chapter iii audit reports on water issues -...
TRANSCRIPT
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
1
Chapter III
Audit reports on Water issues
4.2.7 Unfruitful expenditure on a protected water supply scheme in Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh
Improper planning in the implementation of a Comprehensive Protected Water Supply
scheme by the Executive Engineer, RWS, Nellore, resulted in failure to provide protected
water to the targeted habitations besides unfruitful expenditure of Rs 8 crore.
Government sanctioned (March 2003) a comprehensive protected water supply scheme under
Pradhana Mantri Gramodaya Yojana (PMGY) to provide water to 85 habitations in Nellore
District. The work is to be carried out by the Executive Engineer, Rural Water Supply,
Nellore (EE) in three phases.
Government initially sanctioned Phase I of the scheme in March 2003 to cover 13 habitations
(estimated cost: Rs 4 crore). Phase II of the scheme was sanctioned in March 2005 to cover 47
habitations (estimated cost: Rs 5 crore). Proposal for Phase III of the scheme to cover
remaining 25 habitations submitted in September 2006 (estimated cost: Rs 5 crore) was
awaiting the Government‟s approval (July 2007).
It was observed (February 2007) that though the work under Phase I was completed
(expenditure: Rs 4 crore) way back in April 2005, the scheme had not been commissioned
mainly due to the delay in the acquisition of land for construction of approach road to the
intake well required for carrying heavy vertical turbine pump sets. Finally, the physical
possession of the land was taken over by the RWS division pending alienation of land and the
approach road was laid in May 2006. The pump sets were erected only in July 2006. Under
Phase II also, even after completion (October 2006) of the works (expenditure: Rs 3.99 crore)
the commissioning of the scheme was held up for want of power till February 2007. As of July
2007 both the phases had not been commissioned to cover the targeted habitations even after
four years of sanction of the scheme and water was released only to seven out of 60
habitations in the two phases. Government attributed (August 2007) the delay in
commissioning of the scheme to the delay in release of high tension (HT) load for
energisation.
Thus, due to improper planning by the EE, and lack of coordination firstly with the Revenue
authorities and APTRANSCO authorities, the social objective of supplying protected drinking
water to the specified habitations remains unachieved after incurring an expenditure of Rs 8
crore so far.
4.2.8 Delay in completion of check dams in Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh
The Executive Engineer, PR, Gudur, failed to complete check dams even after five to seven
years, after incurring an expenditure of Rs 3.86 crore resulting in non-creation of envisaged
irrigation potential besides denial of the provision of drinking water facility to the people of 15
villages.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
2
Government sanctioned (November 1998) construction of four check dams across the creeks
of Pulicat Lake (Nellore District) for creation of fresh water reservoir at an estimated cost of
Rs 2.80 crore. This was to irrigate 7280 acres of ayacut lands and provide drinking water to 15
villages in Chittamur and D.V. Satram mandals by recharging ground water sources. The
estimated cost was revised to Rs 5.24 crore in April 2002 with some additional provisions and
deviations. The works were entrusted to Ayacutdar2 Committees in October 1999 (two
works), July 2001 (one work) and October 2002 (one work) with a stipulation to complete the
works in all respects by July 2002 (three dams) and October 2003 (one dam). This was
extended from time to time, the latest being June 2006.
It was however observed (March 2006) from the records of the Executive Engineer,
Panchayati Raj, Gudur that none of the check dams had been completed even 5 to 7 years
after their entrustment. The works were stopped after incurring an expenditure of Rs.3.86
crore on the four check dams. The percentage of work completed was between 62 to 83 per
cent as shown in the table below:
The EE stated (January 2007) that the works were stopped mainly due to lack of funds and
attributed (April 2007) the inordinate delay in completion of the check dams to cyclones and
heavy rains and entrustment of work to ayacutdars without any skill and experience in the
execution of the works. As of March 2007, water was made available for irrigation of only
4460 acres as against the 7280 targeted. The proposals submitted (March 2007) by the District
Collector, Nellore, for sanction of Rs.1.66 crore (as per SSR 2006-07) to complete the
incomplete works were still awaiting government‟s approval as of July 2007.
Thus, failure of the EE to complete the check dams even after five to seven years and after
incurring an expenditure of Rs.3.86 crore, has resulted in the objective of creating irrigation
potential as envisaged not being achieved, besides denial of drinking water facility to people of
15 villages.
The matter was reported to the government in February 2007; their reply has not been
received (August 2007).
Sl no
Check dam
across the
stream at
Estimated
cost
Expenditure Due for
completion
Percent of
work
completed
Work stopped from
1 Buradagali
Kothapalem
1.69 1.87 July 2002 83 November 2001
2 Karikadu 0.68 0.46 July 2002 62 March 2006
3 Velukadu 0.60 0.37 July 2002 80 December 2002
4 Meezur 1.88 1.16 October
2003
71 December 2003
Total 4.85 3.86
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
3
Performance Audit of Godavari Water Utilisation Authority in Andhra Pradesh
Highlights
Godavari Water Utilisation Authority was constituted (April 1999) to plan, promote and
operationalise schemes/projects for expeditious utilisation of allocated water of river
Godavari. Government prioritised (August 2004) six projects on the river under a concept
called “Jalayagnam” to complete them in two to five years for providing water to 16.32 lakh
acres in Telangana region and drinking water to the habitations enroute by lifting 135.68 tmc
water from river Godavari. A review of these projects disclosed that the progress of these
projects was hampered mainly due to delay in land acquisition and approval of designs. The
consultants were not made responsible for any deviations in quantities, designs and drawings
during execution. There was no suitable provision in the agreements to safeguard the
Government interest, resulting in reduction of substantial quantity of material with the benefit
passing on to the contractor. In many cases, the quality and quantity of materials required was
wrongly projected, estimates were unrealistic, advance payments were made contrary to
agreement, etc. resulting in contractors enjoying huge unintended and undue benefits.
3.2.1. Introduction
Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal allocated (July 1980) 1172.78 tmc water to Andhra
Pradesh from river Godavari. Government planned to utilize 1010.31 tmc water at 75 per cent
dependability including regeneration. Government constituted (April 1999) Godavari Water
Utilisation Authority (GWUA) under the chairmanship of the Chief Minister. The main
objectives of GWUA were to plan, promote and operationalise schemes/projects for the
expeditious utilization of allocated waters of river Godavari to provide irrigation to the
backward areas of the State.
Of the projects under the control of GWUA, the following six projects were prioritized
(August 2004) and proposed to be taken up as part of „Jalayagnam‟1.
1. J. Chokkarao Devadula Lift Irrigation Scheme (JCRDLIS)
2. Sripadasagar Project (SSP)
3. Alisagar Lift Irrigation Scheme (ALIS)
4. Arugula Rajaram Guthpa Lift Irrigation Scheme (ARGLIS) (v) Lendi Project and
5. Dummugudem Project consisting of Rajeev Sagar and Indira Sagar Lift Irrigation
Schemes
3.2.2. Organisational setup
1 Jalayagnam‟ is a concept propagated by the Government to bring more ayacut under
cultivation by completing irrigation projects in a record time Engineer-in-Chief (Overall administrative control and Lendi Project); Commissioner, Planning and Development of
Godavari Basin (Alisagar and Guthpa LI schemes); Chief Engineer, Godavari Lift Irrigation Scheme, Warangal (Devadula and Dummugudem LI Schemes) and Chief Engineer, SSP-FFC Karimnagar (SSP)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
4
The implementation of the projects was to be overseen by the Principal Secretary to
Government and Secretary to Government (Telangana Region) in Irrigation and Command
Area Development (I&CAD) Department at Secretariat level. Implementation and Tendering
Committee would oversee the process of tendering, evaluation and award of contracts.
Planning, budgeting, programming, implementation, execution and monitoring of the six
projects were distributed among four Heads of Departments (HOD) supported by
Superintending Engineers (SEs) at circle level and Executive Engineers (EEs) at divisional
level.
3.2.3 Audit objectives
The broad audit objectives of this performance audit were to ascertain whether:
project formulation and planning were comprehensive, detailed and accurate;
financial management was effective in the implementation of the projects;
the execution of the projects was as envisaged; and
the monitoring and evaluation was effective so as to achieve the objectives of the project.
3.2.4 Audit criteria
The audit criteria used for performance audit covered the following aspects of the schemes:
Detailed Project Reports (DPRs), approvals by Government and Internal Bench Mark
(IBM) estimates;
Government of India and State Government orders relating to land acquisition and rehabilitation
and resettlement packages; and
Monitoring, evaluation and quality control as required under the extant orders.
3.2.5 Scope and methodology of audit
A test-check of the records at Secretariat, four HODs, four Circles and nine out of 13 divisions
was conducted between January and April 2007 covering an expenditure of Rs 2463.24 crore
(76 per cent of total expenditure of Rs 3230.10 crore) in 12 out of 27 packages in respect of
four (out of six) projects under the control of GWUA.
An entry conference was held in January 2007 with Secretary to Government
(Telangana Region), I&CAD and all the HODs and the objectives of the performance audit
were explained to them. Physical evidences were obtained in the shape of replies to audit
queries, copies of documents, photographs, maps, etc. The audit observations were also
discussed with Secretary to Government and CEs in the exit conference held in August 2007.
The results of the review are presented in the succeeding paragraphs.
Audit findings
3.2.6 Project formulation
In order to overcome time and cost over runs of the projects and to develop the irrigation
potential without delay for the targeted population, Government decided (August 2004) to
take up the irrigation projects on a turn key basis i.e. awarding of all works on Engineering,
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
5
Procurement, Construction (EPC) system to one agency. Under this, the agency to whom the
work is awarded, SSP Division-1, Ramagundam; SSP Division-3, LMD Colony, Karimnagar;
SSP Division-4, Mancherial; JCRDLIS Division-1, 2, 3 and 4, Chintagattu, Warangal; NSLI
Division-1 and 2, Nizamabad would investigate, survey, design and construct the project on a
turn key basis and then hand over to the Government. The advantage of this arrangement was
supposedly that there would not be any scope for deviation of quantities, revision of estimates
etc, as the agency was to complete the work at its quoted contract amount. Government
approved (August 2004) empanelment of contractors for participation in the procurement of
priority irrigation projects under EPC system.
Accordingly, Government decided to complete all the six projects in two to five years and
provide water to 16.32 lakh acres of ayacut in Telangana region by lifting 135.68 tmc water
from river Godavari. It would also provide drinking water to the habitations enroute. This
required preparation of estimates as accurate as possible so that deviations from estimates are
bare minimum. This increases the role of consultants to a great extent in devising a suitable
mechanism so that once designs are firmed up by department, no changes are made or if any,
it is minimum. Simultaneously, suitable provisions in the agreement should be made to
safeguard the Government interest, wherein the deviations are more than the prescribed limit.
A brief description of each project is given in Appendix 3.5. The deficiencies noticed in the
role of consultant, planning, land acquisition, rehabilitation, etc. are discussed below:
3.2.6.1 Role of consultants
As the projects were implemented on turnkey basis, the estimates were to be as accurate as
possible. Thus the role of consultant was pivotal in contributing to correct estimates to
facilitate timely completion of the projects.
Preparation of detailed project reports (DPRs) comprising detailed investigation, designs,
drawings, preparation of estimates and obtaining clearances required for the projects
from Central Water Commission (CWC), Government of India etc, in respect of five projects
was entrusted between February 2002 and April 2005 to two consultants for a total agreement
value of Rs 7.76 crore. An amount of Rs. 7.09 crore has been paid to the consultants as of
March 2007. However, a scrutiny of the terms of reference of the consultants, estimates,
designs and drawings prepared by them disclosed the following:
The tenders in respect of three projects (JCRDLIS, SSP and Dummugudem) were floated based
on different IBM estimates than those prepared by the consultants.
Survey, investigation, preparation of estimates, designs and drawings, etc, which were entrusted
to the consultants were again included in the scope of work put to tender for construction of the
projects under EPC turnkey system.
There were no provisions in the agreement of consultants and contractors so as to deal with the
deviations between the estimates drawn up by the consultants and the actual execution of work
by the contractors to safeguard the Government interest.
The contractors to whom the works were entrusted under EPC turnkey basis were allowed to
execute the works as per their own designs and drawings approved by the Chief Engineer,
Central Designs Organisation (CE, CDO) with little relevance to those prepared by the
consultants, though the same were approved by CE, CDO before calling the tender.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
6
All the clearances in respect of JCRDLIS and SSP have not yet (July 2007) been obtained by the
consultants although they have been paid their fees.
Thus, the estimates prepared by the consultants, finally approved and works actually executed
with reference to those designs were at variance with each other. Despite this, the consultants
were not made responsible for any deviations in quantities, designs and drawings during
execution.
3.2.6.2 Source and adequacy of water
The Department initially proposed to lift 36.25 tmc water in all three phases of JCRDLIS.
After making provision of 1.92 tmc water for drinking and 2.96 tmc water towards
evaporation losses, water available would be 31.37 tmc for irrigation of 6.47 lakh acres.
Government, with a view to bringing more land under irrigation, decided (December 2006) to
implement drip and sprinkler irrigation at micro level under all the major Lift Irrigation (LI)
schemes so as to irrigate 15000 acres per one tmc water.
Subsequently, the department proposed to irrigate 4.08 lakh acres under Phase-I and II
of JCRDLIS which would require 27.20 tmc water at 15000 acre per one tmc water. Contrary
to the above norms, the Department proposed to lift 12.43 tmc water only as against 27.20
tmc. Thus, the water proposed to be lifted (12.43 tmc) would not be sufficient to irrigate the
proposed ayacut of 4.08 lakh acres. Department however, stated (June 2007) that the
shortages would be covered under Phase-III of the project. Phase III works have yet to be
commenced as of August 2007. The mis-match between the proposed lifting of water and
ayacut contemplated is due to faulty formulation of policy and Government would not be able
to meet the targets under LI Schemes.
3.2.6.3 Non-availability of assured power supply
One of the functions of GWUA was to provide for dedicated power supply for the proposed
lift irrigation schemes on river Godavari. However, no power project has so far been
contemplated on the river for this purpose. The power requirement for five LI schemes was
assessed at 891.98 MW. The CWC has expressed (January 2005) doubt about the availability
of sufficient power in respect of JCRDLIS as the department had not made any firm proposal
for meeting their requirement of power. On the request and at the cost of the department,
APTRANSCO has been executing the electrical works such as extension of HT lines,
construction of separate sub-stations and fixing transformers. So far an amount of Rs 307.02
crore has been paid by the Irrigation Department to APTRANSCO for execution of electrical
works under JCRDLIS, ALIS and ARGLIS projects. However, no memorandum of
understanding/agreement has been concluded with APTRANSCO. As such, the successful
operation of LI schemes, in the absence of the assured power supply, is doubtful. The
Secretary to Government, I&CAD Department, accepting the audit observation in the exit
conference stated that steps were being taken for commissioning a Hydro- electric project on
river Godavari.
3.2.6.4 Overlapping of ayacut
CWC cleared the flood flow canal (FFC) of Sriram Sagar Project (SRSP) in 1996 with an
ayacut of 2.20 lakh acres in Karimnagar, Warangal and Nalgonda Districts. Phase-II of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
7
JCRDLIS was taken up in April 2005 with an ayacut of 2.85 lakh acres in the same districts.
It was, however, observed that the ayacut contemplated under phase-II of JCRDLIS
overlapped the ayacut contemplated under FFC to the extent of 60000 acres in Warangal and
Nalgonda Districts. Thus, it is evident that even the ayacut was not finalized by the CE,
JCRDLIS before concluding the agreements for Phase-II works. The SE, JCRDLIS Circle,
Warangal stated (June 2007) that it was proposed to transfer the overlapping ayacut from FFC
to JCRDLIS. However, no clearance for the changed ayacut has been obtained from the
CWC as of August 2007.
3.2.9.2 Alisagar Lift Irrigation Scheme (ALIS)
The IBM estimate for ALIS was technically sanctioned (August 2004) for Rs 172 crore and
entrusted (March 2005) to a contractor for an agreement value of Rs 163.98 crore at 3.91 per
cent discount on the ECV of Rs 170.65 crore. The scope of the work provided for fabrication
and laying of four rows MS pipeline with 1.80 m dia for a length of 5.60 km and 1.60 m dia
for a length of 1.53 km. Steel required for fabrication of pipes as per the estimate was 12358.37
MT. The basic parameters of the project given in the agreement were to be strictly adhered to
by the bidders, unless otherwise specified during detailed survey, investigation, engineering
and execution of the project. The bidders were required to review the same and incorporate
modifications/ improvements wherever required for optimising benefits without any
deviations from the basic parameters of the project.
During the execution, the number of rows was reduced to two and the alignment length was
also reduced to 6.21 km as per revised designs submitted by the contractor for pressure
pipeline (i.e., two rows of 2.2 m dia for 5.335 km and 1.8 m dia for 0.875 km). The revised
designs were also accepted (June 2005) by the CE, CDO. The contractor accordingly
fabricated and laid the pressure main for a length of 6.21 km by procuring a total quantity of
8455 MT of MS coil as against 12358.37 MT provided in the estimate. Thus, IBM estimate
prepared by the consultant and approved by the department was unrealistic and resulted in
undue benefit of Rs 20.54 crore being the cost of excess steel (3903.12 MT) at the rate of Rs
54768 per MT provided in the estimate duly deducting tender discount.
Similarly, as per the basic parameters stipulated in the agreement, the length of pressure
pipeline was 7.13 km. As per the price breakup given in the IBM estimate for excavation,
refilling, sand bed and CC block for laying of pipes was Rs 6.07 crore. However, as per the
designs furnished by the contractor and actual execution, the length of pipe line was reduced
to 6.21 km. Had the length of the pipe line been correctly assessed at the time of preparing
IBM estimates, the saving of Rs 75 lakh would have accrued to the department. The
contractor was thus unduly benefited to that extent.
Government replied (September 2007) that as the contract price was a firm lump sum on a
single source responsibility and the short utilisation of steel was due to change of designs and
drawings, the cost was not recovered from the contractor. The reply is not acceptable as the
bidder offered his rate, based on the project appraisal appended to the agreement and the
contractor was required to design, fabricate and lay four rows of 1.8 m and 1.6 m dia with 10
mm thick steel plate. Changing the scope of work with two rows of pressure pipeline of 2.2 m
and 1.8 m dia was an alternative design and not a modification. The adoption and execution
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
8
of the alternative and economic design, resulted in savings to the extent of Rs. 21.29 crore
which would have accrued to Government had there been a suitable provision in the
agreements.
3.2.9.3 Arugula Rajaram Guthpa Lift Irrigation Scheme (ARGLIS)
The construction of ARGLIS was entrusted (February 2005) to a contractor under EPC
turnkey system for an agreement value of Rs 145.80 crore. The scope of work, inter-alia,
included manufacture, supply and laying of 2200 mm, 2000 mm and 1600 mm dia pressure
main for a total length of 27895 Running Metres (RMT). As per the agreement conditions, the
work was required to be executed according to the relevant IS codes. IS 1916-1989 stipulates
the inner lining thickness of 25 mm for 450 mm to 3000 mm dia pipes. An experts committee
constituted to discuss the details of IS codes pertaining to laying of steel pipes for schemes
already undertaken and the CE, CDO recommended for 25 mm thickness for inner lining as
per IS 1916-1989. However, the contractor manufactured and delivered the pressure mains
with 15 mm thickness inner lining as per IS 3589-2001, which is applicable for seamless and
welded carbon steel pipes. The Principal Secretary to Government, I&CAD Department,
based on another recommendation given (August 2005) by the Committee, approved
(November 2005) the pipeline with inner lining thickness of 12.5 mm to 15 mm to overcome
contractual obligations. As the contractor would have quoted his rates with 25 mm thickness
inner lining, the acceptance of the pressure mains with 15 mm thick inner lining resulted in
unintended benefit of Rs 32.47 lakh up to executed and paid quantity of 25496 RMT.
Government replied (September 2007) that the instructions to adopt 12.5 mm to 15 mm thick
inner lining were issued based on the recommendations of the committee. They further stated
that there was no unintended benefit to the contractor as the contract price was a firm lump
sum and on a single source responsibility.
The reply does not explain the reasons for incorporating in the agreement a condition for
executing as per IS code 1916-1989. Thus the decision of Government in accepting the lesser
thickness of inner lining during execution was contrary to the agreement conditions and
resulted in unintended benefit to the contractor.
3.2.9.4 Boosting up of IBM estimates: Sripadasagar Project (SSP)
The IBM estimate for stage-II phase I works of SSP was originally sanctioned for Rs 1757.18
crore. The work was entrusted (April 2005) to a contractor for an agreement value of Rs 1737
crore at 0.666 per cent excess over the estimate contract value (ECV) of Rs 1725.50 crore.
During execution, the estimate was revised to Rs 1688.86 crore for which the Administrative
and Technical approvals were accorded in August 2005 and March 2006 respectively.
Consequent to the revision of estimate, the ECV works out to Rs 1657.18 crore enhancing the
tender premium to 4.81 per cent, which is just below the permissible ceiling of five per cent.
A review (February 2007) of the estimates disclosed that even the revised estimate had been
inflated by Rs.349.85 crore extending unintended benefit to the contractor as detailed below.
Had the revised estimate been properly prepared, the contractor would not have qualified as
the tender premium would have exceeded five per cent.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
9
The requirement of MS steel plate for fabrication of pressure pipeline was assessed as 165735
MT in the approved (March 2006) estimate. However, based on the diametre of the pipes and
thickness of steel plates as approved by the CE, CDO, the actual quantity of steel requirement
was worked out by the SE, SSP Circle, Mancherial as 135255 MT with the extra loading of steel
quantity in the approved estimate working out to 30480 MT. The cost of the extra steel loaded
in the estimate at the rate of Rs 54837.70 per MT adopted in the estimate was Rs 167.15 crore.
There was a provision of Rs 68.90 crore in the estimate towards cost of excavation of gravity
canals for inter-connecting the tanks. However, the consultant agency had worked out the cost
of these items including the excavation of approach channels at Rs 25.16 crore. Thus, the extra
loading into the estimate works out to Rs 43.74 crore.
A provision of Rs 368.50 crore was made in the sanctioned (March 2006) estimate towards
Electro Mechanical (EM) works of SSP at the rate of Rs 2.75 crore per MW for 134 MW of
power required. In respect of another estimate sanctioned later in January 2007 for Indira Sagar
LIS (Dummugudem project), a rate of Rs 2 crore per MW was approved by the IBM
Committee. Thus, the rate adopted at Rs 2.75 crore per MW was unjustified and resulted in
excess provision of Rs 100.50 crore at the differential rate of Rs 0.75 crore per MW for 134
MW.
A rate of Rs 72 crore per tmc was adopted in the estimate for strengthening and improvement of
14 old tanks and formation of two new tanks. It was noticed from another estimate sanctioned
(January 2007) for Indira Sagar LIS that a rate of Rs 40 crore per tmc was adopted for formation
of new tanks as approved by IBM Committee. Thus, there was excess provision of Rs 38.46
crore for 1.202 tmc for all the 16 tanks.
Similarly, in the estimate for Stage-I phase II works of SSP (supply of 8.5 tmc water to NTPC),
a provision of Rs 29.15 crore was included towards EM works at a rate of Rs 2.92 crore per
MW for 10 MW. However, a rate of Rs 2 crore per MW was adopted for EM works in Indira
Sagar LIS as approved by the IBM Committee as most economical and workable. Thus, the
excess rate of Rs 0.92 crore per MW resulted in excess provision of Rs 9.15 crore per 10 MW in
the estimate.
3.2.12 Conclusions
There were serious deficiencies in the efficient, economic and effective implementation of the
projects undertaken under GWUA. The schemes were undertaken without proper care in
finalizing the ayacut, source and availability of assured power supply. There was delay in
acquisition of land and implementation of R&R packages, which hampered the progress
of works severely. The projects prioritised for completion before March 2007 were not
completed and consequently, the objectives of utilizing allocated water of river Godavari
and creating irrigation potential were not achieved. The agreements were one sided in favour
of the contractors and suitable provisions were not incorporated to protect Government
interest. The consultants were not made responsible for any deviations in quantities, designs
and drawings during execution. The contractors enjoyed huge undue benefits due to incorrect
projection of materials required, preparation of unrealistic estimates, etc. Despite being
monitored at all levels, the rate of progress in the works under SSP and JCRDLIS is not as per
the milestones fixed.
3.2.13 Recommendations
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
10
Delay in acquisition of land, implementation of R&R packages, approval of designs and getting
clearances is to be avoided to complete the ongoing schemes/projects expeditiously so that the
allocated waters of river Godavari can be utilized to provide irrigation and drinking water to the
backward areas of the State.
For the successful operation of LI schemes, arrangements for assured power supply should be
quickly finalized.
It is essential that future IBM estimates are prepared as accurately as possible regarding
basic parameters of the project, designs and drawings etc., to avoid unintended benefits to the
contractors.
All conditions/clauses in tender schedules and agreements should be examined in consultation
with Law Department and suitable changes/ provisions may be made to safeguard the
Government interest in EPC system of contract.
Amount to the extent of liquidated damages due from contractor should not be released to him.
The above points were reported to Government in July 2007; their reply had not been received
(August 2007). The recommendations were accepted in the exit conference held in August
2007.
Performance Audit of Drinking Water Supply Schemes, Arunachal Pradesh
Highlights
The Public Health Engineering Department (PHED) is responsible for providing adequate
safe drinking water to the rural and urban population of the State. A review of the Rural
Drinking Water Supply Schemes revealed that there was shortfall in coverage of „Not
Covered‟ (NC) and „Partially Covered‟ (PC) habitations despite having sufficient funds.
Number of slipped back and quality affected habitations increased between 2002 and 2007.
Irregularities were noticed in other rural and urban water supply programmes such as
inadequate expenditure on water quality, monitoring and surveillance, un-productive and
wasteful expenditure, irregular expenditure, and non-execution of work as per approved
specification. Despite poor completion rates and increase in number of ongoing schemes, new
schemes were taken up every year which is indicative of poor planning.
3.2.1 Introduction
In order to provide adequate safe drinking water facilities to the rural and urban population,
the following Central and State sector programmes were implemented in the State:
Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) in Central sector;
Accelerated Urban Water Supply Programme (AUWSP), in Central sector;
Rural Piped Water Supply Programme (RPWSP) under MNP in State sector;
Prime Minister‟s Gramodaya Yojana (PMGY) in State sector;
Urban Water Supply Projects (UWSP) funded under NLCPR/DONER.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
11
The ARWSP was introduced by GOI in 1972-73 with 100 per cent grants-in-aid to assist the
State to tackle water supply problems in identified problem villages10. With the introduction
of the Minimum Needs Programme (MNP) under State sector, the ARWSP was withdrawn in
1974-75 but re-introduced in 1977-78 to accelerate the pace of coverage of problem villages. In
1986 the programme was given a mission approach with the introduction of National
Drinking Water Mission (NDWM), which was renamed as the Rajiv Gandhi National
Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991. The RGNDWM covered ARWSP, sector
reforms programme, sub-mission projects and support services. The sector reforms
programme, which was launched by GOI on a pilot basis during 1999-2000, was modified and
launched as Swajaldhara on 25 December 2002. In 2000-01, a new scheme in rural sector
under the PMGY was launched by the GOI for taking up projects /schemes on sustainable
basis.
The Centrally sponsored AUWSP was launched to provide safe and adequate water supply
facilities to towns having population less than 20,000 (as per 1991 census) and to improve the
environment and the quality of life for better socio-economic condition of the country within a
fixed time frame.
MNP is a State sector scheme launched in 1974-75 with the objective of providing water
supply to any habitation regardless of its size/population/number of households. RPWSP and
PMGY programmes under State sector are also implemented in the State.
3.2.3 Scope of Audit
Performance review of various water supply programmes (under CSS and State Plan) covering
the period 2002–07 was conducted during April to June 2007. Records of the office of the CE,
PHED and six12 out of 16 divisions in six out of 15 districts were test checked in audit. The
divisions and districts 1were selected on the basis of simple random sampling covering an
expenditure of Rs.54.49 crore which is 38 per cent of the total expenditure of Rs.142.34 crore
during 2002-07.
3.2.4 Audit objectives
The objectives of the review were to ascertain whether:
Survey of habitations was conducted effectively for authentic and reliable data;
Planning for implementation was adequate and the schemes/projects were properly executed;
Financial management was adequate and effective;
The mechanism for monitoring was adequate and effective;
The objectives of the programmes were achieved in an economical, efficient and effective manner.
3.2.5 Audit criteria
Audit findings were benchmarked against the following criteria:
Guidelines of the GOI for implementation of the schemes;
Project reports, estimates and sanction letters of individual schemes and projects;
Quality assurance mechanism prescribed by GOI;
Prescribed monitoring mechanism.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
12
3.2.6 Audit Methodology
The performance audit commenced with an entry conference in April 2007 with the CE and
Additional CE, PHED wherein the audit objectives, criteria and scope of the review and audit
procedures were explained to the Department. An exit conference was held in November 2007
with the Secretary/Chief Engineer PHED and replies of the Government/Department have
been incorporated in the review at appropriate places.
