declared siblings, and families made to suffer boycotts and excommunication from their villages.
A sad example of the gotra row is that of Ved Pal Moan, brutally beaten to death last year when he tried to secure his wife who was confined by her parents at Singhwal village in Jind district. He was escorted by a police party and a warrant officer of the High Court. Ved Pal had married neither within his gotra nor within the same village. In this case, another absurd code was invoked by the khap: that the couple violated the custom of not marrying in the neighbouring village as it forms part of bhaichara (brotherhood). A khap congregation held in March 2009 publicly pronounced the death sentence for Ved Pal, and it succeeded in executing it in June. As couples are selectively targeted, it is clear the real motive is to control women's sexuality to ensure that property remains within the patriarchal caste domain (mainly Jats in Haryana).
The sarv khap panchayat also called for social boycott of individuals who raised their voice against the caste panchayats. A former police chief of Haryana, himself a self-styled caste leader, went on record threatening khap-critics. How can a former DGP publicly threaten law-abiding citizens, and yet continue to enjoy the hefty perks and pension out of the public exchequer?
The caste panchayat leaders have decided to stifle any voice of assertion from the backward sections. On April 21 more than 20 houses of Dalits were burnt down at Mirchpur village, in the presence of a police force, allegedly by thugs belonging to a dominant caste, resulting in the death of an 18-year-old handicapped girl and her ailing father. A panchayat of khaps convened at Mirchpur three days after the carnage not only declared all arrested persons innocent but also issued an ultimatum to the government for their release! This was exactly the pattern adopted by caste panchayats in the Gohana (2005) and Duleena (2002) incidents, where brutal attacks on Dalits took place.
Even elders from socially and economically weaker families are not spared. At Khedi Meham in December 2009, the father of a newly wed groom was forced to hold a shoe in his mouth in front of the whole village by the panchayatis. Ordinary citizens are caught in the contradiction between two sets of values — the blind consumerism of the neo-liberal dispensation, and the outdated feudal values represented by the khaps. The first is no replacement for the second, and indeed, pseudo-modernism only strengthens the forces of revivalism. The alternative to both types of distortions lies in the spread of healthy and progressive values that can be unleashed through only a new social reform movement in the entire Hindi belt.
Limited but crucial role
The judiciary does have a crucial role to play but has its limitations too. On June 23, 2008 Justice K.S. Ahluwalia of the Punjab and Haryana High Court made a revealing observation while simultaneously hearing 10 cases pertaining to marriages between young couples aged 18 - 21: “The High Court is flooded with petitions where … judges of this Court have to answer for the right of life and liberty to married couples. The State is a mute spectator. When shall the State awake from its slumber [and] for how long can Courts provide solace and balm by disposing of such cases?” A legislature with little political will and a pliant executive will have to be made responsive under pressure of a mass movement.
The voices of dissent are also getting consolidated under the umbrella of organisations like the AIDWA and other democratic forces. The younger generation must stand forth as responsible social activists and lead the struggle for change in an otherwise feudal society that lives by the dictum “Jiski lathi uski bhains” (the powerful call the shots). In Haryana each passing day is costing the lives of innocent women and men.
(The author is Director, Women's Study Centre, Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, and State President of AIDWA, Haryana.)
Tuesday, 16 March 2010
oil exploration works in Rajasthan
Rajya Sabha
The Minister of State for Petroleum & Natural Gas Shri Jitin Prasada informed the Rajya Sabha in a written reply today that oil and gas discoveries have been made in two exploration blocks in Rajasthan. While 17 discoveries have been made (13 oil and 4 gas) in the Block RJ-ON-90/1 block (Cairn-ONGC), 2 gas discoveries have been made in the Block RJ-ON/6 (FOCUS-ISIL-NOCL-ONGC). Under the PSC regime, commercial production of crude oil has commenced w.e.f. 29.08.2009 from the Mangala field in the block RJ-ON-90/1(Cairn-ONGC) in Barmer district in Rajasthan. Till 31.12.2009, about 1.62 Million Barrels of oil have been produced from Mangala Field.