3.2.7 Audit findings
The review revealed improper planning, unproductive and wasteful expenditure, and non-
execution of work as per approved specifications, lack of IEC/HRD and water quality
monitoring activities, improper utilisation of funds etc.
3.2.10 Implementation
3.2.10.1 Targets and achievement
The targets for coverage of habitations/schools under ARWSP and MNP/PMGY and
achievement there against during 2002-03 to 2006-07 were as under:
Source: Information furnished by the Department.
Year Habitation target Achievement schools
NC/PC to
FC
Population NC/PC
habitation
population Target achievement
2002-03 86 25,458 92 24,197 113 117
2003-04 169 19,736 152 17,778 143 146
2004-05 155 19,526 247 31,455 135 300
2005-06 379 50,322 329 45,713 257 347
2006-07 193 39,831 231 41,249 315 403
There was excess achievement of habitation coverage by seven and 25 per cent as compared to
targets fixed under ARWSP and MNP respectively. Achievement of coverage of schools was
also 36 and 16 per cent higher although there were unspent balances in almost all the years as
indicated in paragraph 3.2.9.3. This indicates that targets had not been set realistically taking
into account availability of funds.
3.2.11 Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme
3.2.11.1 Poor completion rate of works
During 2002-2007, the Department took up 4,607 schemes under ARWSP for execution, of
which 2,443 schemes (53 per cent) were completed as of March 2007 and 2,164 schemes were
in progress (March 2007). Total expenditure incurred upto March 2007 was Rs.326.23 crore.
Test check of six divisions17 revealed that out of 1,986 schemes taken up for execution under
ARWSP during 2002-07, 1,866 schemes were due for completion by March 2007. Against
these, only 1,000 schemes (54 per cent) including three schemes which were not due for
completion during 2006-07 were completed at the end of March 2007. The work on 557
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
13
schemes was in progress whereas 429 schemes were yet to be taken up (March 2007) as
detailed in Appendix-3.2.1. Reasons for failure in completion of the 869 schemes were not on
record. The Department however, stated (November 2007) that poor completion rate of works
was mainly due to shortfall in State share. This is not factually correct as ARWSP schemes are
fully funded by GOI.
Thus, due to poor completion rate of water supply schemes, the beneficiaries were deprived of
getting the benefit of drinking water.
3.2.11.2 Unauthorised expenditure
In two districts18 the State Government, during 2002-03 to 2005-06, sanctioned 10 WSS at an
estimated cost of Rs.87 lakh without obtaining technical clearance of the SLSCC. Out of these,
seven schemes were completed between 2004-05 and 2006-07 at a cost of Rs.70 lakh. Work on
the remaining three schemes against which an expenditure of Rs.8 lakh had been incurred was in
progress (March 2007). Thus, expenditure of Rs.78 lakh was unauthorized in the absence of the
technical sanction of the SLSCC.
Between 2001-2006, 12 WSS at an estimated cost of Rs.2.21 crore were sanctioned and taken up
for execution in six districts. The schemes covered two public sector undertakings, seven
Government establishments, one Army camp and two tea estates. As of March 2007, seven
schemes were completed; two in progress and works of three schemes were yet to be
commenced. As of March 2007, total expenditure incurred was Rs.70 lakh. As no rural
habitation was covered under the scheme, providing water supply facilities to the above entities
was not within the scope of ARWSP. Thus, the expenditure of Rs.70 lakh incurred against seven
completed schemes and five incomplete schemes till March 2007 was unauthorized (Appendix-
3.2.2).
3.2.11.3 Doubtful expenditure
In five divisions19 17 schemes sanctioned between 2002-06 covering 17 habitations were
stated to have been completed at a cost of Rs.2.35 crore during 2004-07. But the villages where
the schemes were recorded to have been executed were either uninhabited or non-existent as
per 2001 census.
Thus the entire expenditure of Rs.2.35 crore appeared doubtful (Appendix-3.2.3).
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
14
3.2.11.4 Excess expenditure over approved cost
According to ARWSP guidelines, funds released under ARWSP should not be
utilised/adjusted against any cost escalation of schemes. The guidelines also laid down that
any expenditure incurred over and above the approved cost was to be met by the State
Government from its own resources. Test check, however, revealed that six divisions took up
22 water supply schemes at an estimated cost of Rs.2.85 crore during 1990-2003 and
completed them between 2002-07 after a delay ranging from two to 12 years at a cost of
Rs.3.44 crore resulting in cost overrun of Rs.59 lakh (Appendix-3.2.4). The Department stated
(November 2007) that the excess expenditure was within permissible limit of five per cent. The
contention of the Department is not acceptable as the ARWSP guidelines do not allow any
excess expenditure over approved cost.
3.2.11.5 Overlapping of scheme in same habitation
In Lower Subansiri, the State Government sanctioned (2003-04) one scheme (WSS at Byara
village), for Rs.12 lakh which was completed in 2004-05 at a cost of Rs.12 lakh. The
Department again took up WSS scheme for the same habitation in 2006-07 which was
completed during 2006-07 itself at a cost of Rs.14 lakh. The Department stated (November
2007) that there were two habitations with the same name of Byara as per CAP 99. The
contention of the Department is not acceptable as, as per census of 2001 Byara is one village
with a population of 92 only.
3.2.11.8 Sub-Mission projects
Sub Mission projects under ARWSP are to be taken up by the State for providing safe
drinking water to rural habitations facing water quality problems and for ensuring source
sustainability through rain water harvesting, artificial recharge etc. As per guidelines, an
annual action plan for coverage of habitations with quality related problems is to be
formulated and sent to Central Government for fund allocation and monitoring. Scrutiny
revealed that no annual action plan was formulated by the Department. The Department
however stated (November 2007) that in December 2005 it forwarded an action plan to GOI
under “Bharat Nirman programme”. Further development was awaited (November 2007).
According to a report of the North Eastern Regional Institute of Water and Land
Management for 2006, turbidity in water above permissible limit (> 5 NTU21) was found in
eight22 districts (23 locations) of the State. For arresting turbidity and bacteriological problem,
construction of slow sand filtration tank, pre-sedimentation tank, provision of chlorine dozer
and alum dozer were required to be provided in the estimates for execution of WSS. Test
check of records of four divisions (Yupia, Pasigaht, Along and Changlang) revealed that
between 2003-06, 12 WSS were sanctioned by GOI and completed by the Department at a
cost of Rs.1.52 crore in water quality problem areas. But the estimates of these schemes
neither included the items of works required for arresting turbidity and bacteriological
problems nor any measure was taken for arresting the turbidity of water. Water testing reports
(2003-07) of these divisions showed that turbidity of water in these areas ranged from 11 to 35
NTU.
Thus, non adoption of adequate measures for arresting quality problem of water in the areas
exposed the inhabitants of those areas to potential health risks.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
15
3.2.12 Support services
3.2.12.1 Water quality monitoring
The Department established (2001-02) 13 district level water testing laboratories at a cost of
Rs.24 lakh with the Central assistance of Rs.48 lakh released between October 1997 and
February 2001. Utilisation of balance Rs.24 lakh was not on record. Test check of six
districts23 revealed that no technical persons were appointed till May 2007 and water testing
was carried out by the Sub Divisional Officer/Sectional Officer of the division with the help of
field kits. In June 2006, the Department signed an MoU with Defence Research Laboratory,
Tezpur to act as State Referral Institute (SRI) for community based National rural drinking
water quality, monitoring and surveillance programme. But there was no documentary
evidence indicating involvement and activity undertaken by SRI. In February 2006, GOI
released Rs.22 lakh for IEC and HRD activities and water quality monitoring and surveillance
activities, out of which the Department utilized Rs.14 lakh towards procurement of field kits
and arranging workshops till March 2007. Balance of Rs.8 lakh remained unutilised. Thus,
water quality monitoring and surveillance activities of the Department under ARWSP were
inadequate.
3.2.13 Sector reform/Swajaldhara
The main thrust of the programme was to institutionalize rural community participation
through enhancement of awareness for generating resources for meeting a part of the capital
cost of the project. The beneficiaries were to be properly trained, to plan, implement, operate,
maintain and manage the water supply schemes of their choice.
Under Sector Reforms, GOI approved 181 schemes in two districts (West Siang: 102, Lohit:
79) at a cost of Rs.16 crore and released (February 2000 and February 2004) Rs.6.81 crore. In
addition, the State Government realized Rs.60 lakh as beneficiaries‟ contribution and received
bank interest of Rs.43 lakh. The Department incurred an expenditure of Rs.7.23 crore and
completed 69 schemes till March 2005. The balance 112 schemes along with the balance fund
of Rs.61 lakh were transferred (May 2005) to Swajaldhara.
3.2.13.1 Incomplete schemes
Under Swajaldhara, planning and scheme formulation is to be done by District Water
Sanitation Committee (DWSC). Schemes technically cleared by DWSC are required to be
approved by the State Water and Sanitation Mission (SWSM). In February 2004, GOI
released Rs.2.24 crore out of the total allocation of Rs.4.47 crore. The DWSCs, on the basis of
availability of funds, sanctioned 90 schemes which were to be completed by March 2007. Out
of this, only 35 schemes (39 per cent) were completed till March 2007 at a cost of Rs.3.03
crore. Poor rate of completion was on account of non availability of funds. The balance fund
of Rs.2.23 crore was released by GOI only in February 2007. Out of 35 completed schemes,
only six schemes (Papumpare district) were handed over to the Village Committee as required
under the scheme guidelines.
3.2.15 Water supply programme under Non-lapsable Central Pool of Resource (NLCPR) and
AUWSP
3.2.15.1 Slow progress of works
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
16
Out of 13 water supply projects (12 projects under NLCPR/DONER and 1 project under
AUWSP) taken up during 2000-01 and 2006-07, seven projects were due for completion
between March 2003 and March 2007. Out of these, only one project (water supply at Along)
was recorded as completed and others remained incomplete (March 2007).
Delay in completion of the schemes was due to lack of proper work plan and poor financial
management as discussed below:
3.2.15.2 Incomplete Water Supply Scheme at Hapoli (Ziro) township
Under AUWSP, GOI approved (February 2004) construction of 1.56 MLD capacity Water
Treatment plant (WTP) at Hapoli at an estimated cost of Rs.4.97 crore on 50:50 share basis
(Central Government 50 per cent and State Government 50 per cent including five per cent
community contribution). The project was to be completed by September 2006. The division
increased the capacity of WTP from 1.56 MLD to 2.06 MLD without obtaining approval of
the Centre and a revised estimate was prepared for Rs.7.38 crore which was sanctioned by the
State Government in March 2006. The division incurred an expenditure of Rs.4.91 crore and
95 per cent of the civil works viz construction of treatment plant, sedimentation tank, intake,
service reservour, etc. were completed till March 2007. Although, the Department sought
additional funds of Rs.2.34 crore from the State Government in October 2006, no funds were
released till March 2007. The scheme remains incomplete after a lapse of more than three
years from the date of approval. This led to not only idle investment of Rs.4.91 crore on the
WSS but the beneficiaries were also deprived of safe drinking water.
3.2.15.3 Augmentation of Water Supply at Along-Idle expenditure
The work “Augmentation of Water Supply” at Along in West Siang district was
administratively approved by the State Government in March 1996 at an estimated cost of
Rs.3.54 crore under the State Plan scheme. The work was to be completed by March 1998. In
March 2001, the Department revised the estimated cost to Rs.5.77 crore which was technically
cleared by the GOI in August 2000, with the target of completion by March 2003. The
Department in March 2002 awarded the construction work to a local contractor at Rs.2.09
crore (excluding materials) with the stipulation to complete the work by March 2004. Test
check however, revealed that the estimate was again revised (June 2005) to Rs.8.15 crore with
a provision of extra work viz laying of DI pipes, construction of clear water reservoir and
anchor block etc, which was not technically cleared by GOI till March 2007 and expenditure
sanction was also not accorded by the State Government. Though, the division incurred an
expenditure of Rs.6.10 crore between March 1996 and March 2007, the project remained
incomplete as of March 2007.
Thus, expenditure of Rs.6.10 crore was idle and the objectives of taking up the project were
frustrated as the targeted population could not be provided with adequate safe drinking water
in time.
3.2.15.4 Incomplete Water supply scheme in Bomdila Township - Locking up of funds
The Union Ministry of Urban Development & Poverty Alleviation in May 2004 technically
approved a scheme for construction of a water treatment plant for Bomdila township at an
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
17
estimated cost of Rs.17.98 crore. The division incurred an expenditure of Rs.12.44 crore
towards procurement of DI pipes and partial execution of head work and construction of
water treatment plant till March 2007. However, the land allotted by the district authority in
January 2005 for the scheme belonged to the Army who disallowed construction and laying of
pipelines through their land. In March 2007, the Executive Engineer selected an alternative
alignment for laying pipelines.
Thus wrong selection of work site resulted in delay in completion which led to locking up of
funds of Rs.12.44 crore.
3.2.15.5 Augmentation of water supply at Naharlagun-Nirjuli township
• Extra expenditure
The GOI in May 2002 technically approved the augmentation of water supply at Naharlagun -
Nirjuli township at an estimated cost of Rs.11.78 crore under NLCPR. The State Government
after a delay of two years accorded administrative approval and expenditure sanction in
March 2004. The civil work was awarded to a contractor in May 2004 at tender value of
Rs.4.27 crore with the stipulation to complete the work by December 2006. The division
incurred an expenditure of Rs.14.62 crore (including cost of civil work) till March 2007. Thus
delay of more than two years in granting approval and consequent delay in completion of
work resulted in extra expenditure of Rs.2.84 crore with further liability of Rs.28 lakh required
for completion of the project apart from time overrun.
3.2.17 Conclusion
The process of selection and approval of schemes under ARWSP/Swajaldhara was not
transparent. Due to lack of vision and financial plan, there was piling up of incomplete
schemes. Poor planning and lack of prioritisation resulted in spreading out resources thinly
thereby leaving a majority of schemes incomplete and non-accrual of envisaged benefits.
Delay in completion/ taking up of execution of WSS resulted in cost overrun and idle
investment. The State Government failed to utilise the available funds depriving people of safe
drinking water. The funds were diverted from one scheme to another when diversions were
not permitted. Schemes for sustainability of sources and water quality improvement were not
taken up in the State. Objectives of the programmes were thus not achieved.
3.2.18 Recommendations
• The Department should prepare proper work plan before taking up execution of schemes so that
timely completion of schemes can be ensured to avoid cost overrun and idle investment;
• The Department should ensure that sufficient funds are allotted for completion of ongoing
schemes/projects before taking up new schemes;
• Fund provision under RPWSP, MNP and PMGY should be made as per funds released by the
GOI under ARWSP;
• The State Government and the Nodal Department should evolve effective monitoring system
for completion of the schemes/projects as scheduled.
The Department assured (November 2007) compliance with the recommendations at all
levels.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
18
Perforamce of Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP), Chhattisgarh
Highlights
The Government of India (GOI) introduced (1972-73) Accelerated Rural Water Supply
Programme (ARWSP) to provide safe and potable drinking water at 40 litres per capita per
day (lpcd) to all rural habitations. The GOI provided Rs 239.63 crore during 2002-07, of
which State Government could not utilize Rs 58.78 crore. During new survey (2003), 17,968
new habitations emerged out of which 14,471 habitations were uncovered and 3,507
habitations remained for coverage as of February 2007. Allocation by the State for operation
and maintenance, source sustainability and quality remained low. There were instances of
incorrect reporting of figures. Some important findings of the performance audit are given
below:
Introduction
GOI introduced ARWSP in 1972-1973 with 100 per cent grants-in-aid to the states. It was
discontinued after introduction of Minimum Needs Programme
(MNP) during fifth five year plan in 1974-75 and was revived in 1977-1978. The programme
was given a mission approach1 under National Drinking Water Mission introduced in 1986.
A Comprehensive Action Plan was launched in 1999 under which Not Covered (NC) and
Partially Covered (PC) habitations were identified.
3.3.1 Programme Objectives
• To ensure coverage of all rural habitations especially to reach the un-reached with access to safe
drinking water.
• To ensure sustainability of the system and sources.
• To preserve quality of water by institutionalizing water quality monitoring and surveillance
through a catchment area approach.
Coverage Norms
• 40 Litres per capita per day (lpcd) of drinking water for human beings and
• One hand pump or stand post for every 250 persons.
Criteria for identification of problem habitation
(i) NC/NSS (No Safe Source) habitation.
• Drinking water source/point does not exist within 1.6 km of habitations in plains and 100
metres elevation in hilly areas;
• Habitations having a water source but are affected with quality problems and,
• Habitations where quantum of availability of safe water from any source is not enough to meet
drinking and cooking needs (less than eight lpcd).
(ii) Partial Covered (PC) Habitations-which have a safe drinking water source (either private
or public) within 1.6 km in plains and 100 metres in hilly areas but capacity of the system
ranges between 10 lpcd to 40 lpcd.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
19
(iii) Fully Covered (FC) Habitations- all the remaining habitations
Under the programme priority was to be accorded for coverage of no safe source habitations.
Among them priority was to be given to those inhabited exclusively by SC/ST, quality
affected habitations with acute toxicity, upgradation of source level of safe source habitations
having less than 40 lpcd water to the level of 40 lpcd and coverage of schools and Anganwadis
without safe drinking water source.
The mission approach implied the provision of low cost solutions to identify problems
associated with the supply of safe drinking water through the application of scientific and
technological inputs.
Under ARWSP, funds for coverage of NC/PC was to be allocated in the ratio of 2:1.
3.3.2 Organisational Structure
In Chhattisgarh the Public Health Engineering Department (PHED), headed by the Engineer-
in-Chief is the nodal agency executing the programme. Under him there are two zones each
headed by CE with their headquarters at Raipur and Bilaspur. There is a mechanical
formation headed by the C.E. at Raipur. There are 25 Divisions (16 Civil, five Mechanical,
three Project and one Water recharge) in the state.
3.3.3 Audit Objectives
The main objective of the performance audit were to-
• ascertain whether planning for implementation of ARWSP was effective;
• assess the adequacy and effectiveness of financial control;
• assess whether schemes were properly prioritized and efficiently executed;
• assess whether priority was accorded to Operation and Maintenance (O & M) of existing water
supply sources, and
• ascertain the adequacy and effectiveness of the mechanism to monitor water quality and
sustainability.
3.3.4 Scope of Audit
Information was collected from the E-in-C office and records relating to the scheme for the
period 2002-03 to 2006-07 were scrutinized in seven2 out of 25 divisions selected through
random sampling.
3.3.5 Audit Criteria
The criteria used for the performance audit were taken from the rules, regulations and
provisions in:
(i) Guidelines for Implementation of Rural Water Supply Programme (August 2000);
(ii) Guidelines on Swajaldhara (June 2003);
(iii) Guidelines on Survey of Drinking Water Supply Status in Rural Habitations (February 2003);
(iv) Guidelines for National Rural Drinking Water Quality Monitoring and Surveillance
Programmed (January 2006);
(v) National Water Policy (April 2002); and
(vi) Draft Project Report and Project Implementation Plan for individual schemes.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
20
Audit Findings
3.3.14 Water quality
Sub mission projects on water quality are undertaken by the states for providing safe water to
the rural habitations facing water quality problems but no action in this regard was initiated.
3.3.14.1 Water testing labs
Water testing labs exist in Jagdalpur, Ambikapur, Korba and the newly constructed district lab
at Raipur is being used as a guest house.
No annual targets were fixed by the E-in-C for testing of water samples and the number of
samples taken for testing from the existing and the new sources in Jagdalpur, Korba and
Ambikapur remained very low.
As per ARWSP guidelines, 15 per cent of the allocation of ARWSP funds was to be
earmarked for taking up sub mission projects to supply safe drinking water to rural habitations
facing water quality problems like fluorosis, brackishness and presence of arsenic/iron etc. It
was observed in audit that the State Government allocated Rs 85 lakh on this sub-mission
(0.13 percentage of ARWSP and MNP allocation). The required institutional set up for testing
the quality of water was not set up from the State to the block level as per guidelines and no
IEC activities were taken up to spread awareness about water born diseases and quality of
water in the test checked districts. In Jagdalpur district, it was seen that there were 3,090
quality affected habitations with excess iron (above eight parts per million) in 2002-03. The
number of such habitations increased to 4,478 in 2006. This slip back would have been
avoided by taking up adequate sub-mission projects.
As per ARWSP guidelines, in the coverage of no source habitations, priority was to be given
for coverage of quality affected habitations with acute toxicity.
3.3.14.2 Field testing kits
Objective of field testing kit is to monitor quality of all drinking water sources at Gram
Panchayat (GP) level. According to National Rural Drinking Water Quality and Surveillance
Programme, one field test kit shall be provided for each GP. GOI released (February 2006) Rs
59.77 lakh for procuring such kits. It was however, observed that kits were not procured up to
March 2007 in Raipur, Jagdalpur and Ambikapur districts while 40 field testing kits purchased
during 2006-07 in Korba were yet to be distributed. The E-in-C, PHED stated (August 2007)
that the program is taken up in the current financial year to achieve the goal. The reply proves
that field testing kits were not procured up to March 2007.
3.3.15 Drinking water in rural schools
The position of number of schools without drinking water facilities, targets for coverage and
achievement is given below:
Field testing kits not procured up to March 2007.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
21
Year Numbers of
schools
without
drinking water
facility
Target Achieve
ment
Closing
balance
of
Schools
without
drinking
water at
end of year
Difference
between opening and
closing of previous
year
2002-03
03
11,592 1,448 1,137 10,455 N.A.
2003-04 15,356 5,928 4,569 10,787 4,901
2004-05 11,046 4,500 3,511 7,535 259
2005-06 6,596 6,596 3,996 2,600 (-) 939
2006-07 2,600 3,798 3,301 (-)701 No difference
Incorrect reports sent to GOI regarding drinking water in rural schools
The tabulation shows wide variation between the closing balance (CB) of one year and the
opening balance (OB) of the subsequent years, except during 2006-07. In the last year, against
2,600 uncovered schools in 2006-07 the achievement was shown as 3,301 which was not
possible.
Similarly, test check of records in Ambikapur revealed that the number of schools without
drinking water facility were 1,679 in 2004-05, out of which 388 were covered during the year.
However the number of uncovered schools was shown to be 99 in 2005-06 and against 68
number of uncovered schools in 2006-07 the achievement during the year was shown as 243.
In Korba against 101 uncovered schools during 2006-07 the achievement was shown as 253.
Thus the figures appeared to be inaccurate and exact status of drinking water in schools could
not be verified.
The figures of achievement reported in progress reports were unreliable.
3.3.16 Monitoring
Vigilance and Monitoring Committees were to be formed at the State level and district level. It
was observed that such committees were not formed at the State level as well as four test
checked districts. No evaluation study was carried out on the implementation of the rural
water supply programme in the state during the last five years.
It was noticed from the records of PHE (E/M) division, Jagdalpur that during 2002-03 to
2006-07 total targets for drilling of tube wells were 1,725 against which achievement was
shown as 1,752 tube wells. The PHE civil Dn. Jagdalpur during consolidation of progress
reports, however, changed the targets and achievements as 1,746 and 1,531. Similarly PHE
(E/M) division, Ambikapur drilled 266 tubewells during the year 2006-07 and during
consolidation of progress report it was changed as 155 by the PHE (Civil) division
Ambikapur.
On being pointed out in audit E.E., PHE, Jagdalpur and Korba did not furnish specific reply
in regard to reduction in figures.
During the years 2005-06 and 2006-07, 256 dry tube wells (206 in Korba and 50 in
Ambikapur) in rural NC/PC area were converted to successful tube wells through hydro
fracturing process. Installation of hand pumps and allied civil works were also done. But the
successful tube wells were not shown in the progress report during above period.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
22
On being pointed out in audit, EE, PHE division, Korba stated (June 2007) that the targets
will be revised, while EE, PHE division, Ambikapur stated that action would be taken. These
cases indicated that the progress was not being reported accurately by these divisions and
monitoring of actual situation using progress reports would be difficult.
3.3.17 Rig Management
Out of 48,609 tubewells drilled, 16,504 tube wells were drilled by the departmental machines
(mechanical divisions) while 32,105 tubewells were drilled by the civil divisions through
contractors. It is observed that the department was not able to fully utilize the departmental
rigs as there was a shortfall of 10.8 to 21.17 per cent against the targets during 2005-06 and
2006-07.
3.3.18. Swajaldhara
As of March 2007 only 210 Swajaldhara was launched in December 2002. It involved a
participatory and swajaldhara demand driven approach and guidelines provided upto 20 per
cent allocation of funds under ARWSP. It was seen that the allocation of GOI ranged from
completed. No scheme was proposed during 2004-07.. The State Government did not enter
into MOU with the GOI as mandated in the guidelines. Neither were the communication and
capacity development units set up at the district levels. During the year 2002-03 to 2006-07,
312 schemes were sanctioned in the State out of which 210 schemes have been completed as
of March 2007. Out of total available funds of Rs 5.28 crore (GOI-Rs 4.74 crore and Rs 53.99
lakh-community share) for 312 schemes, 33 per cent of the funds remained unutilized as of
March 2007. No swajaldhara scheme was proposed during 2004 to 2007.
Test check of records of 83 sanctioned schemes in four10 districts revealed the following
deficiencies:
• In 19 out of 28 schemes in Korba, the community contribution was less than 10 per cent.
• Accounts were not audited by the Chartered Accountants in three out of four districts upto
March 2007.
• In three out of four districts (Raipur, Jagdalpur and Korba) the unutilized amount was not
returned to GOI upto March 2007 despite instructions in August 2006.
• In Korba, electrification work in 22 out of 24 Piped Water Supply Scheme remained incomplete
since 2003-04.
• Water quality test, rain water harvesting and ground water recharge system were not executed
in all 83 schemes.
On being pointed out in audit EE, PHE, Ambikapur stated (June 2007) that the accounts
would be audited by July 2007 and EE, PHE, Korba stated (June 2007) audit would be done.
EE, PHE, Raipur did not furnish specific reply regarding audit.
3.3.19 Conclusion
Implementation of ARWSP in the state suffered from deficiencies. The annual action plans
did not prioritize coverage of habitations as per guidelines. There was huge increase in the
number of problem habitations in the survey of 2003 and slip back in fully covered
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
23
habitations. There was savings in the central share of the funds while allocations by the state
for O&M, source sustainability and quality remained low. Piped water supply schemes were
executed inefficiently and there were instances of extra cost, non adherence to mix design and
delays. Field testing kits had not been procured and the monitoring committees had not been
formed. There was incorrect reporting of figures by divisions and discrepancies existed in the
data furnished to GOI.
3.3.20 Recommendation
• Annual action plans should be prepared in accordance with the scheme guidelines for prioritizing
the works efficiently.
• Coverage of NC habitations should be given priority in accordance with scheme guidelines.
• District level targets should be fixed to monitor quality of water and field testing kits be provided
to the functionaries.
• Works should be executed as per approved specification so as to avoid cost escalation.
Audit of Water Management System in Delhi
Delhi Jal Board (DJB) constituted under Delhi Jal Board Act 1998, is responsible for supply
and distribution of potable water to the inhabitants of National Capital Territory (NCT) of
Delhi. DJB receives raw water, mainly from Yamuna river, Bhakhra - Beas storage and upper
Ganga canal. Such raw water is received at the water treatment plants (WTPs) of DJB situated
at Chandrawal, Wazirabad, Bhagirathi, Haiderpur, Nangloi, Sonia Vihar and Bawana (not in
operation). The capacity of the water treatment plants is 710 million gallon per day (MGD).
The performance audit of the water management system in Delhi covers the period from
2002-03 to 2006-07.
Summary of recommendations
• In view of the serious problem of water shortage in Delhi, DJB may ensure that various plan
projects for augmentation of water production and supply are progressed and completed on time
through effective planning and implementation.
• The projects related to rationalization of water distribution may be executed promptly for
ensuring equitable distribution of available water.
• The system of plugging leakages may be strengthened with a view to minimizing wastages and
loss of revenue on account of non-revenue water. The specialized leak detection equipment may
be procured early.
• Effective steps may be taken to improve the quality of drinking water by adopting better quality
control methods and sustained monitoring in order to ensure that water being supplied is potable
and conforms to the standards prescribed by the Government. DJB may take effective steps to
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
24
minimize the number of unmetered connections to facilitate billing and revenue collection on
actual water consumption basis. The revenue collection machinery may be revamped and efforts
may be made to reduce the arrears of outstanding water charges.
3.1 Introduction
Delhi Jal Board (DJB) constituted under Delhi Jal Board Act 1998 is responsible for the
supply and distribution of potable water to the inhabitants of National Capital Territory
(NCT) of Delhi. The Water Treatment Plants (WTPs) situated at Chandrawal, Wazirabad,
Bhagirathi, Haiderpur, Nangloi, Bawana and Sonia Vihar with installed capacity of 710 MGD
receive raw water mainly from Yamuna river, Bhakhra - Beas storage and Upper Ganga
canal. In addition, 100 MGD of ground water is lifted through various ranney wells and tube
wells. DJB provides 780 MGD against the requirement of 1050 MGD of water due to
shortage of raw water.
DJB supplies water in bulk to New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and Delhi Cantonment
Board (DCB). These agencies look after the distribution and supply of water to inhabitants
residing within their areas. There were 16 lakh water connections in MCD area of Delhi as of
March 2007.
The main functions of the Board pertaining to water management were to:
(i) Treat, supply and distribute water for household consumption or other purposes to those parts of
Delhi where there are houses, whether through pipes or by other means;
(ii) Regulate and manage the exploitation of ground water in Delhi in consultation with Central
Ground Water Authority;
(iii) Promote measures for conservation, recycling and re-use of water; and
(iv) Make provisions for un-filtered water supply.
3.2 Organizational set up
DJB functions under the Chairpersonship of the Chief Minister of the State and is assisted by
a Vice Chairperson who is nominated by the Speaker of the Legislature and 16 other members
consisting of 10 political and ex-officio members and six administrative/executive members.
Member (Water) heads the Engineering wing for water activities which is under the overall
control of Chief Executive Officer (CEO). He is assisted by Chief Engineers/Superintending
Engineers/Executive Engineers.
3.3 Scope of audit
The performance audit was conducted between April and August 2007, covering the period
2002-03 to 2006-07, through scrutiny of records at DJB Headquarters, WTPs/Booster
Pumping Stations, water construction/maintenance divisions and Zonal Revenue Officers.
The performance audit examined inter alia the progress of various plan schemes undertaken
by the Government of NCT of Delhi to improve the water supply situation in Delhi, initiatives
taken to conserve water as well as to improve the quality of water and the system of
assessment and collection of revenue.
3.4 Audit methodology
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
25
The audit methodology included:
• Selection of 27 out of 53 construction/maintenance divisions, 13 Zonal Revenue Officers (ZROs)
out of 25 and all nine water treatment plants. The selection was done by picking up the units
which were listed at even numbers from the list of offices.
• Ascertaining public perception regarding the functioning of DJB by circulating a questionnaire to
487 number of Residential Welfare Associations (RWAs) chosen at random out of 1100 number
of RWAs registered with „Bhagidari Cell‟ Government of NCT of Delhi.
• Seeking views of the DJB on the preliminary audit findings.
• Formulation of observations and make recommendations on the basis of the views and
comments of the DJB.
3.5 Audit objectives
The objectives of the audit were to verify whether:
• DJB ensured adequate supply of water to different parts of the city as per norms prescribed by the
Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India in terms of per capita supply.
• Various schemes undertaken to augment water supply were being implemented in a planned and
efficient manner.
• There was equitable distribution of water to different areas and the ancillary projects planned to
rationalise the water supply have been implemented timely.
• The leakage detection and its management was efficient and ensured prompt repair of
transmission and distribution network to minimise the loss of water.
• Effective action is taken to minimise loss of revenue on account of unmetered connections,
defective meters and theft of water etc.
• The quality of potable water at treatment plants, reservoirs and that being supplied to households
was as per norms; and
• Prompt action was taken to address the problems of the customers for ensuring better customer
satisfaction.
3.6 Audit criteria
The audit criteria used in the performance audit included:
• strategic goals and objectives, the targets to be achieved by the DJB for capacity building to
ensure sustainable water supply services;
• provision contained in the DJB Act, 1998 and plan documents;
• quality of water as per prescribed standards; and
• system of assessment and collection of revenue.
Audit Findings
Water is a prime national resource, a basic human need and a precious national asset. High
rate of urbanization and population growth in metropolitan cities in India including Delhi
have laid tremendous stress on drinking water supply systems. Growth process and expansion
of economic activities inevitably led to increasing demands for water for diverse purposes;
domestic, industrial, agricultural, recreation etc. The nation’s capital is perpetually in the grip
of a water crisis due to increasing gap between demand and supply.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
26
To provide potable water supply at reasonable economic price to the satisfaction of the
habitants of NCT of Delhi is the mission of DJB. A memorandum was signed each year
between the Board and Government of NCT of Delhi with assurance of reduction in non-
revenue water, reduction of operating losses, replacement of defective meters, metering of un-
metered connections, augmentation of water supply by constructing various underground
reservoirs and construction, completion and commissioning of Sonia Vihar WTP with all
ancillary works on due date. Improvement of collection efficiency was a matter of utmost
concern. DJB failed in many of these areas as reflected in succeeding paragraphs.
3.7 Consultative Mechanism
As per Section 8 of DJB Act, 1998, the Government may constitute a Water Consultative
Council with the object:
• to advise the Board on policy matters and formulation of annual and five years plans;
• to give expert advice on administrative, financial and technical matters;
advise the Board on matter pertaining to the interest of consumers and issues affecting the
environment ; and
• to advise the Board on any matter on which the Board seeks its advice.
• The Council was constituted in August 1998 but no meeting was ever held as of August 2007.
This defeated the very purpose for which the Council was set up.
3.8 Water requirement, production and shortfall
The production capacity of water in Delhi during Tenth Plan period was 780 million gallon
per day (MGD) against the requirement of 1050 MGD (based on a norm of 60 gallon per
capita per day as per Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India norms prescribed
in the Master Plan of Delhi 2001), thus, leaving a wide demand-supply gap of 270 MGD. The
trends in the projected requirement, actual production and shortfall in supply of water during
Seventh to Tenth five year Plan were as given in the table below:
Table 3.1: Requirement viz-a-viz production of water
Five year
plan
Population
in lakh
Requirement* of
water in MGD
Production of
water in MGD
Shortfall Percentage
shortfall
7th (1985-
90)
94 658 437** 221 33.59
8th (1992-
97)
110 770 580 190 24.68
9th (1997-
02)
138 966 650 316 32.71
10th (2002-
07)
176 1050 780 270 25.71
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
27
Due to increasing urbanisation and population growth in Delhi, requirement of potable water
increased significantly from 658 MGD in Seventh Plan to 1050 MGD in Tenth Plan
registering a growth of 60 per cent.
DJB has not been able to keep pace with the rapid urbanization of the city. The water supply
infrastructure has failed to match the demand. Despite Government efforts to improve
production of potable water, the demand and supply gap persists in the range of about 25 to 34
per cent. Against the requirement of producing additional quantity of 400 MGD during Tenth
Plan to fully meet the projected requirement, DJB could increase production by only 130
MGD of water during this period. The percentage shortfall came down by seven per cent
during Tenth Plan mainly on account of increase in the production capacity (130 MGD) and
downward revision in water supply norms from 70 gallon per capita daily in Ninth Plan to 60
gallon per capita daily in Tenth Plan. Persisting shortfalls in production of potable water led to
significantly reduced supply of water to the residents of national capital at an average rate of
44 gallon per capita per day against the reduced norm of 60 gallon per capita per day. As per
Government‟s own admission, per capita water supply in different parts of the city is not
uniform indicating that certain areas of Delhi are severely affected by water supply shortage
and are getting supply much below the average rate of 44 gallon per capita per day.
3.9 Projects for augmenting water production and supply
DJB planned various schemes to increase production and improve supply of potable drinking
water to the inhabitants of Delhi. The major schemes identified for implementation during the
Tenth five year Plan were:
• Construction of 140 MGD WTP at Sonia Vihar for augmentation of water in Delhi;
• Recycling of waste water at Wazirabad, Chandrawal, Haiderpur and Bhagirathi for producing 45
MGD of safe potable water;
• Construction of Under Ground Reservoirs (UGRs) and Booster Pumping Stations (BPSs) all
over Delhi for rationalization and better distribution of water; and
• Renovation of Chandrawal water works.
An audit appraisal revealed that huge demand and supply gap persisted during Tenth Plan due
to delay in operationalisation of the Sonia Vihar WTP, non-completion of allied works of this
plant, delay in construction of re-cycling plants, delay in construction of UGRs and BPSs, lack
of planning to regulate and manage the exploration of ground water, and improper
management of leakages. The details of slippages in implementation of these projects are
discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.
3.9.1 Sonia Vihar Water Treatment Plant
DJB constructed a 140 MGD WTP at Sonia Vihar in December 2004 at a cost of Rs. 188.80
crore to cater to the water requirement of the Trans Yamuna area as well as South Delhi.
Twenty three UGRs were also required to be constructed at an estimated cost of Rs. 194 crore
for the distribution of potable water that came out of the WTP. Out of 140 MGD, 90 MGD
water was to be allocated to South Delhi, 35 MGD to Tahirpur and 15 MGD to Shastri Park.
Audit scrutiny of the records revealed the following:
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
28
(i) The Sonia Vihar WTP was to become fully operational by December 2003. Though the
construction of the treatment plant was completed in December 2004, the plant could not be
made fully functional due to non-availability of raw water from Tehri Dam. The plant started
functioning only in June 2007 after the Government of Uttar Pradesh released 140 MGD raw
water for the plant. Thus, the projected augmentation of 140 MGD through Sonia Vihar
treatment plant could not be achieved during Tenth Plan due to delayed operationalisation of
the plant.
(ii) Though the plant has since become fully operational in June 2007, the plant is not
functioning at its full capacity due to non-construction of reservoirs and peripheral lines. Out
of 28 UGRs, only 10 UGRs have so far been commissioned as of August 2007. Due to non-
completion of the UGRs, the plant is treating only 112 to 119 MGD of water.
Thus, water supply to the residents of South Delhi, Tahirpur and Shastri Park was affected
due to delayed operationalisation of the plant and delay in completion of anciliary and
peripheral works.
Department stated (November 2007) that full supply of raw water from Tehri to plant was
available only during Monsoon Season and could utilize about 120 MGD. The reply of the
Department confirms the audit observation that the plant is not operating to its full capacity
even after four years of the original scheduled date of completion.
3.9.2 Recycling of waste water
During the course of treatment of raw water at WTPs, 8-10 per cent water goes waste due to
back wash of filters and the clarifloculators. In view of the scarcity of raw water, DJB
proposed to recycle waste water of existing WTPs of Haiderpur, Wazirabad, Bhagirathi and
Chandrawal to produce 45 MGD potable water. The status of creation of facilities for
recycling in these plants was as under:
Name of
recycling
plant
Date of
resolution
passed by the
Board
Date of
award
of
work
Tendered
amount
(Rs. in
crore)
Stipulated
date of
completion
Latest
position
Bhagirath(10 MGD)
27.07.99 at Rs. 6.18 crore
09.08.2005 13.34 14.10.2006 Work-in-progress
Wazirabad (11 MGD)
03.06.1999 Rs. 6.86 crore
December 2005
2780 14.04.2007 Only 40
per cent completed
Haiderpur (16 MGD)
24.09.1999 Rs. 10.44 Crore
23.09.2005 26.59 06.04.2007 Not yet commissioned
Chandrawal (8 MGD)
28.01.2005 Rs.14.66 crore
28.02.2007 12.86 28.06.2008 Work-in-progress
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
29
Despite the need for establishing recycling facilities being felt and accepted as early as 1999,
the DJB took six years in awarding the work for construction of these facilities at
Bhagirathi,Wazirabad and Haiderpur which led to enhancement in the project cost of first
three plants from Rs. 23.48 crore to Rs.67.73 crore (188 per cent). The Board also failed to
ensure completion of work on the three recycling WTPs by the stipulated dates. On account of
these delays, residents of Delhi were deprived of additional quantity of 37 MGD of water.
Department stated (November 2007) that there was a delay of three-four years in finalizing the
appropriate technical design and obtaining the views of evaluation committee.
The reply of the Department is not acceptable, as the entire project was to be implemented
during Tenth Plan to meet serious water shortages in Delhi and, therefore, technical design
should have been finalized and evaluated in a time bound manner.
3.9.3 Rationalization of water distribution and construction of more UGRs/BPSs
There is inequitable supply of water in different parts of city, as a result, some parts of Delhi
for example the Northern Zone receives far more water supply than the South Zone. Since
there was also significant mismatch between demand and supply of water, rational
distribution of the water that was available, was one of the priorities of the DJB to minimize
imbalance and improve customer satisfaction in affected areas. DJB engaged a consultant to
recommend the most appropriate arrangement required for rationalization of water
distribution. The study recommended construction of additional reservoirs and booster
pumping stations in West, North-West and South-West Delhi. On the basis of study
conducted by the consultant, DJB passed a resolution in July 2004 for the construction of 14
UGRs and BPS at different locations in Delhi at an estimated cost of Rs. 263 crore.
Audit analysed the progress achieved in construction of UGRs and observed that the work at
most of the locations has still not commenced. The status of construction of the reservoirs is
indicated in the table below:
Sl.
No
Name of
the
UGR‟s
Proposed
Capacity
(in
million
litres)
Date of award of
work
Tendered
amount
Rs. in
crore)
Stipulated
date of
completi
on
Position of
construction UGRs
as of August 2007
1. Nangloi
(Nilothi)
52.5 24.08.2006 43.00 10.03.2008 Work in progress
(physical progress
70% and financial
progress
60%) 2. Kirti
Nagar
20.9 15.02.2006 10.76 15.05.2007 Work in progress
(physical progress
65%
and financial
progress
50%)-
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
30
3. Pitampura 21.4 Work yet to be
awarded (Tender
opened on
17.08.2007)
- - Work not yet started
4. Awantika 20.0 - Work not
yet
awarde
ded.
- Work not yet started.
5. Qutub garh 7.8 Letter of intent to
be issued
- Work not yet
awarded
6. Janakpuri 15.5 -do- - - Work not yet
awarded
7. Daulatpur 5.2 25.06.2007 5.31 24.09.2008 Work in progress
8. Rohini,
Sector -7
20.5 Work not yet
awarded
- - Land has been
allotted
by DDA. Work
of construction
yet to commence
9. Karala 24.3 Work not
yet
awarded
- - The land is yet to
be
acquired 10. Sultanpur
Dabas
5.0 02.03.2006 4.21 01.03.2007 Work in progress
(Physical progress
25% and financial
progress
10 %). 11. Bawana 27.1 17.07.2007 15.00 16.01.2009 Work yet to be started.
12. Shakur
Basti
23.6 Work not
yet
awarded
- - Land yet to be allotted
by DDA
13 MBR at
Palla
48.9 Yet to be tendered - - Work yet to
commence.
14 Narela 5.8 Yet to be tendered Work yet to
commence.
After three years of passing of resolution by the Board to construct 14 UGRs, work had not
commenced on 10 UGRs as of August 2007. In two cases of construction of UGRs at Kirti
Nagar and Sultanpur Dabas, the work was to be completed by March 2007 and May 2007
respectively. However, the progress of work at these locations was extremely slow and so far
only 25 per cent and 65 per cent physical progress had been achieved respectively. In the
remaining two cases of UGRs at Nangloi and Daulatpur, the works are scheduled to be
completed in 2008. Thus, there were significant delays in commencement and completion of
UGRs at different locations in Delhi which delayed the rationalization of water distribution in
different parts of Delhi.
Department stated (November 2007) that there was no delay in the construction of the UGRs
as no specific time line was given for the construction. The Department added that these
UGRs were not required to be built immediately as their construction was to be synchronized
with the availability of water. The reply is not acceptable as (i) two works planned for
completion by May 2007 are far behind schedule, and (ii) timely commencement and
completion of other UGRs would have facilitated rationalized distribution of water already
available.
3.9.4 Renovation of Chandrawal water treatment plant
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
31
The erstwhile Delhi Water Supplies and Sewerage Disposal Undertaking had approved a
scheme of renovation of Chandrawal water works in February 1988 at a cost of Rs. 1.85 crore.
Subsequently, an estimate of Rs. 3.80 crore was also approved in August 2000 for renovation
of 20 old patersons and 10 Jessop make filters at Chandrawal water works. The CEO, DJB
decided to club both the estimates into a single scheme in March 2002. The tenders were
invited in August, 2005. Audit examination, however, disclosed that the tenders were yet to be
finalized as of August 2007. One of the reasons that was holding up finalization of the tenders
was non- review of the estimates which were framed in 1988. Despite approval of the
renovation work as early as 1988, the actual award and execution of work has been delayed
for about 20 years. Delay in carrying out necessary renovation and replacement of filters
would affect cost-effectiveness and efficiency of operations of the plant.
Executive Engineer (E&M) stated in September 2007 that delay in finalisation of renovation
work has led to deterioration of the condition of the plant to such an extent that no repair was
possible except for its complete replacement. EE further stated that DJB was incurring
substantial expenditure on maintenance of old filter media and the efficiency of the units had
drastically reduced. To maintain the supply, extra labour was required. If the implementation
was delayed further, the units might totally collapse leading to reduction in filtering capacity
and, thus, the production.
The reply of the EE supports the audit contention that the Department has not shown any
urgency in carrying out necessary renovation and repair work at the plant.
Recommendations
(i) Given the serious problem of water shortage in Delhi, the Board should ensure that various
plan projects for augmentation of water production and supply are progressed and completed
on time through effective planning, designing, tendering, execution and monitoring.
(ii) The projects identified and undertaken for rationalisation of water distribution may be
executed promptly for equitable distribution of available water.
3.10 Replacement of old distribution lines
The water distribution system in Delhi is more than a century old. Since some of the mains
are very old, replacement work of 797 km of water mains was carried out in the Ninth Plan.
Government of NCT of Delhi proposed a target of 1500 km replacement of old distribution
lines during the Tenth Plan. The Department fixed annual targets and achievements.
Audit scrutiny revealed that against the target of replacement of 1500 km old distribution lines
in the Tenth Plan, DJB fixed a target of 1147 km only (76 per cent). DJB could replace only
1125 km of the distribution line against this target. However, it seen in the context of the
overall target of the Tenth Plan (1500 km), the shortfall in achievement of target was 25 per
cent.
Further, while DJB‟s performance was lagging during the first three years of the Tenth Plan, it
over shot the target during the next two years of the Plan period, indicating that the annual
targets in the Tenth Plan were not set rationally.
3.11 Leak detection management
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
32
Leak detection and its management is very vital for any water utility as it results in substantial
saving of water that would have otherwise gone waste. It also helps ensuring supply of quality
water to the end users by controlling contamination in the distribution system. The
distribution net work of DJB is divided into different operating zones, each headed by an
officer of the rank of the Executive Engineer. Leakages are detected through
patrolling/surveying of trunk transmission mains and distribution networks by the
Departmental staff of Leak Detection Cell and various maintenance divisions (operating
Zones). The maintenance divisions are required to undertake repair work as soon as the leak is
detected. DJB has also set up central control room to receive complaints from the public
regarding water leakages. Appropriate follow up action is required to be taken by the
operating zones on receipt of such complaints.
An audit appraisal of leak management in DJB revealed the following:
3.11.1 Loss due to leakages and theft
As per Economic Survey of Delhi of 2005-06, the total distribution losses, which include
leakage in pipes and theft of water through unauthorized connections, was of the order of 40
per cent of the total water supply. This was abnormally high not only in comparison to the
acceptable norm of 15 per cent prescribed by the Ministry of Urban Development but also
quite high as compared to 10 to 20 per cent level of distribution losses in developing countries.
Efficient leak management can help address the problem of water shortage in Delhi to a
significant extent. 3.11.2 Lack of monitoring Leak Detection Cell of DJB conducts surveys of
transmission and distribution lines for detection of leaks and reports the leakages to the zones
concerned for immediate repair/corrective action. The Report of the Comptroller and Auditor
General of India for the year ended March 1997 had pointed out lack of feed back mechanism
in DJB for monitoring action taken by the respective zones for prompt plugging of leaks after
being reported by the Cell. Superintendent Engineer (P) Water confirmed (March 2007) that
the Cell did not get action taken reports from respective operating zones on regular basis
indicating that no significant improvement had taken place in detection and management of
leak, its control and follow up despite being pointed out by Audit. Department stated
(November 2007) that instructions have been issued to the staff for submission of timely action
taken reports in leak cases.
3.11.3 Delays in plugging leakages
The number of leakages detected by Leak Detection Cell during 2002-07 varied between 233
and 973. The number of leakages detected during 2006-07 was 822. Audit analysis of delay in
plugging leaks for the selected year of 2006-07 disclosed that:
(a) 101 leaks (12 per cent) remained unplugged as of March 2007. The period of pendency of
these leaks ranged between eight to 268 days. The Department in their reply (November 2007)
stated that leaks were plugged timely but due to delay in receipt of feed back from the
concerned divisions regarding repairing these leakages, the number of leakages non attended
appeared to be high. After being pointed out in audit, Department issued instructions for
timely submission of action taken reports (ATR) in leak cases. The reply of the Department
confirms the audit observation that no regular monitoring of leak cases is carried out to ensure
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
33
that zones concerned have taken timely action to repair the transmission and distribution
lines.
(b) Out of 721 leaks which were plugged in 2006-07, there were significant delays in 131 cases
(18 per cent) ranging upto 120 days or more as is shown in the table below:
Sl. No. Number of leaks Delay in plugging leaks
(beyond seven days)
1. 64 Upto 30 days
2. 39 30 to 90 days
3. 13 90 to 120 days
4. 15 Above 120 days
Delay in repairing of leakages resulted in estimated loss of 84 million gallon of water valuing
Rs.21.79 lakh for the year 2006-07.
3.11.4 Obsolete equipment
Efficient detection and management of leakage especially in underground water pipes would
require proper equipment for timely detection of leaks. Audit scrutiny of equipment inventory
of Leak Detection Cell of DJB disclosed that out of 92 leak detection equipment procured
during 1987-2000, only 12 equipment (13 per cent) were functional as of August 2007. Non-
availability of proper equipment with the Cell is bound to affect its capability to detect leaks
promptly in underground transmission network.
Audit examination further revealed that tenders were invited in June 2005 for the purchase of
41 leak detection equipment on the basis of report of a consultant submitted to the Board in
February 2005. The board awarded the work for the supply of specialized equipment at a cost
of Rs. 47.24 lakh in October 2006. The equipment required to be supplied by the firm by
August 2007 were awaited as of November 2007.
3.11.5 Delay in finalization of scheme for prevention of water wastage
The Board approved a scheme in October 1999 for study of unaccounted flow and prevention
of water wastage in Delhi at a cost of Rs.1.97 crore. It was after seven years that the Board
invited expression of interest in October 2006 and awarded work in July 2007 at a cost of
Rs.1.11 crore plus service tax and education cess. Thus, there was a delay of more than seven
years in initiating concrete action on the scheme for prevention of water wastages in Delhi
which highlights inefficiency of the leakage management system.
Recommendations
(i) Board may put in place an efficient computerized leakages monitoring system to ensure
that leakages in the transmission and distribution system are repaired by the respective zones
promptly within the time norms prescribed by the Board to minimize wastage of water and
loss of revenue.
(ii) The leakage detection infrastructure may be modernized and strengthened for quick
detection of leaks with the help of specialized equipment.
3.12 Quality control mechanism
3.12.1 Testing of alum used in treatment of water
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
34
Alum-Ferric (alum)/Poly-Aluminum Chloride (PAC), which are chemical coagulant, are used
in the treatment process of water in WTPs. DJB purchases alum and PAC centrally through
open tender for utilization at all WTPs. As per provision of the contract agreement, the
Department was required to get the samples of alum/PAC picked up at random and tested at
the National Physical Laboratory (NPL), New Delhi once in a month in the presence of the
officials of Director General Supplies and Disposal (DGS&D), firm‟s representatives and
DJB. Audit scrutiny revealed that only 13 samples were lifted during 2004-07 of which, seven
samples (54 per cent) did not conform to I.S. specification. By the time the test results were
received from NPL, the substandard alum/PAC had already been utilized during the course
of treatment process of potable water. Thus, there was no mechanism which assured DJB
about the purity and effectiveness of the chemicals before they were actually used in water
treatment. Use of untested chemicals for treatment of water may seriously compromise the
quality standards of water supplied to the residents of Delhi. Audit also observed that DJB did
not test alum/PAC in its own laboratories stationed at various water works, which were
equipped with required 14 instruments and chemicals for testing alum and PAC. Department
in their reply has confirmed that in cases where the samples tested by N.P.L. fails the test, the
material cannot be traced as it gets mixed with other supplies and consumed at the plant. The
Department further stated that to avoid the controversy between Department and DGS & D,
the system of third party test was introduced and testing by DJB was suspended.
3.12.2 Inadequate monitoring of water quality
DJB is expected to ensure that water supplied to the residents of NCT of Delhi is potable and
conforms to the standards prescribed by Bureau of Indian Standards, Government of India.
DJB has set up six water testing laboratories all over Delhi to check the quality of drinking
water being supplied. If the water samples are found unfit for drinking, reasons of
contamination are required to be investigated and the zonal maintenance staff has the
responsibility to rectify the problem immediately.
Audit examination disclosed that the number of samples found unsatisfactory has increased
considerably during last four years from 0.73 per cent in 2002-03 to 2.85 per cent in 2005-06
and 1.88 per cent in 2006-07. Details of samples tested and found unsatisfactory during 2002-
07 are in the table below:
Table 3.6: Samples found unsatisfactory
Year No. of
samples
taken
Samples found
unsatisfactory
% of samples found
unsatisfactory
2002-
03
103797 757 0
.
7
3 2003-
04
103842 776 0
.
7
5 2004-
05
113384 3201 2
.
8
2
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
35
2005-
06
104532 2982 2
.
8
5 2006-
07
110928 2090 1
.
8
8 The data is furnished by Director, Quality Control, DJB.
Scrutiny of records in the office of Director, Quality Control indicated that out of 2090
unsatisfactory samples reported during 2006-07, no ATRs were received in the Directorate in
respect of 1874 (90 per cent) unsatisfactory samples as of March 2007.
The Department stated (November 2007) that wherever unsatisfactory reports were received,
corrective action was taken within 24 hours but sometimes delays occurred due to
communication gap between the field officers and quality control.
Recommendations
(i) Appropriate mechanism should be put in place to ensure that adequate numbers of samples are
taken from all supplies received, for testing at NPL/departmental labs. DJB should ensure that
chemicals that have not been quality tested should not be used for purification of water in its
treatment plants.
(ii) DJB may take effective steps to improve quality of drinking water supplied to the residents of
Delhi by adopting better quality control procedures and mechanism at treatment plants and in
the transmission and distribution network.
3.13 Distribution of water
Supply of water from WTPs is shared among NDMC, DCB and MCD areas. It was noticed
that there was no metering system in MCD area to ascertain actual bulk supply of water to
each zone for distribution to consumers. Availability of water was assessed on capacity of
water lines. Besides, there was no co-ordination between distribution zones and their zonal
revenue officers to compare the quantity of water billed with quantity of water supplied.
Hence, audit was unable to ascertain zone-wise distribution losses. The Department stated
(November 2007) that DJB was planning to install the bulk meters in distribution system and
execution was expected by October 2008.
Recommendation
• Necessary steps may be taken for zone-wise metering of water distribution and collection of
revenue for effective monitoring of water losses and detection of revenue leakages.
3.16 Management of ground water
DJB, being the nodal agency for supply of water in Delhi, is expected to have comprehensive
data on the ground water potential and a plan/policy to regulate exploitation of ground water
in Delhi. Audit observed that as of November 2007, there was no policy in place to manage
ground water or regulate its exploitation. The Board was not aware of the quantity of ground
water being explored authorisedly and unauthorisedly. This indicates Board‟s failure to keep
watch over the exploration of ground water in Delhi.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
36
DJB approved “Delhi Water Board Amendment Act, 2002” vide a resolution in May 2002 to
control, regulate and manage ground water. Later on, “Delhi Water Board Amendment Bill
2006”, to regulate and control the use of ground water in NCT Delhi, was put up for approval
of Board incorporating salient features of model bill circulated by Government of India in
2005. No legislation has been introduced or approved till date. The Department stated
(November 2007) that the bill has been approved by Delhi Cabinet and proposed to be placed
before Assembly shortly.
3.16.1 Rain water Harvesting
Rain water harvesting is a simple economical and eco-friendly technique of preserving water.
It is also an effective way of recharging ground water. Delhi Government approved a scheme
for “Setting up of Water Mission and use of new technologies for conservation, harvesting and
recycling of water” for implementation during Tenth five year Plan. Under the scheme,
financial assistance is given to Resident Welfare Associations/Group Housing Societies/
Schools etc., to a maximum of Rs.50,000 or 50 per cent of the cost of rain water harvesting
system, whichever is less. The maximum limit was increased to Rs. One lakh with effect from
02 February 2007. DJB has given financial assistance of Rs. 51.19 lakh in 108 cases during
February 2003 to March 2007. As per terms and conditions of agreement, the party receiving
the financial assistance was required to submit a report with regard to maintenance of rain
water harvesting system every six months–one before the onset of monsoon and one after the
monsoon was over. Further, the officials of DJB were required to carry out random inspection
of the rain water harvesting system to ensure that the system was properly maintained. In case
of default in the maintenance of the system, the entire amount paid as assistance was to be
recovered from the institution/party.
Audit scrutiny revealed that Department did not enforce the conditions of the agreement.