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation(ONGC) is currently holding one nomination and three New Exploration Licensing Policy (NELP) blocks covering area of Jaisalmer, Kota, Bhilwara, Chittorgarh, Jhalawar and Baran districts of Rajasthan and its exploration activities for oil and gas reserves are restricted to these blocks only and being pursued actively. As far as Pvt/JVs are concerned under the Production Sharing Contract (PSC) regime, so far 18 exploration blocks have been awarded under Pre-NELP and NELP rounds in the State of Rajasthan.
Replying to another query, he said that Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited(ONGC) is in consultation with the Government of Rajasthan(GoR) on the feasibility of setting up a refinery at Barmer. For this purpose GoR has set up a high level Committee on the 19th August, 2009 for the preparation of a report on the status of oil and gas sector in Rajathan in the context of future prospects and benefits for the State. Consequent on de-licensing of refinery sector since June, 1998, a refinery can be set up anywhere in India by a Private or Public Sector Enterprise depending on its commercial viability.
Rajya Sabha
The Minister of State for Petroleum & Natural Gas Shri Jitin Prasada informed the Rajya Sabha in a written reply today that oil and gas discoveries have been made in two exploration blocks in Rajasthan. While 17 discoveries have been made (13 oil and 4 gas) in the Block RJ-ON-90/1 block (Cairn-ONGC), 2 gas discoveries have been made in the Block RJ-ON/6 (FOCUS-ISIL-NOCL-ONGC). Under the PSC regime, commercial production of crude oil has commenced w.e.f. 29.08.2009 from the Mangala field in the block RJ-ON-90/1(Cairn-ONGC) in Barmer district in Rajasthan. Till 31.12.2009, about 1.62 Million Barrels of oil have been produced from Mangala Field.
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation(ONGC) is currently holding one nomination and three New Exploration Licensing Policy (NELP) blocks covering area of Jaisalmer, Kota, Bhilwara, Chittorgarh, Jhalawar and Baran districts of Rajasthan and its exploration activities for oil and gas reserves are restricted to these blocks only and being pursued actively. As far as Pvt/JVs are concerned under the Production Sharing Contract (PSC) regime, so far 18 exploration blocks have been awarded under Pre-NELP and NELP rounds in the State of Rajasthan.
Replying to another query, he said that Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited(ONGC) is in consultation with the Government of Rajasthan(GoR) on the feasibility of setting up a refinery at Barmer. For this purpose GoR has set up a high level Committee on the 19th August, 2009 for the preparation of a report on the status of oil and gas sector in Rajathan in the context of future prospects and benefits for the State. Consequent on de-licensing of refinery sector since June, 1998, a refinery can be set up anywhere in India by a Private or Public Sector Enterprise depending on its commercial viability.
Thursday, 7 January 2010
Bhadra, Rajasthan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(July 2007)
Bhadra
Location of Bhadra
in Rajasthan and India
Coordinates 29°07′N 75°10′E / 29.12°N 75.17°E / 29.12; 75.17
Country India
State Rajasthan
District(s) Hanumangarh
Population 35,137 (2001[update])
Time zone IST (UTC+5:30)
Area
• Elevation
• 192 m (630 ft)
Bhadra is a city and a municipality in Hanumangarh district in the state of Rajasthan, India.
Bhadra in colloquial Marwari (a dialect of Hindi) means "The City of Grace". As per History, this name comes from river "SWARNABHADRA" which, unfortunately, has already disappeared.
The town is well connected through railroad on the Sri Ganganagar-Sadulpur(Rajgarh)-Jaipur line, and through state highways to Hisar, and Sirsa in the neighboring state of Haryana.