Consequently, during 2002-07, in 97 out of 108 cases (90 per cent) no maintenance reports
were received from the parties concerned. Only seven inspections (six per cent) were carried
out by the Department. In all the seven cases, the Department found the system either muddy,
silted or only partially functional. Agreeing with the Audit view, Department proposed
(November 2007) 100 per cent inspection of beneficiaries of rain water harvesting assistance
instead of present 25 per cent checking of beneficiaries for the proper maintenance of the
system.
Recommendation
• DJB may formulate a comprehensive policy/ plan for regulating ground water exploitation in
Delhi by authorized and unauthorized sources. Department may carry out periodical inspection
of the Rain Water Harvesting Systems where the financial assistance has been granted to
different beneficiaries/organizations.
3.17 Public perception regarding water supplied by DJB
To ascertain the level of public satisfaction on the quality of services provided by DJB, Audit
obtained a list of RWAs from the Government of NCT of Delhi maintained under the
Bhagidari Scheme. A detailed questionnaire was sent to randomly selected 485 RWAs out of
about 1100 registered RWAs in Delhi. The questions sought information on the number of
hours water was available, sufficiency of water, adequacy of pressure and whether it could
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
37
reach upper floor without assistance of a pump, quality of water supplied, the complaint
redressal mechanism and public awareness regarding execution of work done by the DJB.
Response was received from 113 RWAs which is tabulated as under:
Table 3.13: Public perception
Audit Questions RWAs response
Availability of water
40 per cent stated that they received water supply for less than 2 hours in a day
48 per cent received water for two to four hours a day
12 per cent received water for more than five hours a day
Sufficiency of water
37 per cent respondents stated that they received sufficient water
63 per cent did not have sufficient water
Quality of waters
67 per cent respondents found the water worthy for drinking
33 per cent respondents found it unfit for drinking
Complaints
44 per cent respondents were satisfied with the complaint redressal mechanism
41 per cent were not satisfied with the redressal of complaints and
15 per cent did not comment.
The responses received from RWAs indicated high level of dis-satisfaction both in terms of
sufficiency and quality of water supplied. The complaint redressal was also poor and the
duration of water supply in different parts of Delhi was highly skewed.
Recommendation
• The Board may strengthen the existing mechanism for settlement of complaints through
computerized registration and effective monitoring for timely redressal of grievances in a
satisfactory manner.
3.18 Follow up action on previous Audit Report
A performance appraisal on “Water Supply System in MCD” featured in the Report of the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India for the year ended March 1997. The report had
pointed out the shortage of 20 gallons per capita demand daily, poor quality of water, losses
on account of free water supply to large category of consumers, unmetered water supply,
supply of water to consumers with defective meters, very high distribution losses largely on
account of absence of metering system and large uncollected water charges.
While forwarding the Action Taken Note, the Department assured (November 2005) to
reduce the arrear of water charges by fixing targets for collection of arrears in every zone,
setting up site recovery camps and arranging additional cash counters for collection of
revenue. DJB also mentioned that it had now permitted the consumers to purchase and install
their own meters in replacement of defective meters and bulk water meters were being
installed at WTPs in Haiderpur and Gokulpuri for measurement of water being issued for
distribution.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
38
The current performance audit findings, however, indicate that no effective action has been
taken on the previous recommendations contained in the Audit Report for the year ended
March 1997.
3.19 Conclusion
DJB has been struggling to cope with the increasing demand for water supply. Most of its
projects for augmentation of water production capacity and rationalization of water
distribution in different parts of Delhi have fallen behind schedule compounding the problem
of water shortage in the National Capital. The leak detection management system is inefficient
and results in loss of substantial water from the transmission and distribution network. More
than 50 per cent of the water supplied does not fetch any revenue for the Government and the
satisfaction level of Resident Welfare Associations about the quantity and quality of water
supplied is very low. DJB has not formulated any comprehensive policy or plan for regulating
exploitation of ground water in Delhi. The projects for recycling of waste water have also not
been commissioned as planned. We would encourage the management to address these core
issues in the coming years.
Performance Audit of Imphal water supply scheme, Manipur
Highlights
The state government failed to formulate its state Water Policy as envisaged in the National
Water Policy, 2002 leading to an absence of policy initiatives and directives. Baseline survey
for assessing actual requirement of potable water and preservation of water resources had
never been conducted. Contamination of water was prevalent due to inadequate and
ineffective water treatment, leakages and unauthorized diversions. Improvement and
augmentation works could not be executed in a timely manner. Non-revision of water tariff
and laxity in revenue collection led to revenue realized and O&M costs. Supply of quality
drinking water could not be ensured due to lack of effective quality control mechanism.
3.2.1 Introduction
The Public Health
Engineering
Department (PHED)
is responsible for
ensuring sufficient
supply of clean and
safe drinking water
to all consumers of
the Imphal city and
nine other districts of
the State. This
primarily involves
developing strategies
for meeting the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
39
demand of the ever-increasing population, planning and implementation of new water supply
schemes by adopting scientific techniques, proper maintenance of the existing water supply
system, besides timely revision of water tariff and generation of revenue with effective
mechanism of collection. The Imphal Water Supply Scheme (IWSS) consists of mainly two
components – augmentation of water supply to the city and improvement of the existing
system.
3.2.2 Organizational set up
The Commissioner (PHED) is the administrative head of the Department and the Chief
Engineer (CE), PHED, is the executive and technical head. The responsibility for all the
activities relating to IWSS vests with the CE who is assisted by an Additional Chief Engineer,
two Superintending Engineers (SEs) and five Executive Engineers (EEs) as shown in the
adjoining.
3.2.3 Scope of audit
Performance review of the IWSS was carried out during April to June 2007 and covered the
offices of the CE and four EEs for the period 2002-07.
3.2.4 Audit Objectives
The objectives of the performance review were to assess whether:
• the scheme achieved the objective of providing sufficient quantity of safe drinking water to the
targeted population;
• the financial management of the implementation of the scheme was efficient;
• planning and implementation of the scheme including policy formulation were done as required
under the scheme;
• operation and maintenance of water supply was effective;
• quality of water supplied was of acceptable standard; and
• there was effective monitoring and evaluation system in place.
3.2.5 Audit criteria
The criteria benchmarked for achieving the audit objectives were:
• Targets and milestones set in the policy pronouncements;
• Scale of water requirement per consumer;
• Treatment norms for ensuring quality; and
• Codal provisions for execution of works.
3.2.6 Audit methodology
Audit methodology included holding of an entry conference (April 2007) with the Officers of
the Department, checking of records, documents of the selected Divisions and analysis of data
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
40
and documentary evidence on the basis of audit criteria to arrive at audit findings, conclusions
and recommendations. Audit also carried out a consumer survey to gauge the extent of
provision of potable drinking water to the people.
Audit findings were discussed with the Departmental authorities in an exit conference
(September 2007). The replies of the Department have been incorporated in the review at
appropriate places.
Audit findings
The important points noticed during the course of review are discussed in the
succeeding paragraphs:
3.2.7 Policy and planning
The National Water Policy inter alia envisaged (September 1987) formulation of a State Water
Policy (SWP) backed by an operational action plan to achieve the desired objective of
providing safe drinking water to the entire population of the State. However, the State
Government had neither formulated a SWP nor worked out any long term perspective plan
for capacity building to meet the ever increasing demand. Besides, no base line survey was
ever conducted to assess the present and future requirements of water despite population
growth and expansion of urban conglomerates.
The Department did not evolve any perspective plan and annual plan. Accordingly, there was
no operational plan to achieve various milestones. In the absence of long term perspective
plan and operational action plan, the Department did not fix annual targets for completing
various works (new construction, upgradation, improvement and maintenance).
Even the broad based targets including institutional reforms, preparation of master plan,
outstanding revenue collection, improvement of water testing laboratory, strengthening of
monitoring and evaluation as mentioned in the Manipur Annual Plan documents were not
achieved as of June 2007.
As per Administrative reports of the Department, the projected population, water requirement
and installed capacity of treatment plants in respect of Imphal city and adjoining area were as
shown below:
Table No.1
Source: Departmental records
Parameters/Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Population (in lakh) 5.65 Data not
available
7.13 7.16 7.16
Water requirement
(MLD)2
109 -do- 107 97 97
Installed capacity (MLD) 83.03 -do- 83.03 80.82 80.82
Short fall (MLD) 25.97 -do- 23.97 16.18 16.18
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
41
It may be observed from the above table that the Department had no scientific annual plan as
population and water requirement data are not in consonance with each other. It is also
observed that according to administrative report of the Department, the estimated population
increased from 5.65 lakh (2002-03) to 7.16 lakh (2006-07) in the last five years but water
requirement decreased from 109 MLD to 97 MLD. The projected population data
according to the Department‟s administrative report is also not credible as there is zero per
cent growth in the population from 2005-07. Since there was no effort to enhance the installed
capacity, instead of increasing, the installed capacity decreased by 2.21 MLD during these
years. Thus, due to faulty planning, the Department failed to synchronise the water
requirement against the population growth in advance.
3.2.9 Implementation of Improvement works
Improvement of existing water distribution system and augmentation of old treatment plants
are the two most essential areas of focus for the Department for ensuring safe drinking water
facility for the increasing population of the city. In the course of scrutiny of these works the
following points were noticed:
The improvement of Imphal water supply consisted of the following three components:
Improvement of existing distribution system in selected areas of Imphal city (EC: Rs.71.11 lakh)
Upgradation of old treatment plant at Chinga (EC : Rs.86.56 lakh), and
Improvement of Ningthempukhri water supply scheme (WSS) (EC: Rs.93.28 lakh).
The first component had been completed in March 2004. But the remaining two components
were lingering behind schedule as discussed below:
3.2.9.1 Upgradation of old treatment plant at Chinga
The GOI sanctioned (August 2002) Rs.86.56 lakh for upgradation of the old treatment plant at
Chinga and released Rs.38.95 lakh (50 per cent) against its share of Rs.77.91 lakh. The project
was stipulated to be implemented within a period of two years and the balance share was to be
released during 2003-04 on receipt of utilization certificate. However, the Department
awarded nine works for upgradation only between September 2004 to March 2007 (Appendix
3.3). The delay in award of works ranged from more than one year to five years from the date
of sanction. Of the nine works, four had been completed (October 2006) and two are in
progress (September 2007). The remaining three works had not been started (July 2007). The
GOI had not released its balance share (July 2007) as the progress of works was not
satisfactory.
As per DPR (May 2002), the Project was to be constructed at Chinga hillock and its vicinity.
But due to non-availability of suitable site, this had later been shifted to Moirangkhom Bazar
(August 2003). The Department attributed the delay in completion to non-finalisation of
proper site and non-release of adequate funds. The reply of the Department is not tenable
considering that there were huge unspent balances at the end of each year and considerable
quantum of the funds released by the GOI had been retained by the State Government each
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
42
year during this period. The delay in finalization of suitable site indicates inadequate planning
for upgradation of the Chinga treatment plant.
The scheme was implemented with a view to provide potable water to 3,000 people. Due to
non-completion of the work, the intended benefit could not be provided to the targeted people.
3.2.9.2 Improvement of Ningthempukhri WSS
The GOI sanctioned (August 2002) Rs.93.28 lakh for “Improvement of Ningthempukhri
water supply scheme” to provide drinking water to 33,000 people and released (August 2002)
Rs.41.97 lakh (50 per cent) of its share of Rs.83.95 lakh with the stipulation to complete the
work within two years, the balance share was to be released during 2002-03 on receipt of
utilization certificate. Scrutiny of records revealed that the Department awarded seven
components of the work only in January to May 2004 (Appendix 3.4). The delay in award of
these items ranged from 16 to 20 months from the date of sanction. Out of seven works, five
had been completed (March 2005). The remaining two works relating to the improvement of
the schemes had been completed up to 30 to 90 per cent.
It was seen that the Department had paid (February 2004) Rs.17.59 lakh, being the cost of
1,500 RM of 200 mm pipe to its Stores Division for use in this WSS but the pipes were yet to
be received (July 2007). No action was taken for expediting delivery of the pipes from the
Stores Division as of July 2007.
Despite an expenditure of Rs.89.17 lakh incurred as of July 2007 on various items of work of
the scheme, drinking water could not be provided to the targeted
people.
3.2.10 Implementation of augmentation works
The augmentation of Imphal Water Supply consisted of the following works:
Augmentation from Singda dam by 9.08 MLD (EC : Rs.9.75 crore)
Replacement of old hume pipes by new ductile iron pipes from
Leimakhong to Iroisemba (EC: Rs.11 crore).
Augmentation from Iril river by constructing a treatment plant of 6.81 MLD at Irilbung
(EC: Rs.8.17 crore)
Tapping ground water from Potsangbam and Sekmai areas–Phase-II (6.81 MLD) (EC: Rs.6.73
crore), and
Utilization of Leisangkhong moat at Canchipur as a pre-settling tank for storing the water to be
pumped from the confluence point of Imphal and Iril rivers at Lilong (6.81 MLD) (EC: Rs.7.64
crore)
The first three works had been commissioned in September 2001, November 2003 and July
2007 respectively. Progress on the remaining projects is as under:
3.2.10.1 Scheme for tapping ground water from Potshangbam and Sekmai area, Phase II
The GOI sanctioned the scheme for tapping of ground water from Potshangbam and Sekmai
area, Phase – II to provide drinking water to 50,000 inhabitants and released (June 2005) an
amount of Rs.3.78 crore. The work was targeted to be completed by December 2006 which
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
43
was subsequently revised to March 2007. It was observed that out of 19 items of work, only
six items had been completed (February 2007), six partially completed (60 to 95 per cent) and
works on seven items were yet to be started (details shown in Appendix 3.5). Against a
projected cost of Rs.6.73 crore, a sum of Rs.7.24 crore had so far been spent (July 2007)
leading to a cost over-run of Rs.51 lakh. The Department could not furnish any reasons
for the delay and cost over-run. Due to non-completion of the Scheme, the problem of
drinking water in Imphal city could not be alleviated.
3.2.10.2 Scheme for utilization of Leishangkhong moat
The GOI sanctioned (March 1999) the scheme for utilization of Leishangkhong moat and
released (January 2003) an amount of Rs.5 crore being the first instalment. Ten items of works
were awarded (October 2003 to March 2006) after a delay ranging from nine months to more
than three years from the date of sanction (details shown in Appendix 3.6). The entire work
was projected to be completed by December 2005 which was subsequently revised to March
2006 and then to March 2007. However, only seven items of work were completed within the
stipulated period. Two items were completed (November 2006) with a delay ranging from 4
months to 30 months. The work of design and construction of treatment plant consisting of
clarifloculator, rapid sand filter, chemical dozing chambers etc., which was awarded (August
2004) at a tendered cost of Rs.1.93 crore for completion by June 2005 was still incomplete as
on July 2007.
Scrutiny of records revealed that the Department had initially (July 1998) contemplated
utilizing a part of the Leishangkhong moat (which was extending from Lilong to Canchipur)
as a pre-settling tank where the water pumped from the confluence point of Iril and Imphal
rivers was to be stored. From there the water was to be sent to the treatment plant to be
constructed at Canchipur and then to be sent to a ground sump of six lakh gallons capacity for
pumping into the distribution pipelines.
Subsequently(October 2003), the Department abandoned the idea of using the moat due to
encroachment problems at the site and changed it to laying of 350 mm pipes for 3,643 metres
from the confluence point of Iril and Imphal rivers to the treatment plant. Also, the plan of
constructing a ground sump of six lakh gallon capacities had been replaced by construction of
two sumps each of three lakh gallon capacity – one of them on a hillock. However, the
changed design was not technically cleared subsequently and the Department proceeded
without technical sanction.
The DPR, which was finalized in July 1998 did not even provide for soil testing for the
treatment plant. This item was added (December 2004) by the Department after a gap of six
years. The investigation was completed in January 2005. Thus, the DPR prepared by the
Department was deficient and it did not take into account all the possible eventualities.
The planning and project formulation process was thus deficient and suffered from adhocism.
Thus, even after spending Rs.6.90 crore (90 per cent) against the projected cost of Rs.7.63
crore, the project was yet to be completed (July 2007). The Department stated that the project
could not be completed by the target date due to prevailing law and order situation and
inadequate release of funds by the State Government. Had the scheme been completed in
time, 50,000 people could have been provided potable water.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
44
IWSS Phase-I thus envisaged a capacity creation of 25.38 MLD for catering to water
requirement of 1.88 lakh people. It was observed that only one treatment plant with a capacity
of 6.81 MLD could be completed as of July 2007 and four treatment plants under Phase-I with
a capacity of 18.57 MLD could not be completed as discussed in the preceding paragraphs,
depriving 1.38 lakh people of their drinking water requirement.
Thus, a majority of the people targeted to be covered by the scheme were deprived of clean
drinking water and the problem is unlikely to be alleviated in the
near future.
3.2.12 Quality control
The Department is to ensure distribution of safe drinking water to the consumers of the city.
The quality of the drinking water should be free from contamination, ensured through
treatment plants. Periodical monitoring should be done by the authorities to ensure that
drinking water supplied to the consumers is of acceptable quality and that no health hazards
are caused by the water supplied to the people.
Several deficiencies in assurance of water quality were highlighted in the Audit Report of the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India for the year 2005-06 (Paragraph 5.1.18). However,
the Department did not take proper steps to improve the water quality and the situation
worsened further as discussed below.
3.2.12.1 Analysis of water treatment
The raw water should be analysed for physical, chemical and bacteriological parameters and
suitable treatment and disinfection should be ensured before supply. Leak detection survey
and repairs to control underground leakages in the system are regular exercises that
should be undertaken as part of maintenance.
The Department recorded that it was maintaining its water quality as per WHO standards by
regularly collecting water samples and testing them for physical, chemical and bacteriological
analysis. But this contention is not evidenced by the records, which revealed that the
Department did not carry out analysis of raw water regularly by collecting adequate water
samples from different water sources. During 2002-07, only 528 water samples were collected
from the four test-checked treatment plants serving a population of 1,70,000 against 2,040
samples required to be collected as per Manual of water supply and treatment. The shortfall
varied from 70 to 76 per cent as shown in the table below:
Tests of water were conducted at the only existing State Laboratory, Imphal which was not
provided with adequate and trained technical staff and up to-date calibrated equipment. There
was also no evidence on record to show the Departmental efforts in strengthening the
existing laboratory and to establish another laboratory, if the existing laboratory was not
enough to handle the required number of samples.
It was further observed that the annual requirements of chemicals for the years 2002-2003 to
2006-07 were assessed at the same rate (Lime: 521.62 MT; Ferric alum: 1107.01 MT;
Chlorine: 237.33 MT). This reveals that the requirements were computed based on the
installed capacity of the treatment plants and not on actual requirement to be arrived at after
testing the turbidity and quality of water from time to time.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
45
Examination of eighty water analysis reports pertaining to various water supply schemes
revealed that the turbidity of treated water was beyond the acceptable limit in 43 cases which
is 54 per cent of total reports scrutinised. Total dissolved solids in treated water increased in
comparison to raw water indicating that excess quantities of alum and chlorine had been used
in the treatment. In fact the presence of total dissolved solids was within limits in raw water.
Hardness of water increased after treatment in respect of 67 samples due to use of
disproportionate quantity of chemicals in some samples. Lime (Calcium carbonate) was also
added more than the requirement as was indicated by high level of total alkalinity in five
reports. Chloride content had also increased in treated water in 60 samples which indicates
use of more chlorine than required. This was substantiated by the results of a test check
conducted on Chinga Water Supply Scheme. During the last four years (200307) against the
annual requirements of 8.5 MT of Chlorine, the Department used 11 to 15 MT.
It was also observed that these reports did not contain any reference to any biological tests
being performed to ascertain total Coliforms and E. coli. These tests should be conducted on a
routine basis, especially for the surface water samples.
Thus, as the quality of the drinking water supplied to the city had not been checked, the
possibility of health hazard to consumers through consumption of such water cannot be
ruled out.
3.2.12.2 Water contamination and prevalence of water borne diseases
Scrutiny of records revealed that the Department had not made any effort to conduct any
survey of underground leakage, un-authorised tapping and en-route contamination of water as
of July 2007. However, there were indications that the water at the consumer‟s end was
contaminated as most of the consumers surveyed stated that they had to boil water before use.
Also, the incidence of water borne disease was very high as disclosed by the information
furnished by the Medical Department. It stated that during the last five years (2002-2006)
there were 8,633 cases of water borne diseases such as acute gastro enteritis, enteric fever,
ineffective hepatitis and dysentry. Details are shown in the following Table:
Table No. 8
Type of
disease
Name of
medical
Year Number of
cases
Total
institute 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Enteric fever RIMS 71 64 35 60 45 275
JNH 206 267 135 608
Acute
Gastroenteritis
RIMS 430 327 188 255 328 1528
JNH 3,186 285 1784 5255
Ineffective
Hepatitis
(A.E)
RIMS 24 18 18 30 44 134
JNH 104 160 234 498
Viral RIMS 5 15 3 4 2 29
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
46
Hepatitis JNH 124 85 97 306
Total 530 424 3,864 1,146 2,669 8,633
Source: Departmental records. RIMS: Regional Institute of Medical Sciences. JNH: Jawaharlal Nehru Hospital.
The table discloses that as many as 8,633 persons suffered from water borne diseases during
the period 2002-06. Of these, the number of persons suffering from acute gastroenteritis was
the highest with 6,783 persons suffering from it. The number of persons suffering from water
borne diseases has increased from 530 cases in 2002 to 2,669 cases in the year 2006 which is
an increase of more than 400 per cent. This clearly indicates that the drinking water
supplied by the Department was not free from harmful bacteria. Thus, the Department failed
to ensure supply of quality potable water free from microbes which has serious implications
for public health.
3.2.14 Results of consumer survey
The Department furnished a list of 22,074 consumers to whom it was supplying water as of
March 2007 (the list was not updated). The supply was to be made at the rate of 135 litres per
capita daily (lpcd) and frequency of supply being once or twice a day either in the morning or
in the evening or both.
3.2.14.1 Objective of survey: Audit conducted a postal survey of consumers of Imphal area to
elicit their opinion regarding effectiveness of water supply schemes and thereby to ascertain
whether the supply was regular, adequate in quantity and the water was safe for drinking and
whether water bills were being raised and issued regularly. The scope and sample size, survey
methodology and model of the questionnaire of the survey are given in Appendix .7. The
postal survey consisted of issuing a simple questionnaire to 818 consumers during June –
August 2007.
3.2.14.2 Survey response: 802 consumers (98 per cent) returned the questionnaires with their
responses. Two per cent of the questionnaires were returned by the Postal Department with the
comments “incorrect address/addressee not found”. This is indicative of the fact that some of
the addresses of the consumers with the Department were not correct or were incomplete.
3.2.14.3 Survey findings: Analysis of the responses disclosed the following facts:
Forty seven per cent of the respondents stated that they did not receive the supply regularly
whereas 57 per cent of respondents stated that the delivery was less than the norm of 135 lpcd.
Thirteen per cent of surveyed consumers received less than 50 litres, 15 per cent less than 100
litres and only 24 per cent of them received more than 100 litres of water.
Forty nine per cent of the respondents stated that water was not clean and was smelly and 88
per cent of the respondents stated that water was required to be boiled before drinking as the
quality of water supplied by the Department was not safe.
Thirty three per cent of them stated that water bills were not served regularly which goes to
prove that the Department is not very keen to collect the water charges from its consumers.
Some of the general comments offered by the consumers were (i) non-supply of water for a
long time (ii) unauthorised drawing of water from distribution pipe line by electrical pumps
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
47
(iii) non-repair of leakages (iv) large number of illegal connections (v) non-fitting of water taps
and (vi) delay in supply and dependence on private hawkers.
Results of the survey indicate that though the Department had incurred an enormous
expenditure in the implementation of the water supply schemes, it could not alleviate the
problem of drinking water by providing safe and sufficient drinking water.
3.2.15 Monitoring and evaluation
The Department had not undertaken any evaluation of its water supply system during the last
five years (2002-07) to identify weak areas and to take remedial action. Inspections were not
carried out at periodical intervals to detect cases of unauthorized connections, leakages and
loss of water for taking up effective remedial measures.
The control required to be exercised at the higher level (Chief Engineer and Additional Chief
Engineer) was also found inadequate. Monthly progress reports furnished to the Planning and
Development Department and Chief Minister‟s office were mostly incomplete as vital
information like scheduled dates/actual dates of commencement and completion of projects,
revised cost of work, reasons for delay and cost revision etc. were not mentioned in most of the
cases.
3.2.16 Conclusion
Implementation of the water supply schemes was tardy and the objective of providing potable
drinking water to the citizens could not be achieved. Planning and project formulation process
was deficient. Financial management was poor. Funds released by the GOI were not utilised
fully. Project sites were not settled in advance. Most of the projects were behind schedule and
as such the Department failed to achieve scheme objectives. Collection of water tax was poor
resulting in non-realisation of substantial portion of the Government revenue. Due to non-
revision of water tariff, revenue realised could not compensate the cost of operation and
maintenance. Water was contaminated due to inadequate and inefficient treatment and
underground leakage in the pipelines. Due to the absence of an effective monitoring and
evaluation mechanism, unauthorized connections, leakages/wastage of water remained
unchecked. As a result, the Public Health Engineering Department failed to provide safe and
sufficient drinking water to the consumers.
3.2.17 Recommendations
The Department should formulate a State Water Policy as envisaged in the National Water
Policy and formulate a Perspective Plan for capacity building to meet the water requirement of
Imphal city.
The performance of existing schemes should be enhanced by adopting effective measures to plug
the leakages and by preventing unauthorised diversions.
Adequate funds should be released to complete the water supply schemes in a timely manner and
execution of various water supply projects should be closely monitored.
The Department should ensure proper treatment of water and conduct periodical
inspections to prevent enroute contamination so as to ensure supply of safe drinking water.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
48
Effective mechanism for realization of revenue should be evolved and water tariff structure
should be revised to compensate the cost of operation and maintenance.
Review on Urban Water Supply Schemes, Pondicherry
Highlights
Sixty one per cent of the total population of the Union Territory lives in urban areas and the department
implemented a number of water supply schemes mainly to create additional resources/infrastructure to
augment the existing water supply. Audit scrutiny of these schemes, however, revealed extraction of
ground water in excess of requirement and supply of water in excess of norms prescribed by Government of
India. This resulted in creation of unnecessary infrastructure and wastage of water.
3.1.1 Introduction
The Union Territory (UT) of Puducherry comprises four geographically isolated regions with
an urban population of 6.48 lakh. Drinking water requirement in urban areas of Puducherry
and Karaikal regions is met by utilising ground water resources. Mahe is provided with
drinking water by the Kerala Government on payment and this is augmented by ground water
resources. Yanam gets water from Godavari river supplied by Andhra Pradesh Government.
Tenth Plan (2002-07) laid stress on (a) qualitative improvement of water ensuring
sustainability of sources on long term basis and diminishing reliance on ground water by
increasing use of surface water through rain water harvesting measures (b) revamping the
existing system by creating additional resources or replacing quality affected/defunct sources,
constructing storage reservoirs, redesigning/relaying of distribution networks to balance
supply with demand and (c) monitoring of water supply through surveillance, revamping of
operation and maintenance systems and rationalisation of water tariff to deterrent level to
check wastage. To achieve these objectives, the UT Government implemented Water Supply
Schemes (WSS) in the urban areas during 2002-07 at a cost of Rs 103.27 crore (Capital : Rs
80.76 crore and Revenue: Rs 22.51 crore).
Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation (CPHEEO) prescribes
guidelines for economical designing of various components of WSS, norms for drinking water
supply to various categories of consumers and maintenance of WSS. Public Works
Department implements water supply augmentation schemes by adopting these guidelines.
Puducherry region has been divided into nine zones and works in three zones were
completed before the commencement of the tenth plan period. Works in three more zones
(Zone II, VI and IX) were completed during the tenth plan and works in the remaining three
zones are in progress (March 2007). In Karaikal, augmentation schemes in all the three zones
were completed. As there was huge shortfall in supply of water by Kerala Government to
Mahe region, the department had taken up (May 2003) laying of a direct pipeline from the
treatment plant in Kerala to the service reservoirs as a deposit work by Kerala Water
Authority. The work was completed in October 2006. In Yanam, only infrastructure
development works were carried out.
3.1.2 Organisational set up
The Chief Engineer (CE), who is the head of the department, is assisted by the Superintending
Engineer II (SE) and four Executive Engineers (EEs) one in each region in implementing
WSS. The Secretary to Government is the Administrative Head.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
49
3.1.3 Audit objective
The performance of urban WSS executed in the four regions was reviewed in audit to assess:
the effectiveness of measures taken for qualitative improvements of water and sustainability of
sources with diminishing reliance on ground water and increased utilisation of surface water
the economy, efficiency and effectiveness in revamping the existing system and creation of
additional sources
the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of the operation and maintenance system.
3.1.4 Audit criteria
CPHEEO Manual
Government Plan Document
Central Public Works Department Works Manual
Government orders and circulars, instruction issued by Government/ CE/SE.
Rules on water connection policies in Union Territory of Puducherry
3.1.5 Audit coverage and methodology
Records relating to the execution of WSS by the four divisions of the department during the
year 2002-07, and the related records maintained in the office of SE and CE were reviewed
during January 2007 to May 2007. Site visits were conducted and discussions were held with
the officers. An entry conference was held in February 2007 with the CE. In the exit
conference held in June 2007, the Secretary to Government assured to review the status and
take up action on the audit observations.
Audit Comments
3.1.6 Sustainability of sources
All the four regions of the UT are situated in the coastal areas and excess extraction of ground
water would result in the sea water intrusion thereby affecting the quality of water in the
source. To avoid such excess extraction, the department had to formulate schemes to utilise
surface water through rain water harvesting measures. Audit scrutiny of the adherence to
these instructions by the department revealed the following:
3.1.6.1 Excess extraction of ground water
CPHEEO prescribed supply of 135 litres/70 litres per capita per day (lpcd) of water for cities
having sewerage system and not having sewage system respectively and an additional 15 per
cent for transmission loss. The department extracted ground water in Puducherry, Karaikal
and Mahe regions much in excess of requirement as detailed below:
Region Population
projected
from 2001 Census
Norm as
per CPHEEO
(in lpcd)
Water
requirement
(in million
litres per day
(mld))
Water
actually
drawn and
supplied
during the
month (in
mld)
Month Population
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
50
Puducherry May
2007
5,66,426 155.25 87.94 121.85
Karaikal March
2007
84,843
80.50
6.83
11.00
Mahe Novemb
er
2006
38,637
80.50
3.11
4.73*
Schemes to use surface water were not implemented due to non-acquisition of land
* 1.45 mld supplied by Kerala Government
Excessive drawal of ground water over the norms fixed would result in sea water intrusion as
was evidenced in the aquifer in the coastal areas of the Puducherry
region.
3.1.6.2 Non-utilisation of surface water
Drinking water requirement of Puducherry region is being met by ground water sources only.
With a view to utilise the existing surface water sources in Puducherry, Government
appointed a consultant (August 2001) and paid Rs 44 lakh for identifying water availability
from Oussudu and Bahour tanks. The report of the consultant (June 2002) recommended
utilisation of surplus water from Oussudu tank for about 4 to 5 months in a year till the year
2011 and for the entire year during 2012 to 2021. A site was selected in August 2003 for
constructing a treatment plant for using the water from this tank but the requisition for
acquisition of the land by invoking urgency provision of Land Acquisition Act was sent to the
Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) only in December 2005. Proposals for issue of notification
under section 4 (1) of the Act was submitted by the LAO in November 2006 along with the
approval of Chief Secretary for invoking urgency provision. It was, however, returned by the
Revenue Officer with a request to submit a revised proposal (January 2007) for acquiring the
land under normal acquisition proceedings as courts have taken strong exception for invoking
urgency provisions. The proposal was not submitted as of July 2007 as land use conversion
was to be obtained from Town and Country Planning Department. The avoidable delay in
acquiring land resulted in non-implementation of the scheme.
The department included a scheme for construction of a treatment plant in Karaikal for using
surface water of Arasalar river in the Annual Plan for 2002-03, but the estimate for the scheme
was prepared during 2005-06 and the scheme was sanctioned in July 2006. The tenders called
for in October 2006 were rejected by the CE in June 2007 on account of non-verification of
credentials of the bidders and retendering was yet to be done (August 2007).
In order to augment the short supply of drinking water in Mahe during summer months, the
department carried out (March 2001) detailed investigation through a consultant for
harvesting rain water and storing it in newly formed ponds. While one pond, constructed at a
cost of Rs 6.97 lakh in December 2004, was not put to use due to objections from the residents
fearing drying up of their wells, the proposals for issue of notification for acquiring land for the
other pond, sent by LAO in January 2004, was pending with Government (May 2007).
3.1.7 Revamping of existing systems to meet the demand
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
51
Water Supply Schemes comprise creation of sources with infiltration wells (for surface
water) and borewells (for ground water), construction of treatment plants (for surface water),
conveyance of treated water to sumps and service reservoirs and supply of water to consumers
through distribution system. CPHEEO has prescribed norms for arriving at the capacity of
various infrastructure to be created and their designed life period to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of the schemes and economise the expenditure. The execution of various works
by the department disclosed the following deficiencies:
3.1.7.1 Wasteful expenditure due to poor planning
In order to augment the shortfall in water supply to Kanuvapet area, the EE, Public Health
Division, Puducherry constructed (January 2004) two borewells at a cost of Rs 2.72 lakh and
awarded (March 2004) the work of construction of compound wall to protect the structure and
the pumping main to be laid. The work was stopped after spending Rs 15.71 lakh due to
claim by a private party that the land on which one of the borewells was located and a portion
of the land used for constructing compound wall were his property. On verification, it was
found one of the borewells was not located within the boundary of Government land and
further work were not taken up. On account of demand from public for supply of quality
water, the EE proposed to use the other borewell located on Government land. The water
from this borewell was, however, found unfit due to higher total dissolved solids (July 2006).
In spite of this, the EE obtained Government sanction (September 2006) for laying pumping
main from this borewell to the existing overhead tank (OHT). The work was taken up in
December 2006 and completed in February 2007 at a cost of Rs 4.74 lakh. However, due to
poor quality of water, the department constructed another borewell (February 2007) and took
over one of the borewells constructed by Villianur Commune Panchayat and supplied water
to the public. Wrong location of borewell and construction of pumping main fully knowing
the poor quality of water from the source rendered the expenditure of Rs 23.17 lakh wasteful.
3.1.7.2 Wasteful expenditure on construction of storage facilities
CPHEEO manual provides for designing storage facilities like sump, OHT for 15 years to
facilitate carrying out extensions when required and to avoid expenditure far ahead of utility.
The department constructed a 20 lakh litres OHT (Rs 2.18 crore) and a six lakh litres sump
(Rs 26.27 lakh) for the Central Zone in Karaikal on the ground that the existing seven lakh
litres OHT was damaged and the existing 14 lakh litres sump would be insufficient. Audit
scrutiny of the estimate revealed that the Chief Engineer approved the work for a design
period of 30 years instead of 15 years. Had the guidelines of CPHEEO manual been followed,
17 lakh litres OHT and eight lakh litres sump would have been adequate for the zone.
Construction of OHT of three lakh litres capacity in excess of requirement and sump of six
lakh litres capacity resulted in a wasteful expenditure of Rs 58.97 lakh.
3.1.7.3 Unnecessary creation of infrastructure
CPHEEO recommended 70 lpcd as the maximum water supply level for domestic and
non-domestic purposes for towns without sewerage system and this includes requirement of
water for commercial, institutional and minor industries. CPHEEO also recommended a
maximum of 15 per cent of the total requirement towards unaccounted water supply. In
addition, water supply schemes should provide water for fire fighting, for institutions of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
52
considerable magnitude and for major industries. It also stipulated that the storage facility
should be designed for continuous supply to consumers as intermittent supply are neither
desirable for the public health point of view nor economical. The capacity of OHTs where
power is available throughout 24 hours and 16 hours of pumping is possible should be for 15
per cent of daily demand and the capacity of the sumps for filling the OHT should be designed
for 50 per cent of the capacity of the OHT, if two fillings per day is resorted to. Yanam region
has an area of 20 square kilometres. The surface water received from Government of Andhra
Pradesh for this region is stored in three locations (Yanam Town, Kanakalapeta and
Dariyalathipa) which are interconnected. The water is treated in treatment plant with sand
filters and carried through pipelines to sumps constructed in different locations, pumped to
overhead tanks constructed nearby and distributed by gravity to consumers. The distribution
system for the whole region is interconnected. The region had three water treatment plants
(WTPs) with a total capacity of 5.75 mld, five OHTs and 12 sumps with a total capacity of 10
lakh litres and 12.05 lakh litres respectively as of March 2002. The department increased the
capacity of WTPs, OHTs and sumps to 14.75 mld, 32 lakh litres and 23.05 lakh litres during
2002-07 on the ground that the projected population in the year 2018 (designed period of 15
years) would be 90,300 and tail end areas had inadequate water. Audit scrutiny, however,
revealed that the projected population for the Yanam region in the year 2018 is only 50,000.
As there are no big institutions and major industries and the department is not supplying
treated water to industries, the water requirement for this population adopting the norms
prescribed by CPHEEO would be 4.735 mld5. Hence, the requirement of infrastructure would
be 4.735 mld of WTP, 7.5 lakh litres OHT6 and 3.75 lakh litres sump. As such, the
infrastructure existed as of March 2002 would be more than adequate. By boosting the
projected population to 90,300, adopting higher norms of 100 lpcd and including huge
quantity of water for institutional and industrial demand (4.19 mld), the department worked
out the water requirement for 2018 at 14.39 mld and constructed three WTPs with a total
capacity of nine mld, eight OHTs of 22 lakh litres capacity and eight sumps of 11 lakh litres
capacity at a total cost of Rs 10.73 crore (vide Appendix – 3.1). Failure to follow
CPHEEO guidelines resulted in creation of unnecessary infrastructure, wastage of water
and higher cost of maintenance.
Government contended (November 2007) that the additional infrastructure was provided to
cater to the projected population for 30 years (upto 2033) and the requirement of surrounding
population of neighbouring Andhra Pradesh and industrialisation was also considered. This
contention was not factual as the project reports considered the requirement of projected
population of 15 years as provided in CPHEEO guidelines but boosted the estimated
population and did not consider the requirement of population of neighbouring state. Besides,
water was not supplied to industries and there were no documents to support the requirement
of huge industrial demand.
3.1.8.1 Wastage of water
To avoid wastage and to conserve water, CPHEEO stipulated fixing of bulk water meters in
strategic points. The department fixed bulk meters in three out of five OHTs in Karaikal and
10 out of 37 OHTs in Puducherry only during 2006 . The Department has no equipment to
detect leakages in pipelines. To an audit query, the Assistant Engineer, Puducherry stated
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
53
that the leakage is being detected based on complaints from public/site supervision staff.
Failure to detect leakages in time would result in wastage of water and increase the
maintenance cost.
The rules for domestic water connection stipulate installation of water meters by the
department and raising of demands based on water actually consumed. The working
conditions of water meters in the four regions are as under:
Region Number of
connections
Meters not working Percentage of defective meters
Month Number
Puducherry
74,637*
March
2007
50,492
68
Karaikal
11,462
April
2007
5,180
45
Mahe
1,495
April
2007
403
27
Yanam
2,550
May
2007
2,550
100
* includes a portion of rural area
While 35,513 meters in Puducherry failed before 2004-05, 1,174 to 1,510 meters failed during
every quarter thereafter. All the meters in Yanam region did not function for the past seven
years. Defective meters prevented the department from billing the actual quantity of water
consumed.
In Yanam region, the department supplied 7.60 mld of water during November 2006 as
against 3.06 mld of water required for the present population of 38,064. The department
constructed a number of storage facilities on the ground of inadequacy of water in tail ends.
The excess delivery of water, however, indicated drawal of more water by the consumers of
initial reaches. As the size of the pipes used for house connections was fixed and the period of
supply is also regulated, such over drawal could only be made by tampering the water
connection pipes and using other mechanical devices. The EE had made no attempts to
conduct surveillance to detect any unauthorised drawal of water. Instead, he had created more
infrastructure to supply to the tail ends.
Government stated (November 2007) that new water meters would be provided at the
time of commissioning the new relaid pipeline.
3.1.8.3 Quality of water not ensured
The CPHEEO has prescribed physical, chemical and biological parameters for ensuring the
quality of drinking water supplied to the public. The department is required to employ suitable
treatment and disinfection methods to ensure quality of water before supply and to monitor
the quality of water at consumer‟s end. Audit scrutiny revealed that water from 54 out of 146
borewells in Puducherry region was directly supplied to consumers without any intermediate
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
54
storage. This water is not being treated with chlorine to minimise the risk of water borne
diseases. Besides, water supplied from four such borewells has higher iron content and water
from two borewells has higher nitrate content and this was not fit for consumption as drinking
water.
3.1.9 Conclusion
The department exploited ground water in excess of requirement and did not exploit surface
water. More infrastructure were created unnecessarily and schemes were not implemented
within a time frame. Economical use of water was not enforced. Poor quality water was
supplied directly from four borewells in Puducherry.
Recommendations
Schemes for utilising surface water should be given priority.
Wastage of water should be prevented by fixing bulk meters, detecting leakages, replacing the
defective water meters and conducting surveillance.
Water tariff rationalisation should be considered.
The above points were referred to Government in August 2007; reply, except for observations
in respect of Yanam region, had not been received (January 2008).
Performance Audit of Working Of Irrigation Department, Punjab
Highlights
Performance audit of working of Irrigation Department disclosed cases of defective planning
and programme management besides over exploitation of underground water. There were
cases of delay in release of funds, administrative approvals accorded without ensuring pre-
requisites and construction of new channels without ensuring availability of water. Non-
tapping the hydro potential led to loss of power generation. Non-imparting of training
resulted in idle establishment and infrastructure.
3.1.1Introduction
The State of Punjab has primarily an agrarian economy; therefore water resources and
irrigation are central to it. The total geographical area of the State is 50.36 lakh hectares with
irrigable area of 42 lakh hectares. There are seven canal systems designed for culturable
command area (CCA) of 30.88 lakh hectares. The Department of Irrigation is responsible for
maintenance of canals, drains and dams, execution of flood protection and water-logging
works and river projects.
3.1.2 Organizational set-up
Principal Secretary Irrigation and Power (Administrative Secretary) is the overall in-charge of
the Department assisted by 12 Chief Engineers (CEs). In the field, the execution and research
works are executed through 210 Executive Engineers (EE) under the supervision of 54
Superintending Engineers (SE) or equivalent officers. The Director, Irrigation and Power
Research Institute (DIPR); Director, Punjab Irrigation Management Training Institute
(PIMTI) and CE, Vigilance and Quality Control (CE (V)) are responsible for research, training
and quality control activities respectively.
3.1.3 Audit objectives
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
55
The main objectives of the performance audit are to assess whether:
budget estimates were prepared realistically and provisions made in approved five year/annual
plans were adhered to;
the sanctions to the project estimates were accorded timely and funds provided to avoid time
and cost overrun;
projects being executed by the Department were planned properly to achieve intended benefits
optimally and
available manpower was utilized optimally and training, research and vigilance control
activities were performed efficiently.
3.1.4 Audit criteria
Provisions laid down in Punjab Public Works Department Code, Irrigation Manual of Orders
(IMO), Punjab Financial Rules and instructions/guidelines of Central Design Organization
(CDO), Central Water Commission (CWC), Vigilance and Quality Control wing were used as
audit criteria.
3.1.5 Scope of Audit and Methodology
The records of Administrative Secretary, five CEs out of 12 and 21 EEs out of 83
implementing units of the Department pertaining to the period 2000-07 were test checked
between September 2006 and March 2007. The selection of units was made by adopting
systematic sampling technique. Documentary evidence was gathered and analyzed to arrive
at the results of audit.
3.1.8 Environmental aspect
The total geographical area of the State is 50.36 lakh hectares with irrigable area of 42 lakh
hectares. The existing canal irrigation system is designed for CCA of 30.88 lakh hectares.
The details of area irrigated by canals and tubewells are given below:
Year Total
Geogra
phical
area
Net Area
sown
(percentag
e to total
area)
Net
irrigated
area
(percentage
toarea
sown)
Irrigation
By canals
(percentage
to irrigated
area)
Irrigation
By tube
wells
andwells
(percentage
to irrigated
area)
Irrigation
byother
means
(percentage
to irrigated
area)
No. of tube
wells (No. in
lakh)
Length of
canals (in
Kms)
2002-
03
50.36 42.24
(84)
40.35
(84)
11.48
(28.45)
28.80
(71.38)
0.07
(0.17)
11.33 13614
2003-
04
50.36 42.01
(83)
40.28
(83)
11.29
(28.03)
28.89
(71.72)
0.10
(0.25)
11.44 NA
2004-
05
50.36 42.00
(83)
40.35
(83)
11.01
(27.28)
29.19
(72.34)
0.15
(0.38)
11.68 14500
Though total length of canals increased from 13614 kilometers to 14500 kilometers during
2002-05 but there was continuous decrease in area irrigated by canals from 11.48 lakh hectares
to 11.01 lakh hectares owing to warabandi, disputes among farmers and tubewell irrigation
being a more convenient option over canal irrigation.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
56
The decrease in area irrigated by canals during 2002-05 was taken over by the installation of
35000 new tubewells as area irrigated by tubewells increased from 28.80 lakh hectares to 29.19
lakh hectares during this period. Preference for tubewells over canal irrigation, among other
factors, was mainly due to non-existence of regulations to check installation of tubewells, its
independent use and ready availability of ground water.
3.1.8.1 Non-monitoring of ground water
To monitor the ground water, a project “Ground water investigation and integrated utilization
of water resources in the Punjab State” was taken up in 1971 estimated at Rs 1.80 crore to be
completed by 1975, which provided for research and development activities relating to ground
water. 62 exploratory bores (E-bores) were to be installed for examination of deep-water
aquifers to assess the scope and limitation of water resources and problems that may arise out
of over-exploitation of ground water resources. Subsequently the project was revised thrice
and as per the latest administrative approval (January 2006) the estimated cost of the project
has increased to Rs 98.63 crore. However, even after a lapse of more than thirty years only 32
E-bores were installed and work on two bores was in hand (November 2006). This defeated
the purpose of the project.
3.1.8.2 Over exploitation of ground water
Total area irrigated by canals constituted 28 per cent only of the total area sown in Punjab,
whereas area irrigated by tubewells was 72 per cent. The number of tubewells increased from
1.92 lakh (1971) to 11.68 lakh (2005). As per latest report of 2007 during 2003-04, 31.16 lakh
hectare meter of underground water was drafted against the recharge of 23.78 lakh hectare
meter resulting in over exploitation of underground water by 7.38 lakh hectare meter.
Due to unchecked drafting during 1984-2004, number of overexploited blocks increased from
53 (1984) to 103 (2004) with time, as detailed below:
Sr.
No.
Category of Blocks 1984 1986 1989 1992 1999 2004
1 Overexploited 53 55 62 63 73 103
2 Critical 7 9 7 7 11 5
3 Semi-critical 22 18 20 15 16 4
4 Safe 36 36 29 33 38 25
Total16 118 118 118 118 138 137
Thus, over exploitation of ground water led to continuous fall of ground water table in the
State rendering 103 blocks overexploited, five blocks critical and four blocks semi critical
leaving only 25 blocks (18 per cent) in the safe category.
In the absence of a system to monitor and scientifically regulate the use of ground water, there
is a trend towards over exploitation of ground water in most blocks.
In reply, the Director, Water Resources and Environment Directorate, Chandigarh while
admitting (July 2007) the facts attributed the problem of over exploitation to diverse aspects
including limited share of surface water, cropping pattern of wheat and paddy, adoption of
high yield variety of crops, pollution and contamination of surface water besides its easy
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
57
availability and uncontrolled use. As regards non-completion of installation of E-bores,
the Executive Engineer, Water Resources Investigation Division, Chandigarh attributed
it to paucity of funds.
3.1.9 Execution of works
3.1.9.1 Under utilisation of irrigation potential due to non-completion of project
Kandi canal, having a length of 130 kms (discharge of 500 cusecs) off-taking from Mukerian
Hydel Channel at RD 5575M/L proposed to be constructed in two stages which were
complimentary to each other. Stage-I including irrigation system designed for 22594 hectare
was completed in 1998 at a cost of Rs109.92 crore.
The State Government accorded administrative approval to Kandi Canal Stage-II for
extending irrigation facility to 29527 hectare in July 1998. As of March 2007, only 25 Kms of
canal against total length of 70.50 Kms was constructed after incurring total expenditure of Rs
52.26 crore.
Due to non-completion of Stage-II of the canal, against designed discharge of 500 cusecs only
242 cusecs could be released in already constructed Stage-I leading to creation of irrigation
potential of 15695 hectare against envisaged 22594 hectare. Further, even the created potential
was irrigated to the extent of 35.51 per cent only, as during 2002-06 against created potential of
62780 hectares (15695x4) only 22294 hectare were actually irrigated.
Further, the cost of the Stage-II also increased by Rs 128.48 crore from Rs 147.13 crore (May
1997) to Rs 275.61 crore (January 2007). Due to coverage of lesser area under irrigation the
projected potential increase in crop production of Rs 384.89 crore could not be achieved.
On being pointed out (January 2007), Executive Engineers concerned admitted the facts.
Shahpur Kandi Dam (SPKD) was to act as a balancing reservoir for the discharge from Ranjit
Sagar Dam (RSD) to the existing Upper Bari Doab Canal (UBDC) system. It was also to
generate 1042.92 million units of electricity per annum and create additional irrigation
potential of 5000 hectares in Punjab. The completion of SPKD was required to be completed
with RSD by March 2001. The total cost of the project (Rs 1,324 crore) was to be shared
between GOI and Punjab in the ratio of 2:1.
GOI released CLA of Rs 16.16 crore during 2002-03. The State Government released this
along with its share of Rs 8.08 crore after three years during 2006-07. Therefore, GOI did not
provide CLA between 2003 and 2007 so the project also remained incomplete even after
incurring an expenditure of Rs 80.27 crore (March 2007). The cost was revised to Rs 1,945
crore (September 2005 price level). Thus due to slow progress of work the aim of generating
6257.52 million units of power and creating irrigation potential of 5000 hectares could not be
achieved.
On being pointed out (May 2007), CE SPKD attributed (May 2007) the reasons to paucity of
funds.
• Gurusar minor completed in 1999 at a cost of Rs 0.99 crore was lying unused as provision of
working head of Malookpur distributory to feed the minor were not initially provided and a
necessary railway siphon was not built. EE demanded (March 2007) Rs 2.28 crore to raise parent
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
58
distributory and construct railway siphon. Rs 0.44 crore received for Railway siphon were
deposited with Railway authorities. However, balance funds to raise parent distributory were still
awaited (July 2007).
• Abhun minor completed in April 1998 at a cost of Rs 0.94 crore was lying unused as raising of its
parent distributory (Jandwala) to feed the minor was not provided for in the original estimate.
Revised estimate framed (October 2001) for Rs 1.42 crore but funds had not been provided (July
2007).
• Shikar reclamation distributory remodelled (2002) at a cost of Rs 0.33 crore was running with 12
cusecs water against enhanced capacity of 45 cusecs because provision of replacing pipe of 5
cusecs with an aqueduct to carry 21 cusecs discharge at RD 21032 crossing over Landa Nalla
was not provided for in the approved project. Neither the estimate to construct aqueduct has
been sanctioned nor the funds provided (July 2007).
Non-release of funds for remedy of omissions committed in project preparation at initial stage
rendered expenditure of Rs 2.26 crore as unfruitful. The potential for irrigating 6884 acres of
land and accompanying benefits envisaged could not be realized.
On being pointed out (November 2006 & March 2007), EEs attributed the reasons for non-
initiating remedial measure to non-receipt of funds.
3.1.9.6 Non-functional drainage schemes
The Government sanctioned 13 lift drainage schemes estimated at Rs 2.56 crore (November
1999) in order to provide outfall to the rain water collected in large depressions causing water
logging.
Scrutiny of the records (February 2007) of EE, Mansa Drainage Division, Mansa disclosed
that as per completion report submitted (May 2005) to Superintending Engineer, out of these
13 lift drainage schemes estimated at a cost of Rs 2.56 crore, nine were completed (2001-02) at
a cost of Rs 1.17 crore and leaving four schemes incomplete. In the four incomplete
schemes, civil works costing Rs 0.51 crore were completed in December 2002, but mechanical
and electrical works could not be taken up (March 2007). Nine completed lift drainage
schemes also remained non-functional since 2002 due to disconnection of electricity.
Department did not provide funds (February 2007) despite repeated demands submitted by the
EE to make these schemes functional.
Failure of the Department to provide funds for payment of electricity bills and for incomplete
schemes resulted in unfruitful expenditure of Rs 1.68 crore.
On being pointed out (February 2007), EE stated (February 2007) that the schemes will be
made operational on receipt of funds.
3.1.9.7 Execution of deficient contracts
State Government notified (July 2001) 136 sites on various canal systems for setting up Mini
Hydel Projects through private sector on Build, Operate and Own (BOO) basis. The
Department entered into a tri-partite agreement with Punjab Energy Development Agency
(PEDA) and private promoters for these projects. As per agreement, the promoter was to pay
lease money at the rate of Rs 90,000 per annum for 33 years initially, which was extendable
on mutual basis and cess at a rate of one paisa per unit of electricity generated and also would
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
59
compensate the loss of revenue to Department equal to the latest annual auction bid of each
site where the closure of functional water mill was necessitated for setting up of MHP.
Audit scrutiny (November 2006) of records of EE, Bathinda Canal Division, Bathinda
disclosed that three agreements were entered into (August 2001) with M/s Aqua Power
Limited (private promoter) for installing MHPs at three sites. The lease money amounting to
Rs 1.80 lakh (Lohgarh and Sidhana); cess amounting to Rs 3.39 lakh (Chak Bhai and
Lohgarh) and compensation amounting to Rs 33.95 lakh was not paid by the private promoter
(November 2006). Further, in case of delayed payment of lease amount, provision of interest
at the rate of 15 per cent per annum was made but no such condition was included in the
agreement for delayed payment of cess and compensation. This resulted in loss of interest of
Rs 9.03 lakh as of March 2007. Presently arrears of Rs 39.14 lakh were pending against private
promoters for lease, cess and compensation.
On being pointed out (November 2006), EE stated that the agreement was formulated at
higher level.
3.1.9.8 Inordinate delay in reclamation of land
With a view to reclaim 9559 acres in a period of 15 years, Kahan Singh Wala Reclamation
Channel off-taking from Main Branch of Ferozepur feeder and having a length of 58000 feet
was completed in 1983-84.
Scrutiny of the records (November 2006) of EE, Eastern Canal Division, Ferozepur disclosed
that ever since completion of channel, full supply level could not be maintained due to long
length, loamy sandy area and paucity of funds for maintenance. As such only 2572 acres was
reclaimed and 6987 acre of land was not reclaimed. The Department did not take any action
to reclaim balance 6987 acre of land for 22 years. A link channel for this purpose was
proposed (June 2006) at an estimate of Rs 1.02 crore off-taking at RD 42450/L of Nizamwah
Distributory to join at RD 38825/R of Kahan Singh Wala reclamation channel.
However, funds were awaited (July 2007).
As a result even though more than two decades have passed 6987 acres of land is yet to be
reclaimed. EE admitted (November 2006) the facts and informed that the work of link channel
was still under consideration.
3.1.12.3 Non-conducting of inspection
During the period 2002-07, 10 EEs were required to conduct 175 inspections according to the
Irrigation Manual of Manual of orders but carried out 74 inspections only resulting in shortfall
of 58 per cent, this would compromise the monitoring of sub-divisions. On being pointed out
(January and March 2007), the EEs assured compliance in future.
3.1.13 Conclusion
Performance audit of Irrigation Department disclosed cases of financial, planning and
programme mismanagement. Nine projects approved in annual plans were not
implemented depriving irrigation potential of 3.27 lakh hectares instead three projects not
included in the annual plans were executed indicating poor planning. Increase in
installation of tubewells rendered 103 blocks overexploited, five blocks critical and four
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
60
blocks semi critical out of 137 blocks in the State. Delay in providing funds, construction of
minors without adequate survey resulted in unfruitful expenditure of Rs 2.26 crore. Failure to
restore electric connections and completion of lift drainage schemes resulted in unfruitful
expenditure of Rs 1.68 crore. Short utilization of departmental machinery resulted in
unproductive expenditure of Rs 13.30 crore on establishment and non-inclusion of crew
charges in the operational cost of machinery resulted in non-recovery of Rs 3.43 crore from
client departments/agencies.
Recommendations
The Department should focus on completion of irrigation and power generation projects in a
time bound manner;
Effective steps should be taken to regulate exploitation of underground water through tubewells
and
Human resources and available infrastructure should optimally be utilized.
The above points were reported to Government (May 2007); reply has not been received (July
2007).
Perforamce audit of The Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) in
Rajasthan
Highlights
The Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) aims at providing safe and adequate
drinking water facilities to the rural population. More than 65,000 habitations in the State did not
have adequate drinking water mainly due to mismanagement of scheme funds and slow execution of
works taken up under the programme. Monitoring of the programme implementation was
inadequate and quality of water supplied was poor. There was no plan for water source
sustainability. The programmes for community participation in the water supply schemes and
Communication and Capacity Development were not successful in the State.
3.1.1 Introduction
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
61
The Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP), a Centrally sponsored scheme,
was revamped (April 1999) to provide safe and adequate drinking water facilities to the rural
population by supplementing the efforts of the State Government under Minimum Needs
Programme (MNP). The main objectives of ARWSP were:
• to ensure coverage of all rural habitations;
• to ensure sustainability of the systems and sources; and
• to preserve quality of water by institutionalising water quality monitoring and surveillance
through a catchments area approach.