[edit] Geography
Bhadra is located at 29°07′N 75°10′E / 29.12°N 75.17°E / 29.12; 75.17.[1] It has an average elevation of 192 metres (629 feet). Main villages of Bhadra are Kirara Bara, Dungarana, Sickrodi, Kalana, Malsisar, Kunji, Jogiwala, Ajitpura, Motsara,Bhangarh, Channi Bari ,Jatan,Hunatpura(also called Dingbas) Ghandhi Bari, Bhirani and Dabri,ghotra patta.
Main circles/street points here are Khubram ji saraf chowk, Ambedkar chowk, Rajiv chowk, Agarsain chowk(gur mandi). ghotra bus stand One beautiful public garden is one old pillar of Bhadra, known as "Gandhi park". Luhariwala dharamsala is famous dharamsala of city and situated in the heart of city. Its used for public ceremoneies like Marriages, Religious purpose like Bhagawat-Path etc.
There are some good old seeing worth buildings like KATH KI HAVELI owned by PATAWARIS etc.
Government Hospital" and "Vivekanand Swasthya Sewa Samiti" are the main pillars of Bhadra. VSSS has achieved many milestone and now the most advanced Hospital within whole district of Hanumangarh.
[edit] Demographics
As of 2001[update] India census,[2] Bhadra had a population of 35,137. Males constitute 53% of the population and females 47%. Bhadra has an average literacy rate of 62%, higher than the national average of 59.5%; with 60% of the males and 40% of females literate. 15% of the population is under 6 years of age.
Just like other villages, here also people like to gather in the evening and then starts an endless discussion with tea n snacks....
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(July 2007)
Bhadra
Location of Bhadra
in Rajasthan and India
Coordinates 29°07′N 75°10′E / 29.12°N 75.17°E / 29.12; 75.17
Country India
State Rajasthan
District(s) Hanumangarh
Population 35,137 (2001[update])
Time zone IST (UTC+5:30)
Area
• Elevation
• 192 m (630 ft)
Bhadra is a city and a municipality in Hanumangarh district in the state of Rajasthan, India.
Bhadra in colloquial Marwari (a dialect of Hindi) means "The City of Grace". As per History, this name comes from river "SWARNABHADRA" which, unfortunately, has already disappeared.
The town is well connected through railroad on the Sri Ganganagar-Sadulpur(Rajgarh)-Jaipur line, and through state highways to Hisar, and Sirsa in the neighboring state of Haryana.
[edit] Geography
Bhadra is located at 29°07′N 75°10′E / 29.12°N 75.17°E / 29.12; 75.17.[1] It has an average elevation of 192 metres (629 feet). Main villages of Bhadra are Kirara Bara, Dungarana, Sickrodi, Kalana, Malsisar, Kunji, Jogiwala, Ajitpura, Motsara,Bhangarh, Channi Bari ,Jatan,Hunatpura(also called Dingbas) Ghandhi Bari, Bhirani and Dabri,ghotra patta.
Main circles/street points here are Khubram ji saraf chowk, Ambedkar chowk, Rajiv chowk, Agarsain chowk(gur mandi). ghotra bus stand One beautiful public garden is one old pillar of Bhadra, known as "Gandhi park". Luhariwala dharamsala is famous dharamsala of city and situated in the heart of city. Its used for public ceremoneies like Marriages, Religious purpose like Bhagawat-Path etc.
There are some good old seeing worth buildings like KATH KI HAVELI owned by PATAWARIS etc.
Government Hospital" and "Vivekanand Swasthya Sewa Samiti" are the main pillars of Bhadra. VSSS has achieved many milestone and now the most advanced Hospital within whole district of Hanumangarh.
[edit] Demographics
As of 2001[update] India census,[2] Bhadra had a population of 35,137. Males constitute 53% of the population and females 47%. Bhadra has an average literacy rate of 62%, higher than the national average of 59.5%; with 60% of the males and 40% of females literate. 15% of the population is under 6 years of age.
Just like other villages, here also people like to gather in the evening and then starts an endless discussion with tea n snacks....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)