Rajasthan covers about 10 per cent of total area of the country whereas availability of water is
less than one per cent. Ground water is the main source of water in the State. In many places
water is not potable due to excess contents of Chloride, Fluoride, Nitrate and Arsenic, etc.
3.1.2 Organisational set up
In the State the programme is being implemented by Public Health Engineering Department
(PHED). Principal Secretary is the administrative head of PHED. The Chief Engineer (CE),
Rural is the overall in-charge of the ARWSP assisted by six Additional Chief Engineers
(ACEs) at Zonal level, 28
Superintending Engineers (SEs) at circle level and by Executive Engineers (EEs) of 98
Divisions. The
Rajasthan Water Supply and Sewerage Management Board (Board) headed by Minister,
PHED is an agency for policy formulation, technical advice, consolidation and control of
expenditure.
3.1.3 Audit objectives
The audit objectives were to assess whether:
• the process of planning for ARWSP was effective;
• the survey of habitations conducted effectively and planning was based on authentic and reliable
data;
• the financial management was efficient;
• the schemes were executed economically and efficiently; and
• the mechanism for monitoring of water quality was adequate and effective.
3.1.4 Audit criteria
Performance audit was conducted with reference to:
• ARWSP guidelines for planning and implementation of the projects;
• guidelines for National Rural Drinking Water Quality Monitoring and Surveillance
Programme;
• National Water Policy;
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
62
• Project Implementation Plan for individual schemes and
• instructions issued by the Central and the State Governments.
3.1.5 Audit coverage and methodology
The performance audit was conducted (February to May 2007) to examine the
implementation of the ARWSP covering the period 2002-03 to 2006-07 by test check of
records of the CE (Headquarters), CE1 (Special Projects), CE (Rural) at Jaipur and of 19
Divisions
2 in seven Districts (out of 32) having 49 blocks (out of 237) and 8,130 villages (out of 39,753).
A meeting was held in January 2007 with the Principal Secretary, PHED to discuss the subject
of the performance audit, the audit objectives and the criteria.
3.1.6 Planning
Annual Action Plans (AAPs) were to be prepared by the CE with all necessary details
indicated in the programme guidelines and submitted to the Government of India (GOI)
(Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission). Action Plans submitted to the GOI did not
focus on priority for coverage of Not Covered (NC) habitations, steps proposed to be taken to
function in mission-mode, in house plan for Human Resource Development, activities to be
taken up under sub-mission to tackle the problems of the targeted population including the
Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs). Thus, the AAPs were not complete as per
provisions of guidelines. There was no plan for water source sustainability. In order to have a
complete understanding on the villages to be surveyed, maps were to be prepared before and
just after the survey. However, such maps were not prepared by PHED. The impact of the
shortcomings in planning on programme implementation has been commented at the
appropriate places.
3.1.7 Survey of habitations
To ascertain reliable information on the status of drinking water supply in rural habitations,
rural schools and the water source tested for quality problem with details of existing safe
drinking water supply system in such quality affected habitations, GOI issued instructions
(February 2003) to conduct a survey in accordance with the guidelines and submit the results
by September 2003. Government submitted the survey results in October 2003.
Based on the survey, Government reported the status of 1,21,133 habitations in the State to
GOI including 40,342 as fully covered (FC), 61,995 as partially covered (PC) and 18,796 as
not covered (NC). However, GOI considered 1,07,768 habitations (NC : 55,934; PC : 17,168
and FC : 34,666) as per the ARWSP norms (population less than 100 were not considered for
a habitation). State Government, however, planned for 1,22,250 habitations (NC: 65,213; PC:
17,159 and FC: 39,878). Thus, there was deviation from the ARWSP guidelines for deciding
the number of habitations and the AAPs were not based on correct data of habitation and the
category of habitation.
3.1.9.2 Extraction of ground water
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
63
The State suffers from scanty rainfall, inadequate surface water and depends mostly on ground
water. There was over extraction of ground water in 140 blocks (out of 237 blocks). The GOI
fixed (2000-01) five per cent of funds released under ARWSP for exclusive use on projects
relating to sustainability of water resources. Accordingly, State was to spend Rs 63.37 crore on
source sustainability. As the PHED had not formulated any plan for water source
sustainability, no sum could be spent on this component despite the fact that there was
indiscriminate and disproportionate level of ground water extraction. This resulted in non-
protection of precious natural resources.
3.1.9.3 Supply of drinking water in rural schools
Under the ARWSP, drinking water facility was to be provided to all rural schools by the end
of Tenth Plan. The targets of 2005-06 and 2006-07 for coverage of rural schools were not
achieved and shortfall was 64 and 57 percent respectively. As of March 2007, 8,195 schools
were not covered.
3.1.12 Water quality
3.1.12.1 Quality affected villages not benefited
As of March 2001 there were 30,380 quality affected habitations which increased to 31,600 as
of March 2007. This showed that special emphasis was not given for coverage of quality
affected 24 habitations.
More than 50 per cent villages in test checked districts.were qaultiy affected.
Government planned (July 1994) to set up Fluoride Control Project (FCP) for providing
drinking water from Bisalpur dam to 669 fluoride affected villages and 23 en-route villages of
Ajmer District within four years.
The schemes were to be completed within two to three years from the date of sanctions. The
PPC of the Board sanctioned (July 1994 to January 2005) eight schemes costing Rs. 437..10
crore covering 692 villages and two towns. As off March 2007, two schemes were completed
including 153 villages already covered and 136 villages were covered through remaining
ongoing six schemes. Thus, actually no new villages were covered in these two schemes.
Delay in according sanctions and in execution of work resulted in deprival of intended benefit
to the 403 fluoride affected villages for a decade.
Further, the PPC sanctioned (2002-03) the Barmer Lift Drinking Water Project costing Rs
424.91 crore covering Barmer and Jaisalmer Districts. This included coverage of quality
affected 529 and 162 rural habitations of Barmer and Jaisalmer Districts respectively. The
revised sanction of the project for Rs 688.65 crore was accorded by PPC in February 2007.
The project was taken up in March 2007 after a lapse of four years from the date of original
sanction and the State could incur only Rs 5.22 lakh upto March 2007. Poor financial and
physical performance of the project showed lack of seriousness to cover the quality affected
habitations of both the districts.
3.1.12.2 Supply of unsafe water to public
As per ARWSP guidelines the potable water (at least eight litre per capita per day) for
drinking and cooking purposes is to be provided to all habitations. Test check of records of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
64
Balotra and Bikaner divisions showed that from five water supply schemes unsafe water
containing "Total Dissolved Solid" (TDS) between 1920 PPM and 4000 PPM as against
permissible limit upto 1500 PPM was being supplied (April 2003) to 49 habitations of 31,844
population. Expenditure incurred on these schemes was Rs 4.79 crore.
3.1.12.3 Water Quality Monitoring and Surveillance
For institutionalising the Water Quality Monitoring and Surveillance System, the National
Rural Drinking Water Quality Monitoring and Surveillance Programme (NRDWQM&SP)
was launched (February 2006). GOI was to provide complete assistance for implementation of
The programme. GOI released (February 2006) Rs. 72.43 lakh for monitoring and
surveillance activies, of which only Rs. 1.99 lakh was spent.
District Level Surveillance Coordinator and State Referral Institute as of March 2007. Field
Testing Kits worth Rs 69.79 lakh were not procured (April 2007) after a lapse of more than
one year from sanction. Thus, water quality monitoring mechanism was not evolved
efficiently. Further, the GOI released (February 2006) Rs 2.02 crore for Human Resource
Development (HRD) and Information, Education and Communication (IEC) activities. The
PHED transferred (January-March 2007) the money to Communication and Capacity
Development Unit (CCDU) after a lapse of 11 to 13 months. The utilisation of funds could
not be verified as CCDU did not submit the audited accounts as of May 2007.
3.1.14 Sector reform
The GOI launched (1999-2000) the Sector Reform Project for institutionalising community
based Rural Drinking Water Supply Programme. The basic concept of the reform project was
to ensure community participation in the water supply schemes. Ten per cent of the capital cost
of the scheme was to be paid by the beneficiaries. The GOI sanctioned (2000-02) Sector
Reform Pilot Projects for four districts at a cost of Rs.
141.71 crore . Test check in Rajsamand and Sikar Districts showed the following:
• District Water and Sanitation Mission (DWSM) of Rajsamand and Sikar received (2000-
02) Rs 23.14 crore from GOI. Of this, Rs 6.05 crore was transferred to the District Water
and Sanitation Committees (DWSCs), Jaipur and Alwar. The committees spent Rs
12.49 crore on Sector Reform and Rs 4.60 crore was lying unutilised as of March 2007.
• DWSCs sanctioned and took up 199 Water Supply Schemes costing Rs 22.14 crore
during 2002-04. In 34 schemes (Sikar District), public contribution of Rs 43.13 lakh was
not received and in 27 schemes contribution of Rs 15.99 lakh against Rs 33.81 lakh was
received. Thus, there was short receipt of beneficiary contribution to the extent of Rs
60.95 lakh. Of the 138 schemes for which contribution received, 78 schemes were
completed.
• As of March 2007, 101 Schemes (Sikar: 80 and Rajsamand: 21) were lying incomplete
for more than two years after spending Rs 5.67 crore. The DWSCs attributed this to
delay in execution of the works by the Village Water and Sanitation Committees
(VWSCs). Of the 98 completed schemes, 68 schemes were handed over to the VWSCs
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
65 | P a g e
and 13 were closed due to non-taking/handing over the charge of schemes by Sarpanch,
power disconnection, etc.
• The SE, Sikar circle stated (May 2007) that the schemes were not maintained properly by
VWSC as they considered that the power charges to be high and nearby schemes being
maintained by the State Government. The contention of SE was not tenable because the
selection of schemes was determined on the basis of users preference and requirement
combined with affordability and willingness to contribute towards implementation,
(capital cost), and O&M.
3.1.17 Evaluation
ARWSP guidelines envisage that the State Government should take up monitoring and
evaluation studies through reputed organisations/institutions on the implementation of
the rural water supply programme. However, no such study was undertaken (2002-07)
by the State Government.
Implementation of ARWSP in the State during 1997-2001 was reviewed and included in
the Audit Report (Civil) for 2000-01 (Para 4.2). The Report discussed by the Public
Accounts Committee during February
2003 and November 2006, the recommendations were awaited. However, some
irregularities related to uncovered habitations, non-providing the safe drinking water to
habitations, not giving emphasis on SC/ST habitations, improper implementations of
sector reform and computerisation, slow spending of central assistance commented in
the earlier Audit Report were persisting as already discussed in this Report.
3.1.18 Conclusion
The annual action plans were not drawn adequately. Poor financial management led to
diversion of funds, depriving the State of Central assistance of Rs 188.59 crore.
Adequate drinking water was not provided to more than 65,000 habitations. Special
emphasis was not given to cover water quality affected habitations (31,600). Schemes
were not executed properly. There were delays in completion of fluoride control projects
and coverage of rural schools in providing drinking water. There was cost overrun of Rs
8.70 crore due to delays in finalisation of tenders and issue of sanctions. Cases of
avoidable/extra expenditure, blocking of funds and unfruitful expenditure of scheme
funds were also noticed. The sector reform project was not implemented effectively. The
Monitoring and Investigation units were working without the technical experts.
Irregularities noticed in the implementation of ARWSP included in Report of the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India for the year ending 31 March 2001 (Civil),
Government of Rajasthan were found to be still persisting.
3.1.19 Recommendations
• Annual Action Plans should be drawn focusing on incomplete projects, priority for
covering of habitations, water source sustainability.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
66 | P a g e
• Government should improve financial management to avoid diversion of funds and
depriving the State of Central assistance.
• Government should ensure the completion of the schemes in time to provide adequate
drinking water to rural population.
• Government should give special emphasis to cover water quality affected habitations.
• To check the over extraction of ground water prompt action should be taken by the
Government and action for sustainability of water sources should be taken to protect the
production capacity of sources.
• Government should strengthen monitoring by appointing hydrologist, geophysicist and
computer specialist and ensure following on recommendation of Public Accounts
Committee.
The matter was reported to the Government in June 2007; reply has not been received
(September 2007).
Performance Audit of Urban water supply in Sikkim.
Performance Audit of Urban Water Supply System revealed non-framing of ‘State Water Policy’ in
line with the ‘National Water Policy’ and absence of long-term perspective planning. Baseline
survey for assessing actual requirement of potable water and preservation of water sources had never
been conducted. Contamination of water was prevalent due to inadequate and ineffective water
treatment and alignment of pipelines through drains and jhoras. Leakages and wastage of water
was rampant as the Department failed to put in place vigilance mechanism to detect un-authorised
connections and wastage of water. There was excess and unnecessary expenditure in execution of
works while beneficiary participation in creation of assets could not be obtained. Water tariff fixed
by the Department was devoid of any cost analysis and revenue collection lax leading to huge gap
between the revenue earned vis-à-vis operation and maintenance costs.
3.5.1 Introduction
The Water Security and Public Health Engineering Department (WS&PHED) is
responsible for ensuring sufficient supply of clean and safe drinking water to all
consumers of the capital town of Gangtok, eight other notified towns37
and 55 Rural
Marketing Centres (RMCs)38
in Sikkim. This primarily involved:
(i) planningand implementation of new water supply schemes/programmes,
(ii) adequate and timely maintenance and repairs of the existing water supply systems and
(iii) developing strategies to meet the increasing demand for water due to population growth,
besides timely formulation of water tariff and collection of revenue.
3.5.2 Organisational set-up
The responsibility of all activities relating to urban water supply system vested with
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
67 | P a g e
the Principal Chief Engineer-cum-Secretary, Water Security and Public Health
Engineering Department (WS&PHED), supported by an Additional Chief Engineer
at the Headquarters and a number of other engineers and staff.
3.5.3 Scope of Audit
Records relating to the period from 2001-02 to 2005-06 in the office of the Principal
Chief Engineer-cum-Secretary and three (North-East, Gangtok and Revenue) out of
the five Divisional Engineers‟ offices were reviewed during the Performance Audit
carried out between May and June 2006. About 40 per cent (Rs. 40 crore) of the total
expenditure of Rs. 100 crore on water supply schemes undertaken/ completed during
the period were test-checked in Audit during this period.
3.5.4 Audit Objective
The primary objective of the Performance Audit was to assess the efficiency and
effectiveness of various programmes in the WS&PHE Department in ensuring
supply of sufficient and safe drinking water to the consumers. This entailed assessing
and verifying whether:
• The State Water Policy was formulated and implemented in an efficacious manner;
• Sustainability of the water sources was ensured;
• Adequate treatment facility existed for ensuring prescribed drinking water quality;
• Infrastructure maintenance / up-gradation was adequate;
• Works were executed economically, efficiently and effectively; and
• Monitoring, evaluation and vigilance mechanism was adequate, efficient and effective.
3.5.5 Audit criteria
For arriving at conclusions against the above Audit objectives, the following criteria
were adopted in Audit:
• Targets and milestones set in the policy pronouncements of the Government,
• Norms / scale for discharge capacity of water sources and requirement of water per
consumer as prescribed,
• Treatment as per prescribed norms for ensuring quality,
• Codal provisions for execution of works, and
• Norms / standards for replacement/ up-gradation and maintenance of assets.
3.5.6 Audit methodology
The Performance Audit process began with group discussions (February 2006) with
various stake holders, followed by selection of sample based on multistage sampling
combining simple random sampling and probability proportionate to size
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
68 | P a g e
(expenditure). Before commencement of the field Audit, Audit engagement letter
(April 2006) was sent to the Department followed by entry conference (May 2006)
wherein the broad performance indicators and criteria for evaluating implementation
of the water supply system were discussed and agreed to.
Questionnaires were issued on various aspects like targets, achievement and status of
various water supply projects etc. The data provided by the Department was
analysed with reference to original records in three divisional offices and head office
and discussed with senior officers of the Department. At the end of the Audit, exit
conference was held (September 2006) and the report finalised after taking into
consideration the views of the Department during the exit conference.
Auditfindings
3.5.7 Policy and planning
A National Water Policy (NWP) adopted in September 1987 and reviewed and
updated in April 2002 inter alia envisaged formulation of State Water Policy (SWP)
backed by an operational action plan to achieve the desired objective of provision of
safe drinking water to entire population. The State Government, however, had
neither formulated a SWP nor worked out any long term perspective plan to build
capacity for increased demand in future. Besides, no base line survey was ever
conducted to assess the present and future requirements of water given the
population growth and expansion of urban conglomerates. Absence of policy
directives resulted in the following deficiencies:
3.5.7.1 No annual targets fixed
The WS&PHED did not have annual targets for accomplishing various works (new
construction, up-gradation and maintenance) since there was no long term
perspective plan in place. Audit analysis revealed that even the broad based targets
(institutional reforms, preparation of master plan, outsourcing revenue collection, contain
leakages and establishment of water testing laboratories in all districts) mentioned in the
State Plan documents (2002-07) were not achieved as of September 2006. There was
no time frame set by the Department as to when each of these targets would be met.
The Department while accepting the Audit observation stated (September 2006) that
necessary steps would be initiated to formulate SWP, master plan, institutional
reforms and establishment of laboratories.
3.5.7.2 Misplaced priority
In terms of population coverage, the capital town of Gangtok was shown as „fully
covered’ while the seven notified towns and 34 Rural Marketing Centres (out of 55)
were shown as „partially covered’. But despite the fact that there was still some
coverage to be done / achieved, the Department took up construction of water
fountain and beautification works like laying of tiles and compound lighting etc. at
Selep in Gangtok for Rs. 71.50 lakh during 2005-06. This indicated misplaced
priorities by the Department in its planning.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
69 | P a g e
3.5.7.3 Preservation of water sources
The water supply systems of the State were based on snow-fed rivers and mountain
streams which were sensitive to pollution, population growth and environmental
degradation. Audit scrutiny revealed that the Department had not conducted any
detailed study to record the gradual decline in the yield of water from the sources and
had not initiated any tangible action for preservation of ecology and water sources.
3.5.7.4 Non-metering of consumers
Sikkim Water Supply and Water Tax Act 1986 stipulated fixation of water charges
for supply of water under the Act on metered basis or on the basis of number of taps
installed. The Department chose to fix water charges on the basis of number of taps
installed rather than on metered consumption although the former had several well
known inherent deficiencies.
The Government fixed (Notification dated 3 October 2001) water charges on
metered basis at the rate of Rs. 3 per 1,000 litres (minimum) for industrial units,
commercial establishments and residential premises where the Department made
bulk supply of water. In terms of the notification, water meters were to be procured
and installed by the consumers themselves. The average consumption of water per
capita per day for urban areas was estimated at 135 litres by the Department, which
translated to 4,050 litres per capita per month, indicating bulk consumption. At this
rate, annual water consumption for the year 2005–06 would be 60,750 lakh litres for
a population of 1.25 lakh of Gangtok. The revenue from water charges for the year
2005-06 would, therefore, work out to Rs. 1.82 crore, if realised on metered basis.
Against this, the revenue realised on the prevailing tap based tariff for the year 2005-
06 was only Rs. 30.53 lakh – a difference of Rs. 1.51 crore in one year alone.
Metering of domestic connections was also recommended (February 2005) in a
report by AUSAID39
. However, the Department had failed to adopt a clear policy on
this issue so far.
In reply, the Department stated (September 2006) that metering of the water supply
system of Gangtok would be taken up once the detailed project report submitted to
Asian Development Bank for funding was cleared.
3.5.7.5 Revenue generation vis-à-vis O & M cost
Scrutiny revealed that the methodology adopted by the Department to fix water
charges was not based on an analysis of the operating cost, depreciation and assets
replacement cost vis-à-vis the anticipated revenue. Tariff structures were neither
revised periodically nor did the Department/Government fix any norms for such
regular revision. During 2001-02 to 2005-06, water tariff was revised only once
(October 2001). Thus there was a huge gap between the operation & maintenance
cost (not including depreciation) and the corresponding revenue realised as indicated
below:
Table- 3.5.1
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
70 | P a g e
(Rupees in lakh)
Particulars 2001-
02
2002-
03
2003-
04
2004-
05
2005-06 Total
O & M 320.20 325.26 417.94 334.71 332.46 1,730.57
Revenue 38.34 57.29 56.96 73.71 80.69 306.99 Difference 281.86 267.97 360.98 261.00 251.77 1,423.58
Source: Detailed Appropriation Accounts and Finance Accounts
It was seen that while formulating the water supply schemes, the Department
invariably projected a favourable cost benefit ratio on the basis of which the projects
were sanctioned by the funding agencies. However, in reality, the Department did
not take resolute steps to translate the projections into a reality leading to gap
between the revenue earned and the O & M cost and consequential huge financial
liability of Rs. 14.24 crore during the five year period alone.
3.5.7.6 Leakage / wastage of water
The Department had not fixed any norms for probable maximum quantity of leakage
from a water supply system. The ‘Gangtok Water Supply System’, supplied 30 to 36
million litres per day (mld) of water for catering to the requirement of the city. For
the Gangtok population of 1.25 lakh the requirement of water per day would be
16.86 mld40
at the rate of 135 lpcd41
.
Thus 13.14 mld of water, which constituted 44 per cent of the minimum daily
discharge (30 mld) from the treatment plant was unaccounted for. Similarly, the
loss/leakage of water from systems in the other towns and RMCs ranged from 7 to
80 per cent of the quantity of water released from the respective sources.
The Central Public Health & Environmental Engineering Organisation norm for
leakage / loss was 10 per cent. Compared to this norm, the loss/leakage/pilferage of
water at 44 per cent for Gangtok and 20 to 80 per cent for other towns and RMCs was
abnormally high. The Department had not put in a policy to mitigate the problem by
installation of bulk meters at various points in the feeder lines, strengthening of
vigilance and surveillance mechanism etc.
In reply, the Department stated (September 2006) that after completion of the
ongoing augmentation works wastage/leakages in Gangtok would be minimised and
similar exercise shall be carried out in other towns and RMCs in a phased manner.
3.5.8 Budget and Financial Management
Budget estimates, actual expenditure, savings and excess figures under revenue and
capital head during the period from 2001-02 to 2005-06 were as under:
Table- 3.5.2
(Rupees in lakh)
Year Budget on Act ual Saving (- (+)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
71 | P a g e
Expenditu
re
)/Excess
Revenue Capita
l
Provis
i
Total Revenu
e
Capital Total Revenue Capital Total
2001-
02
521.15 976.32 1,497.
47
520.44 974.30 1,494.7
4
-0.71
(0.14)
-2.02 (0.21) -2.73
(0.18)
2002-
03
543.45 1,031.
01
1,574.
46
541.00 1,030.85 1,571.8
5
-2.45
(0.45)
-0.16 (0.02) -2.61
(0.17)
2003-
04
661.62 966.87 1,628.
49
663.02 893.43 1,556.4
5
1.40
(0.21)
-73.44
(7.59)
-72.04
(4.42)
2004-
05
352.55 2,183.
12
2,535.
67
349.93 2,186.92 2,536.8
5
-2.62
(0.74)
3.80 (0.17) 1.18
(0.05)
2005-
06
603.18 2,413.
13
3,016.
31
609.93 2,201.92 2,811.8
5
6.75
(1.12)
-211.21
(8.75)
-204.46
(6.78)
Total 2681.95 7570.4
5
10252.
40
2684.32 7287.42 9971.7
4
2.37 -283.03 -280.66
Source: Appropriation Accounts. Figures in brackets represent percentage
Analysis of budgetary and financial management revealed the following defects:
3.5.8.1 Significant savings
Significant savings of Rs. 0.72 crore during 2003-04 and Rs. 2.04 crore in 2005-06
was due to delayed/non-receipt (December 2003) of funds from GOI.
3.5.8.2 Substantial committed liability
The Department incurred substantial financial liability year after year without
adequate budgetary support in contravention of the State Public Works Code leading
to accumulated committed liability increasing from Rs. 57.74 lakh in 2001-02 to Rs.
1.10 crore in 2003-04. It however dipped thereafter to Rs. 92.18 lakh in 2004-05 and
Rs. 28.23 lakh in 2005-0642
. The spending Department as well as the Finance,
Revenue and Expenditure Department failed to impose any restriction on creation of
liabilities beyond the approved allocation indicating inadequate budgetary control.
The Department stated (September 2006) that it shall be more vigilant in future.
3.5.9 Implementation of Projects/Schemes
During the period 2001-06, the Department had undertaken 43 schemes/projects for
execution, out of which 28 were completed and 15 were under progress (ranging
between 20 to 99 per cent of completion) as of March 2006. Out of the above, 14 projects
were selected for scrutiny in Audit; the results are enumerated in the succeeding
paragraphs:
3.5.9.1 Avoidable wasteful expenditure on abandonment of Rangpo Water Supply System
due to faulty design
The Department took up (January 2003) the “augmentation of the Rangpo water
supply system by lifting water from Rangpo Khola” at an estimated cost of Rs. 1.31
crore though it was fully aware of the design flaw issues in the new venture pointed
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
72 | P a g e
out (July 2001) to it by the Principal Secretary-cum-Development Commissioner,
Planning and Development Department. A similar project by the Animal Husbandry
& Veterinary Services (AH & VS) Department had also failed in the past. The result
was that while the civil works and procurement of pipes and fittings were
progressing, the entire foundation work of the Pumping Station and the intake
structure were damaged due to flooding of the river during May 2003, as initially
apprehended. To make good the damage and ensure viability of the project, the
Department proposed revision of the original estimates of Rs. 1.31 crore to Rs. 1.87
crore by making extensive changes to the scope of work. The revised proposal was
however turned down (January 2004) by NABARD and in the absence of fund, the
project was suspended after incurring Rs. 1.02 crore. The Additional Chief Engineer
also proposed (September 2005) closure of the project. No decision on the matter had
been taken as of September 2006. Thus, despite failure of AH & VS in similar project
and knowing there was design flaws the Department went ahead with the Rangpo
water supply System rendering the whole expenditure as wasteful.
3.5.9.2 Irregular and excess contingency provision
The Department irregularly inflated the contingency provision to Rs. 1.16 crore (13
per cent of the work value) as against the stipulated provision of 3 per cent (Rs. 26.13
lakh) as per the Sikkim Public Works Code, in case of the „Augmentation of
Gangtok Water Supply Scheme, Phase – II‟ project thereby making excess provision
of Rs. 89.79 lakh. This excess amount was diverted in meeting expenditure on
muster roll, maintenance of sewerage system and buildings, etc which were not
related to the project.
3.5.9.3 Avoidable excess projection of expenditure in carpeting works
The project „Augmentation of Gangtok Water Supply Scheme, Phase – II‟ envisaged
carpeting of damaged road surfaces wherever the pipelines were laid along the roads
for total length of 14,150 metres in 28 sub-works. However, in the analysis of costs
for carpeting works, the width of the surface to be carpeted was taken as 100 cm
instead of 60 cm (actual width of the trench), thereby unduly inflating the quantities of
labour and materials consumed and incurring excess expenditure of Rs. 22.64 lakh.
3.5.9.4 Excess purchase of sockets
In addition to procurement of pipes for laying of water supply lines, the Department
also purchased sockets for connecting the pipes. Test check revealed that all the pipes
procured by the Department invariably came with a socket attached at one end. The
Department, however, never took into account the sockets that came with the pipes
and instead procured additional sockets worth Rs. 24.87 lakh during the year 2001-
02 to 2005-06 leading to extra expenditure as there was no requirement for additional
sockets for joining the pipes.
In reply, Department stated (September 2006) that cutting of pipes to shorter lengths
at places necessitated additional sockets. The reply is not tenable as the Department
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
73 | P a g e
had never taken into account the sockets already available with pipes when newly
purchased, as seen during scrutiny of their purchase proposals.
3.5.9.5 Estimation of quantity of steel for RCC works
Audit scrutiny revealed that in all nine43
schemes out of 14 involving construction of
RCC structures, the method of estimation of steel by the Department was
fundamentally flawed as the detailed drawings of RCC structures and the bar bending
schedules44
as prescribed in principles of civil engineering were never prepared.
Resultantly, the Department used different quantities of steel per unit volume of
RCC in different schemes within the same State for the same type of work as can be
seen from the table below:
Table-3.5.3
Sl
1.
2.
3.4.
Item of work
RCC sedimentation
tanks Intake tanks
Reservoir/
distribution tanks
Distribution
chambers
Requirement of steel
130 kg per cum (1 case) , 160 kg per cum (2 cases) and
192.44 kg per cum (3 cases). 160 kg per cum (1 case), 130
kg per cum (4 cases) and 128 kg per cum (2 cases) 160 kg
per cum (5 cases) and 130 kg per cum (1 case) 82 kg per
cum, 110 kg per cum and 130 kg per cum
In reply, the Department stated (September 2006) that the quantity of steel varied
widely from 47 to 300 kg/cum of concrete and the same was permissible under
Indian Standard Code of Practice for re-enforced concrete works. The reply was not
tenable as it did not explain the reasons for such a wide variation, particularly when
all these structures were built for similar purposes in almost similar terrain.
3.5.10 Water quality
Water supplied to public must be potable from the point of view of its chemical,
physical and biological characteristics. The Department was, however, found
wanting in this respect despite substantial investments so far in this sector during the
period under Audit as is evident from following observations:
3.5.10.1 Pre distribution treatment
The Department had not attached the desired importance to pre-distributed water
treatment as out of 35 water supply systems in the State, only five had full water
treatment facilities (with sedimentation, filtration and disinfection) while the remaining 30
systems had partial treatment facilities (physical application of bleaching powder and alum
only). Inadequate treatment of water was fraught with the risk of health hazard,
outbreak of water borne diseases, etc. Audit point was borne out by the fact that
instances of water borne diseases like diarrhoea, gastroenteritis, cholera afflicting
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
74 | P a g e
42,843, 48,573 and 50,617 persons resulting in five, two and one death had come to
notice of the Health Department of the State Government during 2003, 2004 and
2005 respectively due to consumption of contaminated water. In reply, the WS &
PHED stated (September 2006) that it would provide full treatment facilities for all
the systems under its purview in a phased manner as per availability of resources. But
Audit scrutiny revealed that the Department had not made any time bound plan for
achieving the same.
3.5.10.2 Ineffective water treatment
Scrutiny of test reports of Central Water Testing Laboratory, Selep for 34 months
between June 2002 to October 2005 revealed bacterial contamination of water in one
or the other consumer points in the reports of as many as 30 months indicating
ineffective treatment of bacteriological contamination. This rendered the expenditure
on chemicals, salaries and wages of chemist, lab attendants and the equipments
largely ineffective. Similarly, test reports (June 2002) in respect of Mangan, Phodong
and Chungthang in the North District also indicated bacteriological contamination.
In reply, the Department stated (September 2006) that the consumers lines were laid
through jhoras and drains which may probably be the source of contamination for
which remedial measures had been initiated. However as of September 2006, no
progress could be seen during physical verification by the departmental officials in
the presence of Audit.
3.5.10.3 En-route contamination of water
Survey (November 2002) conducted under the Aus-aid project indicated coliform
contamination of water leading to high gastro-intestinal related morbidity. Physical
verification by Audit in the presence of Departmental Officers confirmed the enroute
contamination of water due to cross-contamination between sewer lines and drains
with water lines as can be seen from the photograph below:
While accepting the Audit observation, the Department assured (September 2006) to
initiate action for removal of consumer supply lines from the jhoras / drains to
mitigate the problem.
3.5.11 People participation and recovery of charges
With a view to inculcate a sense of participation and ownership, it is widely
advocated to ensure beneficiary participation and recover user charges so as to offset
O&M cost to the maximum extent possible. The GOI guidelines on Accelerated
Urban Water Supply Programme (AUWSP) stipulated 5 per cent beneficiary
contribution towards creation of water supply systems. The Department was found
wanting in this respect as elucidated in the following paragraphs:
3.5.11.1 Recovery of beneficiary contribution
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
75 | P a g e
The Department proposed (June 2000) to proportionately offset 5 per cent of
estimated cost as community participation by way of carriage of materials, land
donation, shram daan etc. while implementing AUWSP in Jorethang and Singtam at
an expenditure of Rs. 4.62 crore (Singtam -Rs. 1.26 crore, Jorethang – Rs. 3.36 crore)
during 2002-04. However, during actual execution, the Department failed to achieve
this and instead incurred an expenditure of Rs. 23.10 lakh. During 2004-05, in a
water supply scheme implemented under the Aus-Aid project in the Arithang area of
Gangtok, a local NGO (ECOSS) could offset 30 per cent (Rs. 23.44 lakh) of the
project cost (Rs. 77.33 lakh) through the community participation whereas the
Department failed to seek the full and unequivocal support and participation of the
beneficiary communities.
The Department could have saved Rs. 3.64 crore (5 per cent of Rs. 72.70 crore)45
during the period 2001-06 had it ensured community participation. Reply of the
Department (September 2006) that people‟s participation was realised through
donation of land is not tenable as no value was mentioned for land and no
community participation in the form of labour was taken. As mentioned above the
NGO managed to offset 30 per cent of the cost in case of the Aus-aid project.
3.5.11.2 Arrears of revenue
As mentioned in preceding paragraph, every consumer was billed on the basis of the
number of taps and was required to pay the water charges every month. It was,
however, noticed that the Revenue divisions of the Department had failed to collect
the revenue in time from the consumers leading to substantial increase in arrears of
revenue from Rs. 52.40 lakh in 2001-02 to Rs. 56.57 lakh as of March 2006. The
major defaulter was Gangtok sub-division (Rs.
32.52 lakh) followed by Namchi sub-division (Rs. 11.53 lakh).
The huge arrear of revenue is indicative of the lackadaisical approach of
departmental authority to ensure timely collection of Government revenue.
3.5.12 Monitoring and Evaluation
The Department had not created any monitoring and evaluation cell till date. There
was no central authority within the Department to independently monitor the
schemes and evaluate their effectiveness. There was no periodic inspection of supply
connections to consumers to detect cases of unauthorised connections, leakages and
losses of water despite presence of adequate staff (JEs & AEs) to do the same. The
level of oversight required to be exercised at the highest level (PCE-cum-Secretary
and Additional Chief Engineers) was also found inadequate. It was seen that the
monthly progress reports furnished to Planning & Development Department and the
Chief Minister‟s office were mostly incomplete as vital information like scheduled
date of commencement of projects, actual date of commencement and completion,
revised cost of works, reasons for delay and cost revision etc were not mentioned in
most cases.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
76 | P a g e
In reply, the Department agreed (September 2006) to set up a monitoring and
evaluation cell.
The Department had also not undertaken any evaluation of its water supply systems
during the last five years to assess whether the consumers were being supplied with
sufficient drinking water and to identify weak areas and take consequent remedial
actions. A study conducted (February 2005) by Aus-aid on Gangtok water Supply
systems, inter alia, concluded that there was very high incidence of unauthorised
connections, leakage / wastage of water and cross contamination of water with drain
and sewer lines.
3.5.12.1 Inventory of Assets
The Department had not evolved any system of asset accounting in the form of Asset
Registers. Due to this deficiency, an accurate track of assets created by the
Department since inception till date could not be made available to Audit. It was
also not clear how the Department calculated its budget estimate and how it
monitored the requirement of regular maintenance/ replacement to its assets
suffering erosion due to time and usage in the absence of a comprehensive listing of
its assets.
In reply, the Department stated (September 2006) that it shall initiate the work in this
regard during the current financial year itself.
3.5.12.2 Testing for quality of material
There was no system in the Department to conduct test to determine the quality of
materials like pipes and fittings, steel, cement, sand and stone aggregates used
extensively in construction of the projects. No quality testing laboratory was
established in the State till date. In reply, Department stated that it was proposing to
establish a testing laboratory during 11th
Plan period.
3.5.12.3 Vigilance mechanism to detect un-authorised connections
Survey conducted (February 2005) under Aus-aid project indicated a very high
incidence of un-authorised connections, against the Department‟s assessment of un-
authorised connections of 17 per cent (1,676 nos.). Despite the above facts, the
Department had not constituted any vigilance mechanism towards regular vigil and
detection of un-authorised connections although the Department was not short of
manpower. Detection and regularisation of unauthorised connections could have
earned the Department minimum recurring revenue of Rs. 6.23 lakh per annum
calculated at the minimum rate of Rs. 31 per connection per month.
In reply, the Department stated (September 2006) that unauthorised connections
were being checked and would be eliminated by the next two years.
3.5.13 Conclusion
The Water Security and Public Health Engineering Department failed to conduct baseline
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
77 | P a g e
survey for assessing the actual requirement and usage of water by the consumers. As
contamination of water was prevalent due to inadequate and ineffective water treatment and
alignment of pipelines through drains and jhoras, the quality of water supplied to the
consumers also could not be assured. Due to absence of an effective monitoring and vigilance
mechanism, un-authorised connections, leakage / wastage of water continued unchecked.
3.5.14 Recommendations
Following recommendations are made:
The Department should take immediate steps to:
• Expedite formulation of a State Water Policy;
• Conduct baseline survey and prepare master plan for future planning;
• Prioritise activities to accord utmost priority to uncovered areas;
• Improve water quality to supply hygienic and safe water by adequate pre-distribution
treatment and prevent en-route contamination;
• Introduce volumetric tariff for making the Department a self sustaining entity;
• Inculcate sense of participation and ownership among the users by realising
beneficiaries contribution and publicise all its programme;
• Evolve system of asset accounting in the form of Asset Registers;
• In respect of projects completed and in progress it should display information as
required in the Right to Information Act.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
78 | P a g e
Performance Audit of Conservation and Management of Dal Lake (2006)
Housing and Urban Development, Jammu and Kashmir
3.2 Conservation and Management of Dal Lake
Dal Lake has been playing a major role in the economy of the State by attracting tourists
and by providing a means of livelihood for a large number of people. This review focuses
on the effectiveness of implementation of the Programmes relating to Lake conservation
and rehabilitation by the State Government.
Highlights
The open area of the Lake had reduced to 12 square kilometers (2006) from 24
square kilometers (1962) and its average depth had also reduced to three meters,
with no significant improvement in overall health of the Lake despite incurring
expenditure of Rs. 235.70 crore. Problems like excessive weed growth,
deterioration in the water quality, discharge of sewage/nutrients into the Lake
body and deposition of silt persisted. (Paragraphs: 3.2.1 and 3.2.10)
Under the Lake Conservation Programme, against the target of acquiring 4,580
kanals of hamlet land and 3,741 structures, only 590 kanals of land (13 per cent) and
528 structures (14 per cent) had been acquired as of March 2006. (Paragraph:
3.2.10.1)
Failure of the Jammu and Kashmir Lakes and Waterways Development
Authorityto ascertain the use of the acquired land in the Master Plan of the
Srinagar City prior to its acquisition, rendered expenditure of Rs. 8.32 crore
unfruitful, besides adversely affecting the evacuation programme of the Lake
dwellers. (Paragraph: 3.2.10.1)
Despite undertaking Catchment Area Management Works, the rate at which the
silt had entered the Lake had increased from 7,254 tonnes per year (between
August 1998 and August 2003) to 22,354 tonnes per year (between September 2003
and August 2005). (Paragraph: 3.2.10.2)
Due to destruction of their breeding ground and other environmental stress, the
fish species had undergone decrease in their size and population. (Paragraph:
3.2.10.3)
The Authority did not prepare an inventory of assets/liabilities inherited by it
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
79 | P a g e
from the Urban Environmental Engineering Department, nor was the status of
on-going works obtained from the implementing divisions. (Paragraph: 3.2.15)
3.2.1 Introduction
Kashmir Valley is gifted with a number of natural water bodies having great
ecological and socio-economic significance. Dal Lake, one of such natural bodies is
said to be the cradle of Kashmir civilization and has played a major role in the
economy of the State by attracting tourists and also conduct of agricultural activities
like nelumbium♥
cultivation, harvesting typhus for mat weaving, etc. In addition,
people within its periphery live in houseboats and hamlets and also perform
agricultural activities on hamlets.
With the coming up of commercial establishments in and around its periphery, direct
discharge of sewage and waste water into it, denudation of its catchment area and
inflow of silt have adversely affected the health of the Lake and has resulted in water
pollution and reduction in its water expanse from 24 square kilometers (1962) to
11.98 square kilometers∝
(2006). The average depth of the Lake had also reduced to
three meters. Problems like excessive weed growth, deterioration in the water
quality, direct discharge of sewage and nutrients into the Lake body and deposition
of silt persisted. Treatment of its catchment area too had shown no positive results,
as inflow of silt from the area into the Lake body continued. According to a Survey
conducted (2005) by the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB), the Lake was rapidly
turning into marshy area due to the presence of large quantity of nutrients, which
increase plant life and cause environmental damage, resulting in dying of the Lake.
3.2.2 Implementation of Dal Lake Conservation Project
With a view to improving the water quality of the lake and also saving it from further
degradation, the State Government launched the Project “Conservation of Dal-
Nigeen Lake” in 1977. The work on the Project was started in 1978-79 and was
implemented through the State Urban Environment Engineering Department
(UEED) up to 1996-97. During March 1997, the Project was transferred to the
Jammu and Kashmir Lakes and Waterways Development Authority; (Authority)
created during 1997 in pursuance of Jammu and Kashmir Development Act, 1970,
and was also included in the „National Lakes Conservation Plan‟ (NLCP) under the
Ministry of Environment and Forest (MOEF), Government of India (GOI).
The Authority conceived (August 1997) two Programmes viz. Lake Conservation
Programme and the Rehabilitation Programme. The salient features of the
Programme are:
Lake Conservation Programme
• Evacuation of the hamlet population by acquiring propriety land of the lake
dwellers alongwith the structures erected thereon, and restoring the area to the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
80 | P a g e
Lake sewerage treatment,solid waste management, water quality monitoring
desilting, dredging and weed control and Catchment Management
Rehabilitation Programme
• Acquisition of the watery area, surrounding the hamlets
• Resettlement of the dislocated hamlet population in new housing colonies.
3.2.3 Organisational Structure
The Authority, under the administrative control of the Housing and Urban
Development Department, is managed by a Board comprising nine members
including the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, appointed by the Government. The
day-to-day activities are looked after by the Vice-Chairman, assisted by various
Officers.
3.2.4 Scope of Audit
The performance of the Jammu and Kashmir Lakes and Waterways Authority in
implementation of programmes aimed at saving the Lake from further degradation,
covering the period 1997-2006, was reviewed in audit during 2005-06.
3.2.5 Audit Objectives
Audit of the Authority was undertaken with a view to assessing:
• whether the Projects were designed carefully after adequate planning the impact of implementation of the Conservation and Rehabilitation Programmes;
• Effectiveness of measures taken to curb direct discharge of sewage and solid waste into the Lake;
• Effectiveness of the steps taken to improve the quality of water of the Lake; and
• Whether adequate financial controls existed in the Authority.
3.2.6 Audit Criteria
Performance of the Authority was assessed against the following audit criteria:
• Provisions of the Project Report and National Lakes Conservation Plan
• Projections in the Survey reports and plan documents
• Targets fixed for conservation and rehabilitation programmes
3.2.7 Audit Methodology
Audit evidence was collected through a test-check of the records of the Authority
(pertaining to the Lake Divisions–I and II, Mechanical Division, Land Acquisition
and Monitoring Laboratory), UEED, MOEF, Draft Project Report, Watershed
Management, Agenda notes, and other records like, cashbooks, vouchers, stock
registers, etc. In addition, Survey Reports of the State Pollution Control Board,
Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal and Alternate Hydro Energy Centre,
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
81 | P a g e
Roorke were also examined. Records for test-check were selected on a random
sampling basis.
Besides, the Audit team also conducted (August 2006) a Survey to have a first hand
knowledge about the impact of the Rehabilitation programme with respect to
resettlement of the dislocated families in new housing colonies. The Survey was
based on audio-visual tapes and written statements obtained from the representatives
of about 30 families, who had either been resettled in new housing colonies or were
expected to shift to new places.
The Audit Plan and the Audit Objectives were discussed in the entry conference held
with the Vice Chairperson of the Authority. Audit conclusions arrived at in the
performance review were also discussed (October 2006) with the Commissioner
Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department and the Vice Chairperson
of the Authority in the exit conference. The replies of the Authority have been
incorporated in the relevant paragraphs, where appropriate.
3.2.8 Project Planning and Funding Pattern
The programme on Lake Conservation was initially (1997) proposed to be funded on
70:30 pattern (70 per cent by the Central Government and 30 per cent by the State
Government). From June 2003, the Central Government decided to wholly finance
the programme. The Detailed Project Report (DPR) on the programme was prepared
by the Authority through the Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, Roorkee (AHEC) in
October 2000 and was approved by the Central Government (MOEF) in September
2005. The project was estimated to cost Rs. 298.76 crore and the target date of its
completion is 2010.
The Rehabilitation Programme was the responsibility of the State Government. The
programme was approved by the State Government in May 2001 at an estimated
cost of Rs. 135 crore.
3.2.9 Financial Management
Prior to the approval of the Project Report by the MOEF, the Planning Commission
released (1997-98 to 2001-02) Rs. 106.68 crore to the State Government as
Additional Central Assistance for Lake Conservation Programme. In November
2005, an amount of Rs 40 crore was released by the MOEF to the Authority.
Besides, the State Government released Rs. 26.13 crore to the Authority between
1997-98 and 2005-06.
The expenditure on Direction and Administration varying between 17 and 60 per cent
of the expenditure on conservation was on the higher side compared to establishment
charges of 7.5 per cent recovered by the Public Works Department for execution of
Government works. The Authority stated (October 2006) that increase in the
expenditure on Direction and Administration was due to increase in the pay and
allowances of the employees, and that the matter was being seriously watched.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
82 | P a g e
3.2.9.1 Non preparation of Accounts
In terms of Section 21 of the Jammu and Kashmir Development Act, 1970, the
Authority was required to prepare annual accounts in consultation with the auditor
to be appointed by the Government. The Authority, despite having a full fledged
Accounts Wing, had not prepared its accounts, nor had engaged chartered
accountants, indicating laxity. In the absence of the finalised accounts, its financial
position and details of assets/liabilities could not be ascertained. Non-preparation of
accounts is also fraught with the risk of irregularities, frauds, etc. going undetected.
The Authority had also not prepared the accounting manual nor had prescribed the
accounting procedures, thereby violating the provisions of the Act. The Authority
stated (October 2006) that the accounts could not be prepared due to the absence of
the financial mechanism required for commercial pattern of accounts, and that the
Government had been requested (January 2006) to appoint a chartered accountant,
which had not been done till date.
The Office Complex of the Authority was gutted in February 2005, in which the
records of the Authority including cash books, vouchers, etc. were destroyed. The
records had not been reconstructed as of March 2006. The Authority stated (October
2006) that efforts were afoot to reconstruct the records.
3.2.10 Impact of the Programmes
Up to March 1997, the UEED spent Rs. 72 crore on the developmental activities of
the Lake. The Authority incurred a further amount of Rs. 163.70 crore between
1997-98 and 2005-06, as detailed in Table-3.8 above. The Authority contends
(October 2006) that there was improvement in the health of the Lake, due to various
measures taken by it. The reply is not tenable, as despite incurring an aggregate
expenditure of Rs. 235.70 crore by the UEED and the Authority, there was no
significant improvement in the overall health of the Lake, as discussed in the
succeeding paragraphs.
3.2.10.1 Reduction in the Water Expanse
There were 58 hamlets •
within the Lake, situated towards its western shore. About
6,550 families resided aboard these hamlets, and had proprietary rights over 6,000
kanals of hamlet land within the Lake and 14,547 kanals of watery land (water area).
These lake dwellers undertake agricultural activities on these hamlets and in the
process reclaim the Lake area by filling or by converting floating gardens♠
into hard
landmass and raise structures thereon. This contributes to the shrinkage of the Lake
area, besides causing deterioration in its water quality, as the sewage/solid wastes
generated by the hamlet population is discharged directly into the Lake body. In this
connection, it is pertinent to mention that the Finance Minister of the State had in
his budget speech (March 2005) set a target of increasing the clear water expanse of
the Lake area by about three square kilometers during 2005-06.
The Lake Conservation Programme envisaged acquisition of hamlet land alongwith
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
83 | P a g e
the structures erected thereon and restoration of the area to the Lake body. It was
however observed in audit that the pace of implementation of the programme was
unsatisfactory. Against the target of acquiring 4,580 kanals of hamlet land and 3,741
structures by March 2006, only 590 kanals of land (13 per cent) and 528 structures (14
per cent) had been acquired (March 2006) at an expenditure of Rs. 20.80 crore. It was
also observed that the area so acquired could not be restored to the Lake body except
at Gadda Mohalla (where 38 structures had been raised), as the property had been
acquired at isolated spots in a sporadic manner instead of in clusters. As a result,
inspite of incurring an expenditure of Rs. 20.80 crore, the programme objectives
could not be achieved in full rendering the expenditure largely unfruitful.
The Dal dwellers had proprietary rights of watery land within the Lake. To prevent
the dislocated dwellers from returning to the Lake and filling up this watery land for
residential/agricultural purposes, it was proposed (January 1999) to acquire 14,547
kanals of watery area under the Rehabilitation Programme. However, against the
target of acquiring 14,547 kanals, only 1,055 kanals had been acquired as of March
2006.
Besides, against 11,000 plots required (January 1999) for rehabilitation of the hamlet
population, the Authority had only 1,539 plots (March 2006) at Bemina, Panch
Kherwari, Botakadal, Agro Bagh, Devdebagh, JKPCC Bagh, Habibullah Nowshehri
Colony and Habak. The Authority identified (January 1999) 7831 kanals of land at
Chandpora, Telbal, Harwan and Pazwalpora to develop as Colonies for
rehabilitation of the Lake dwellers. The land could not be put to any use, as the sites
were declared „green belt area‟ in the Master Plan of Srinagar City. The Authority
informed (October 2006) that the State Government had recently allotted 7526 kanals
and 7 marlas of land at Rakh-i-Arth, which could help in expediting the process of
resettlement and rehabilitation.
According to the Authority records•
, out of 1,539 plots, only 1,252 plots were allotted
to the beneficiaries prior to March 1999. Out of the remaining 87 plots, 65 were
converted into play fields, ten were annexed to Imambada, eight were undersized,
three were under illegal occupation and one plot was converted into a graveyard.
The Authority had not initiated action to get the illegal occupants evicted. The
remaining 200 plots had not been allotted (March 2006).
Similarly, the Authority acquired 581 kanals and 6 Marlas of land during July 1997
and October 2003 (cost: Rs. 8.32 crore) at Guptganga and Chandpora. The land was,
however, not allotted to the dwellers as these sites were also declared as green belt
area in the Master Plan of Srinagar City. Failure of the Authority to ascertain the use
of the acquired land in the Master Plan of the Srinagar City prior to acquisition,
rendered the expenditure of Rs. 8.32 crore unfruitful, besides adversely affecting the
evacuation programme of the Lake dwellers. The Authority, while admitting slow
progress in Rehabilitation and Resettlement Programmes, stated (October 2006) that
the State Government had agreed to change the land use of 550 kanals of land at
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
84 | P a g e
Chandpora. Further developments in the matter are awaited. (November 2006).
3.2.10.2 Reduction in the depth of the Lake
According to the Project Report on Lake Conservation Programme, the catchment
area of the Lake was 314 square kilometers, of which 148 square kilometers had been
identified as prone to soil erosion. As per this Report, about 15 tonnes of
phosphorus, 323 tonnes of nitrogen and 80 thousand tonnes of silt flow into the Lake
annually, especially through Telbal Nallah. The inflow of nutrients and silt into the
Lake results in excessive growth of weed and silt deposition, which reduce the depth
of the Lake and also cause shrinkage of the water expanse.
With a view to checking soil erosion and reducing the sediment and nutrient flow
into the Lake, the Authority had incurred (up to March 2006) Rs. 7.54 crore on
catchment conservation works since its inception. Also, to arrest the inflow of silt
through Telbal Nallah, a Settling basin, to act as silt arrester was commissioned in
1997-98 to allow flowing of decanted water into the Lake. The Authority spent a
further amount of Rs. 7.59 crore on the Settling basin up to the end of March 2006.
According to the Authority (October 2006), 99 square kilometers of the catchment
area had been treated from the erosion point of view through the Soil Conservation
Department. It was further stated that, with the installation of the Settling basin,
there had been reduction in the silt inflow to the Lake by 20 per cent, and that there
was further scope in the reduction of silt inflow with the increase in age and quantum
of afforestation. It was however, observed in audit that the rate at which the silt had
entered the Lake had increased from 7,254 tonnes per year (between August 1998
and August 2003) to 22,354 tonnes per year (between September 2003 and August
2005). Also, according to the DPR, the efficiency of the Settling basin had varied
between 7 and 54 per cent only, from May 1998 to June 2000. The Authority also
stated (October 2006) that no Catchment Management Works were undertaken by it
during 2003-2006, but were initiated in 2006-07. However, according to the
Expenditure Statement of the Authority, an amount of Rs. 1.05 crore had already
been shown as spent on Catchment Management Works during 2003-2006.
3.2.10.3 Excessive Weed Growth
Indiscriminate disposal of sewage and solid wastes into the Lake is the major cause
of contamination of its waters. According to the Survey conducted by the State
Pollution Control Board (SPCB) in December 2005, there was deterioration in the
water quality of the Lake due to the discharge of untreated wastes from human
settlements living in the peripheral areas of the Lake, houseboats, shikaras and
hamlets. While organic constituents present in the solid wastes cause depletion of
dissolved oxygen in its waters, the inorganic constituents add to the nutrient content,
thereby resulting in excessive weed growth. The Authority stated (October 2006) that
a Restoration and Management Plan had been framed to remedy the problem.
Undesirable level of organic compounds also affects aquatic life and production of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
85 | P a g e
agricultural products. According to the Project Feasibility Report (August 1997) out
of 37 species of fish found in Kashmir, 17 are available from the Lake. The
ecological disturbances, according to the Report, had greatly harmed the local fish,
which are adapted to living in clean waters. Due to the destruction of their breeding
ground, introduction of grass carp species by Fisheries Department and other
environmental stresses, the fish species had undergone a decrease in their size and
population. The SPCB also held that increase in fish mortality and
disappearance/decline of some species of the fish was due to the inflow of sewage
and wastes into the Lake. The Authority took no remedial measures with regard to
Fisheries Management and their conservation. The contention of the Authority
(October 2006) that fish growth in water bodies was being looked after by the
Fisheries Department is not tenable as the management and conservation of fisheries
as per the DPR was the mandate of the Authority.
3.2.10.4 Weed Harvesting and De-weeding
The Authority incurred Rs. 6.78 crore on harvesting and de-weeding activities during
1997-2006. According to the Authority (October 2006), the Lake grows about 80
thousand tonnes of biomass, of which less than 40-50 per cent was extracted annually.
However, according to a Research conducted (2004) by the University of Kashmir,
mechanical de-weeding and harvesting activities had an adverse effect on the health
of the Lake, as there was undesirable growth of species of flora and fauna. Despite
observations of the University, the Authority continued the harvesting operations.
The Laboratory wing of the Authority also pointed out that the activity had proved
to be just „cosmetic treatment‟ and that too for a short period.
3.2.10.5 Presence of heavy metals in the Lake body
Results2 of the soil tests indicated the presence of heavy metals like manganese,
copper, lead, nickel, cadmium, and arsenic in the Lake body. These heavy metals
concentrate in the living tissues through food chain, which results in high level of
these elements in aquatic life, ultimately being consumed by the humans at the top of
the food chain. Pathological effects of these elements can cause damage to brain,
liver and kidneys. The percentage of these elements in the Lake body as brought out
in the following table was far above the permissible limits.
Table 3.9
Name of the
element
Presence (Mg.
/Litre)
Permissible limit
(Mg. /Litre)
Excess per Litre
(Percentage) (one unit:
1000)
Iron 68.57 0.30 68.27 (22.76)
Manganese 5.89 0.10 5.79 (5.79)
2 Conducted by the Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal during February 1999.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
86 | P a g e
Copper 4.89 0.05 4.84 (9.68)
Lead 3.37 0.10 3.27 (3.27)
Cadmium 0.10 0.01 0.09 (0.9)
Chromium 0.81 0.05 0.76 (1.52)
Arsenic 48.00 0.05 47.95 (95.9)
(Source: Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal)
The Authority contended (October 2006) that test results pertained to the soil
samples dredged out along Northern Foreshore Road from a depth of 2-3 meters and
could not be generalized for the Lake water composition. The contention is not
tenable as the sediment wherefrom the sample was taken for conducting tests,
formed an integral part of the Lake body. The Authority also maintained (October
2006) that reduction in conductivity, and quantities of calcium, chlorine, nitrates-
nitrogen, iron and phosphates were indicators of improvement in the health
condition of the Lake. The reply is silent about the presence of more harmful heavy
metals like manganese, copper, lead, nickel, cadmium, and arsenic in the Lake body
as pointed out by Audit.
The deteriorating condition of the Lake body could be remedied to a great extent by
sewage treatment and houseboat sanitation. Audit observed that the Authority
largely failed to effectively implement these schemes as discussed in the succeeding
paragraphs.
3.2.10.6 Sewage Treatment Plants
The Lake has been used as a receptacle for large quantities of waste water and
untreated human wastes from the peripheral areas through a number of drains that
enter into it.
With a view to arresting the inflow of waste water and sewage into the Lake, the
Authority proposed to install six Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) at different spots
around the periphery of the Lake. However, the Ministry of Urban Development and
Poverty Alleviation, GOI expressed its doubt over the effectiveness of the treatment
plants during cold conditions and the sustainability of huge maintenance costs. Audit
scrutiny also revealed that the DPR did not include a Plan for connecting houses to
the Treatment Plants.
However, inspite of the concerns expressed by the Ministry, the Authority allotted
(August 2004) the work of construction of three STPs at Hazratbal, Habak and Laam
(Nishat) to a private firm at a cost of Rs. 8.90 crore, with the scheduled date of
completion as May 2005. Out of three STPs, two STPs at Hazratbal and Habak had
been commissioned during February and April 2006. The Authority claimed
(October 2006) that the STPs were working efficiently and that the health of the lake
would improve after the work of construction of all the STPs was completed and
commissioned. However, according to the analytical report of the Research and
Monitoring Division of the Authority (August 2006), concentration of some of the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
87 | P a g e
nutrients present in the waste water increased at the outflow stage vis-à-vis inflow
stage, despite receiving treatment at the STPs. The percentage efficiency of the two
STPs ranged between 63.39 and (-) 366.3. Also, the treatment plants did not match
the prescribed norms, particularly with regard to inorganic nutrients viz. nitrogen
and phosphorus. According to the Report, measures were required to be taken for
effective treatment of sewage to prevent detrimental impact on the Lake ecology as
entry of raw sewage was one of the major causes of the enhanced eutrophyα
of the
Lake. The contention of the Authority (October 2006) that the plants were working
efficiently is, therefore, not acceptable.
3.2.11 Houseboat Sanitation
Besides the peripheral area of the Lake, human settlements residing within the Lake
in houseboats, shikaras and hamlets also contribute to generation of solid and liquid
wastes. According to the Deputy Director, Tourism (January 2004), there are 1094
houseboats and 2800 shikaras located within the Lake, which accommodate a large
chunk of people including tourists. The houseboats have attached toilets, which
discharge sewage directly into the Lake. The total quantity of solid waste and sewage
generated by the people living in these houseboats and shikaras annually, was of the
order of 4.80 lakh♣
kilograms of solid waste and 49.91♠
million litres of sewage.
Though the Authority undertook a number of Pilot Projects to remedy the problem
and incurred Rs. 38.50 lakh on Pilot studies, none of the studies could provide an
implementable solution (March 2006), as none of the solutions/suggestions was
found viable.
The Authority stated (October 2006) that action had been initiated to carry the
effluents after primary treatment by sewers laid on the bed of the Lake to STP.
Further progress in the matter is awaited (November 2006).
3.2.12 Construction of Outfall Channel/Conduit at Brari-Numbal
Brari-Numbal basin (a part of the main Lake), was getting water from the Lake via
Nowpora and discharging it into Anchar Lake through Nallah Mar. After the closure
of Nallah Mar due to the construction of a road over it, the Brari-Numbal basin
became a dead pocket. The sewage and wastewater of the surrounding areas
accumulated in it and it also became a source of pollution to the main Lake. To
overcome this problem, it was proposed to connect the basin to River Jhelum at New
Fateh Kadal. The Contract for construction of an outfall channel/conduit (total
length 479 meters) was awarded (January 1996) by the UEED to a contractor at an
estimated cost of Rs. 3.80 crore to be completed in 30 months. The work could not
be completed within the scheduled period as obstacles like structures, water pipes
and LT lines were coming in the alignment of the channel. However, according to
the Authority (October 2006), the Channel had been laid in March 2006 at an
expenditure of Rs. 3.87 crore, thereby involving time and cost overruns of over eight
years and Rs. 7 lakh, respectively, besides polluting the Lake body for this period.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
88 | P a g e
3.2.13 Unauthorised Constructions/Encroachments
The Lake dwellers encroach upon the water body of the Lake by filling it with earth
around each cluster. Despite the Authority having its own Enforcement Wing to
check encroachment within the Lake, the same continued unabated. The Authority
had failed to stop fresh encroachments involving conversion of watery area into hard
landmass and establishment of fresh structures, thereon. The Authority stated
(October 2006) that out of about 316 kanals of land mass formed by illegal
encroachment of water area, 40 kanals had been removed, and that the remaining
encroachments were in a scattered manner in patches of one or two marlas each in a
cluster. The Authority intended (October 2006) to acquire the entire clusters to be
dredged out along with encroachments.
Audit scrutiny (March 2006) also revealed that the periphery of the Lake had also
been encroached upon and illegal structures had been established thereon. The
Authority stated (October 2006) that the demolition of the unauthorised structures
was a continuous process and as of October 2006, 602 demolitions had been
conducted and 728 structures brought down. Moreover, out of 141 plots allotted by
the UEED in the Bemina colony prior to 1997, only four allottees were Lake
dwellers and the remaining plots had been encroached upon illegally (February 2003)
and continued to be so occupied (March 2006).
3.2.14 Stock/Stores Management
Stock items costing Rs. 108 crore were transferred to the Authority from the UEED.
The inventory included usable items like chain-link fencing (valued at Rs. 14.57 lakh)
and RCC pipes of varied specifications (valued at Rs. 73.17 lakh) and damaged items
worth Rs. 11.18 lakh. The Authority neither utilised the usable items on on-going
works, nor disposed off the damaged items, thereby incurring wasteful expenditure
on their storage.
It was also observed during audit that the UEED (Lake Division-I) had placed (1995)
orders for fabrication of gates/gearings for Nallah Amir Khan at a cost of Rs. 24
lakh, of which Rs. 22.80 lakh were advanced to a Firm. The gates were not installed
due to change of their fabrication design, and the material was lying with the Firm.
The Authority stated (October 2006) that most of the material was being utilized for
construction of new gated headworks/navigational channels, and that the unutilised
material would be put to use shortly.
3.2.15 Non-preparation of Inventory of Assets/Liabilities
The Authority did not prepare an inventory of the assets and liabilities inherited by it
from the UEED, nor was the status of on-going works obtained from the
implementing Divisions. Further, expenditure incurred by the UEED up to March
1997 included Rs. 3.66 crore advanced by it to the Director Tourism (Rs. 2 crore),
Collector, Land Acquisition (Rs. 16 lakh) and Director Health Services (Rs. 1.50
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
89 | P a g e
crore) for acquisition of land, houseboat sites and shifting of leper hospital. The
amount remained outstanding with these Departments, as none of these works was
executed. The Authority stated (October 2006) that steps would be taken to recover
the amount or jobs got executed by the Departments.
3.2.16.1 Wasteful expenditure
The MOEF was to appoint consultants of its own choice for preparation of the
Project Report on Lake Conservation Programme, as it provided full funding of the
Programme. Despite this, the Authority appointed (May 1998) a Delhi-based private
consultancy firm for preparation of the Detailed Project Report. Audit observed that
the appointment was made without resorting to tendering process to ascertain
competitiveness of rates and ascertaining whether the firm had the requisite expertise
in preparing such Reports. The firm submitted its Report in September 1998, which
was not approved by the MOEF, as it was found deficient in many ways. As a result
Rs. 67.72 lakh paid♥
to the firm was rendered wasteful. The Authority stated
(October 2006) that the case was under investigation with the Vigilance
Organisation.
3.2.16.2 Excess Fuel Consumption
The Authority owns two diesel-run harvesters (K.K.Dal and K.K.Nigeen) used for
de-weeding purposes. Audit observed that the Authority had not fixed norms for fuel
consumption of the harvesters. Test-check of log books of the harvesters revealed that
the machines put to use for 18,821.3 hours (K.K.Dal: 10,461.3 hours up to 31
October 2000 and K.K.Nigeen: 8,360 hours up to 9 November 2000) had consumed
1,69,391.7 litres of fuel at nine litres/hour. Audit observed that beyond 31 October
2000 and 9 November 2000, the harvesters consumed only four litres/per hour.
Utilisation of excess quantity of fuel up to 31 October 2000/9 November 2000
resulted in extra consumption of 94,106.5 litres of fuel costing Rs. 11.81 lakh♦
, with
consequent loss to the Authority. Though the Authority admitted the Audit
contention, reasons for the excess consumption were not intimated and the case was
stated (October 2006) to be under investigation with the Vigilance Organisation.
3.2.17 Monitoring/evaluation and Internal Control
1. 3.2.17.1 A Committee constituted (August 2003) by the MOEF to assess the
status of the progress of the Project, recommended the appointment of a Project
Management Committee to ensure effective implementation of the project within the
stipulated period. The Report also provided for the constitution of a Scientific
Advisory Committee to oversee various aspects of the Programme and preparation of
Programme Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) chart. It was observed that
no such Committees had been constituted nor was the PERT chart framed. The
Authority stated (October 2006) that the process of formation of a Project
Management Consultancy was in its final stage and would be in place shortly. It was
also stated that a Monitoring Committee had been constituted (June 2006) to ensure
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
90 | P a g e
effective monitoring.
2. 3.2.17.2 No internal controls/vigilance mechanism existed in the Authority.
The Authority had also not established (February 2006) an Internal Audit Wing.
Besides, a number of cases of works/purchases were under investigation with the
State Vigilance Department. According to the Authority, the outcome of the
vigilance investigation was awaited (November 2006).
3.2.18 Conclusion
Dal Lake, a unique natural body and a major contributer towards the State‟s
economy, has been a victim of environmental degradation over the years. It has
suffered heavily due to lack of planning in implementation of both Conservation as
well as Rehabilitation Programmes.
Despite incurring of huge expenditure in different spells on various activities
connected with the development of the Lake, no appreciable improvement could be
discerned in the overall health of the Lake in its conservation, as well as
rehabilitation of the people. Problems like excessive weed growth, direct discharge of
sewage/nutrients in to the Lake body, deposition of silt and encroachments, which
are the main contributory factors for its degradation, have remained unresolved.
These have also contributed to the reduction in the water expanse and the average
depth of the Lake. The Authority has also not been able to find a workable solution
to the problem of houseboat sanitation.
Concentration of heavy metals in the Lake waters was far above the permissible
limits. Pathological effects of these elements can cause damage to the brain, liver and
kidneys.
The pace of implementation of the Rehabilitation Programme was poor. Lack of
adequate planning was visible throughout. Land acquired by the Authority under the
Programme could not be allotted to the dwellers, as these sites were situated in the
green belt of the Master Plan of the Srinagar city.
The performance of the Authority in financial matters was also not encouraging.
Though the Authority was created about 10 years back, it has neither finalised any of
its accounts nor prepared the Accounts Manual. Besides, there was no monitoring
mechanism to physically verify and evaluate the work done by the Authority and the
funds spent in achieving the targets.
3.2.19 Recommendations
• The Authority should frame a time-bound Action Plan with milestones, while
prioritizing both conservational and rehabilitation activities, to deal with various
problems endangering the existence of the Lake.
• Measures should be taken to check inflow of sediments and nutrients in to the Lake
from the catchment areas. Similarly, agricultural practices should be modified to
check soil erosion.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
91 | P a g e
• Deteriorating water quality of the Lake is a matter of great concern and needs to be
remedied on top priority basis.
• The Authority should work out a sustainable alternative for drainage and treatment of
sewage.
• Monitoring mechanisms need to be established for overseeing the implementation of
works. Also, the Authority needs to institute a system of surveillance/vigilance to report
cases of encroachment, and the persons responsible for encroaching upon the Lake area
should be dealt with firmly.
Performance Audit of sewerage Schemes in Himachal Pradesh
Highlights
Hygienic sanitation facilities are essential for healthy living. The State Government was
required to provide these facilities to 56 towns of the State through Sewerage schemes. The
Government had, however, not prepared any master plan to provide sewerage facilities to
cover all the towns in a phased manner. Funds provided for sewerage schemes were
diverted to irrigation and water supply schemes and there were instances of abnormal
delays in completion of schemes. Sewage treatment plants provided in the schemes were
not being utilised fully mainly because of non-release of sewerage connections due to lack
of awareness among the beneficiaries about its utility. The main points noticed in audit
were as under:
3.2.1 Introduction
Hygienic sanitation facilities are essential for healthy living. Sewerage programmes
have come to assume immense importance in Himachal Pradesh in view of the fact
that most of the towns in the State serve as health resorts or pilgrim centres. About
80 per cent of the water used by the community comes out of houses in the form of
waste water, which, unless properly collected, conveyed, treated and safely disposed
off, may eventually pollute the precious water resources and cause environmental
degradation. It has become imperative for the State Government to set up efficient
sewerage systems in all its urban areas.
According to the 2001 census, the total population of the State is 60.78 lakh, out of
which, 54.82 lakh (90.19 per cent) live in rural areas and the remaining 5.96 lakh (9.81
per cent) in urban areas. Of the total urban population of
5.96 lakh, sewerage facility has been provided to 2.71 lakh (45.47 per cent) as of April
2006. In respect of 2.26 lakh urban population provision of sewerage facilities is in
progress while 0.99 lakh people are yet to be covered (April 2006). The State
Government has not framed any policy to provide sewerage facility in the rural
areas.
There are 56 towns1
in the State which are classified into six categories on the basis
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
92 | P a g e
of population. The Irrigation and Public Health (I&PH) Department has been
entrusted with the job of providing efficient sewerage system in 49 towns as six
towns2
are under Cantonment Boards and one town (Parwanoo) is under the
Housing Board. Out of 49 towns, sewerage schemes have been commissioned in 10
towns between 1997-1998 and 2005-2006 and work in 23 towns, taken up for
execution between 1991-1992 and 2005-2006, is in progress. The remaining 16
towns (Population: 0.99 lakh) have neither any sewerage facility, nor were any
sewerage works administratively approved as of March 2006.
3.2.2 Organisational set up
The organisational set up of the Irrigation and Public Health (I&PH) Department is
as under:
3.2.3 Scope of audit
Twenty four divisions covering 33 towns are entrusted with the execution of
sewerage schemes in the State. Records pertaining to the selection and execution of
sewerage schemes in 11 divisions3
of 16 towns for the period 2001-2006 were test-
checked during October 2005-April 2006. The sample check in terms of divisions
was thus 45.83 per cent covering 48 per cent of towns and 79.25 per cent of the total
expenditure (Rs 131.52 crore). This was supplemented by the information obtained
from the Engineer-in-Chief and the Superintending Engineer, Planning and
Investigation-I in March-April 2006.
3.2.4 Audit objectives
A performance audit of the sewerage schemes in the State was conducted with a
view to assessing the:
efficiency and effectiveness in planning and execution of various sewerage schemes;
adequacy in providing hygienic sanitation facilities to the public;
Effectiveness of the internal control mechanism.
3.2.5 Audit criteria
The audit criteria used for assessing the performance of various schemes were:
Selection criteria for providing sewerage schemes in accordance with the laid down
policy of the Government.
Targets fixed for providing sewerage schemes in classified towns.
Arrangement of funds for providing, maintenance and operation of sewerage systems.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
93 | P a g e
Mechanism evolved to inspect and monitor the ongoing and completed
schemes.
3.2.6 Audit methodology
Before commencing the audit, the audit scope, objectives and criteria were discussed
(October 2005) with the Chief Engineer (I&PH) in an entry conference. The selection
of divisions and towns for test-check was based on multistage stratified sampling
methodology. Audit conclusions were drawn after scrutiny of records, analysis of
available data by issuing audit memos and questionnaires and obtaining the response
of departmental functionaries at various levels. The audit findings were discussed
with the Principal Secretary (I&PH) in an exit conference (May 2006), and the views
of the Government were incorporated at appropriate places in the report.
3.2.7 Audit findings
3.2.7.1 Financial outlay and expenditure
Expenditure on sewerage schemes during 2001-2006 was met partly out of State
funds (61 per cent) and partly from loans obtained from the Organisation of Oil
Producing and Exporting Countries (OPEC) and Housing and Urban Development
Corporation (HUDCO) (39 per cent). In addition, special problems grant of Rs 30
crore under the award of the Eleventh Finance Commission (EFC) was also received
from the Government of India during 2001-2005 for providing sewerage systems in
Dharamshala, Hamirpur and Jawalamukhi towns. The budget allotment and
expenditure thereagainst on sewerage schemes during 2001-2006 was as under:
Table: 3.2.1
(Rupees in crore)
Year State Sector Special problems
grantunder
EFC
awarded
Funds
alloted
Expenditure
incurred
Variation
excess
(+)
savings (-
)
Funds alloted Expenditure
incurred
Variations
excess (+)
savings (-)
2001-
2002
26.84 27.00 (+) 0.16 6.00 6.00
2002-
2003
14.50 14.45 (-) 0.05 6.00 3.71 (-) 2.29
2003-
2004
19.25 18.47 () 0.78 9.13 9.13
2004-
2005
19.98 20.60 (+) 0.62 8.87 6.03 () 2.84
2005-
2006
26.19 26.13 () 0.06
Total 106.76 106.65 (-) 0.11 30.00 24.87 (-) 5.13
Source: Departmental figures
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
94 | P a g e
It was noticed in audit that against the allocation of Rs 30 crore by the EFC, Rs
24.87 crore was spent by the Divisional Officers on sewerage systems of these towns
during 2001-2005. The Principal Secretary attributed (May 2006) the shortfall in
expenditure to less receipt of letter of credit (LOC) from the Finance Department.
Evidently, the EFC funds of Rs 5.13 crore had been diverted at the Government
level, as LOC was short released to this extent to the department.
Test-check of records in the selected divisions revealed the following:
3.2.7.2 Diversion of funds
In Kullu division, against the allotment of Rs 3.12 crore during 2001-2006 for
providing sewerage system, funds amounting to Rs 1.30 crore were actually spent by
the EE between 2001-2002 and 2005-2006 on augmentation and maintenance of
water supply schemes, improvement of flow irrigation schemes, renovation of the
residences of EE and SE. The cost was however, debited to the accounts of
Sewerage Scheme, Kullu. The Principal Secretary admitted (June 2006) that the
expenditure was irregular and stated that the defaulting officer had been charge-
sheeted and that wrong booking of expenditure would be rectified on the availability
of funds.
Similarly, in Hamirpur division, Rs 1.76 crore was alloted during 2001-2002 for
providing sewerage system to Hamirpur town. Of these, Rs 1.44 crore was diverted
and spent on augmentation of various water supply schemes during 2001-2002 but
was debited to the accounts of the Sewerage Scheme, Hamirpur. While confirming
the facts, the Principal Secretary stated (May 2006) that the funds would be credited
to the sewerage scheme during the current financial year, and that inquiry had been
ordered in to the matter.
Clearly, utilisation of funds amounting to Rs 2.74 crore on various works other than
on sewerage schemes, had a decelerating effect on the ongoing sewerage schemes for
Kullu and Hamirpur towns.
3.2.8 Planning and physical performance
3.2.8.1 Selection of schemes
The category-wise details of 49 towns, where efficient sewerage systems were to be
provided by the I&PH Department and their status is given in Appendix-XVIII.
The Government had not prepared any master plan for providing sewerage systems
to cover all the towns within a specified time frame. However, as per the policy
adopted (1985) by the department, the first priority for providing sewerage systems
was to be given to the district headquarters, followed by pilgrim and tourist centres
and the remaining towns were to be covered last. It was, however, noticed that the
district headquarters of Sirmour (Nahan) and famous tourist/pilgrim centres like
Banjar, Rewalsar and Talai had not been covered as of March 2006. Seven towns of
Class-VI category viz. Arki, Bhuntar, Chowari, Jubbal, Kotkhai, Nadaun and
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
95 | P a g e
Sarkaghat which were neither district headquarters nor famous tourist centres had
been selected for providing sewerage systems and works in these towns were in
progress (April 2006). Similarly, Baddi town which falls under Class-III category
and is coming up as an industrial area had not been covered (June 2006).
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that socio-environmental improvement
coupled with the pace of providing adequate water in the town was also a criteria for
taking up the development of sewerage schemes in a particular town. However,
reasons for non-coverage of Nahan, Baddi and four tourist/pilgrim centres, ibid, and
why the Government did not follow the specified norms laid down by it were not
intimated.
3.2.8.2 Targets and achievement
The department had 23 ongoing schemes in hand in June 2006 which included 20
schemes taken up for execution between 1991-1992 and 2000-2001. The remaining
three schemes were taken up for execution between 2001-2002 and 2005-2006.
Details of sewerage schemes targeted for completion during 2001-2006 were as
under:
Table: 3.2.2
Targeted year
of completion
Name of the
sewerage
scheme/town
targeted for
completion
Year of start
of work
Year of completion/(percentage
of physical progress of schemes)
Remarks
2001-2002 (i) Rampur
phase-II
1991-1992 In progress/ (87) Not completed
even after delay
of over four
years
(ii) Shimla 1998-1999 2005-2006 Delayed by four
years
2002-2003 (i) Ghumarwin 1994-1995 2005-2006 Delayed by
three years
(ii) Manali 1994-1995 2005-2006 Delayed by
three years
2004-2005 Jawalamukhi 1998-1999 2005-2006 Delayed by one
year
2005-2006 (i) Arki 1998-1999 In progress/ (82) Stipulated
period for
completion
already over in
March 2006.
(ii)
Jogindernagar
1999-2000 In progress/ (88)
Thus, the yearly targets for completion of seven sewerage schemes fixed for 2001-
2006 were not achieved. The Principal Secretary attributed (June 2006) the delay in
completion of two sewerage schemes (Ghumarwin and Shimla) to the subsequent
increase in sewer network and change in the sites of the treatment plants due to poor
strata/land disputes. Reasons for the delay in completion of the remaining five
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
96 | P a g e
schemes were not intimated. However, the E-in-C attributed (April 2006) the non-
achievement of targets fixed during 2001-2006, to insufficient funds. The contention
is not tenable because the funds provided during 2001-2006 were not utilised fully.
3.2.8.3 Time and cost overrun
Four divisions4
took up the execution of five sewerage schemes between 1991-1992
and 1998-1999 at an estimated cost of Rs 69.76 crore. The schemes were scheduled
to be completed within two to five years from the dates of their commencement. Of
these, two schemes (Manali and Shimla), estimated to cost Rs 51.77 crore, were
completed at a cost of Rs 82.14 crore during 2005-2006 after a delay of 18 to 80
months, involving a cost overrun of Rs 30.37 crore which ranged between 53 and
128 per cent. The remaining three schemes (Kullu, Rampur Phase-II and Solan)
estimated to cost Rs 17.99 crore with physical progress ranging between 72 and 88
per cent, were under implementation as of March 2006, involving a cost overrun of Rs
12.09 crore. The time and cost overrun in these three cases ranged between 84 and
108 months and 40 and 128 per cent respectively, as detailed in Appendix-XIX.
The Principal Secretary attributed (June 2006) the delay in completion of the
schemes to land disputes, damages by floods, delay in acquisition of land, insufficient
provision of funds, unrealistic stipulated period for completion of work, price
escalation, etc. The contention is not tenable as all the technical and financial
aspects including fixation of a realistic period for completion, should have been
visualised before taking up the works.
3.2.8.4 Non-utilisation of sewerage facility at Jawalamukhi town
The work relating to provision of sewerage system to the pilgrim town Jawalamukhi
was originally sanctioned in January 1999 for Rs 9.62 crore and stipulated to be
completed by March 2004. The cost was later revised to Rs 6.89 crore in January
2004. The town was divided into two zones (A and B) depending upon the
topography of the area. The system was designed for a population of 12,983 plus
50,245 pilgrims upto the year 2033 with the provision of a septic tank (zone A) as
disposal point and a Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) of 2.83 million litres per day
(MLD) capacity (zone B). The work was taken up for execution during 1998-1999
and the system was commissioned in October 2005. Expenditure of Rs 7.49 crore
had been incurred on the work as of March 2006.
Test-check of the records of Dehra division revealed (March 2006) that zone „A‟ was
ready for releasing connections in December 2003 but no sewerage connection had
been released to the beneficiaries as of March 2006. The work of zone „B‟ alongwith
the STP was commissioned in October 2005. It was noticed in audit that against the
1,325 estimated sewer connections, only one connection had been released as of
March 2006. Thus, the benefit of the expenditure of Rs 7.49 crore incurred on the
scheme had not been derived upto March 2006.
The EE confirmed the facts and stated (March 2006) that the sewerage connections
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
97 | P a g e
could not be released, as the beneficiaries had not come forward to deposit the
connection charges. The Principal Secretary, however, stated (June 2006) that more
than 400 application forms had been issued to the consumers, against which, 80
sewer connections stood sanctioned and 33 released to the consumers. The reply of
the Government indicated that adequate action for educating the public regarding
the benefits of the sewerage system had not been taken during the execution stage.
The existing sewerage system of Shimla was not sufficient to serve the present
population of the town. The treatment plants had been damaged badly and the
water sources downstream the disposal point were being contaminated. To augment
the sewerage system, administrative approval and expenditure sanction was accorded
(February 1999) for Rs 47.76 crore. The project was to be financed by the Oil
Producing and Exporting Countries and the State Government in the ratio of 73:27.
The project involved construction of six STPs of 35.63 MLD capacity and laying of
179 kms of sewer line network. The system was commissioned during October 2005
at an expenditure of Rs 73 crore.
Test-check of records of the Sewage Treatment Plant Construction division, Shimla
revealed (November 2005) that different STPs completed between April 2002 and
September 2004 were put into operation with partial sewage and were not working at
optimum level. Based on the present population (1,95,303 persons in 2006), the level
of sewage being generated in the town was assessed at 23.44 MLD, against which,
only 3.77 MLD (16 per cent) was being received for treatment in all the six STPs at
the end of March 2006. It was noticed that no/negligible sewage was being received
at the points identified for connectivity with newly laid sewer system. An
expenditure of Rs 3.01 crore had been incurred on operation and maintenance of
these STPs upto March 2006. Less receipt of sewage being tapped in the STPs than
the assessed level was attributed (November 2005) by the EE to damage/choking of
sewer lines of the already existing sewerage system.
The Manual on Sewerage and Sewage Treatment provides that improvements and
de-bottleneck works of the existing system if necessary, should be planned for
execution prior to taking up the project. It was, however, noticed that de-
bottlenecking of the existing sewerage system was neither planned nor carried out
prior to taking up the execution of the new project for the town.
The Principal Secretary attributed (June 2006) less receipt of sewage to many missing
links of the existing system, which required to be bridged. It was further stated that
the work would be undertaken during 2006-2007 for which a sum of Rs 250 lakh had
been demanded. The contention is not tenable, as the de-bottlenecking of the
existing system should have been planned and carried out before taking up the new
project. Thus the intended objective of providing a pollution free environment and
checking the contamination of water sources downstream of the disposal points
remained un-achieved even after incurring an expenditure of Rs 76.01 crore.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
98 | P a g e
3.2.8.6 Non-operation of sewerage scheme at Sri Naina Devi Ji town
The sewerage scheme for Sri Naina Devi Ji town was taken up for execution in
August 1994 and completed in March 1998 at a cost of Rs 1.87 crore to serve an
existing population of 14,280 persons.
Test-check of records of Bilaspur division revealed (December 2005) that the STP
constructed was not put into operation since the commissioning of the scheme. It
was noticed that the STP was not functioning due to the leakage/bursting of pipes
midway and inadequate staff for its operation.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that the system was put to use after May
2006. Due to the non-operation of the STP, the sewerage scheme provided at a cost
of Rs 1.87 crore had not served any purpose during the last eight years.
3.2.8.7 Idle investment on Sewage Treatment Plant at Solan
Sewerage scheme, Solan was administratively approved (November 1995) for Rs
4.55 crore. The scheme was designed for a period of 34 years (upto the year 2029)
including four years for execution and completion. The town was divided into three
zones (A, B and C) after taking into account the geographical and topographical
conditions. The work of providing STP of
2.90 MLD capacity for zone B was taken up for execution in February 1998 and
completed in March 2001 at a cost of Rs 1.18 crore.
Test-check of records of Solan division revealed (November 2005) that the STP had
not been made functional as of October 2005 due to non-laying of sewerage network
of zone B. It was further noticed that against the laying of total sewerage network of
19,190 metres pipes in zone B only 7,314 metres pipes had been laid as of October
2005.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that the sewer lines were passing through
thickly populated/busy streets and there were lot of hindrances. He further stated
that the sewerage network for zone B could not be accelerated due to paucity of
funds. The contention is not tenable because budget allotment of Rs 9.95 crore was
available against which Rs 7.56 crore were spent on various components of the
scheme during 2001-2006. Evidently, due to lackadaisical planning, resources were
scattered and construction of STP and sewerage network for zone B was not
synchronised which resulted in idle investment on the STP since March 2001.
3.2.8.8 Avoidable and unfruitful expenditure on sewerage schemes for
Hamirpur and Kullu towns
The construction of an STP of 3.13 MLD capacity for zone-I of sewerage scheme for
Hamirpur town, was awarded (September 1998) to a contractor for a lump sum
tendered cost of Rs 89 lakh. The work was stipulated to be completed by September
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
99 | P a g e
2001.
Test-check of the records of Hamirpur division revealed (February 2006) that the
contractor started the work in October 1998 and stopped the same in July 2003 for
want of sufficient land for the construction of STP and non-availability of access to
the site. The contractor had been paid Rs 20.21 lakh till stoppage of work. As the
contractor failed to resume the work, the contract was rescinded in December 2004.
It was further noticed in audit that the land was acquired by the department about
three and a half years after the award of the work of STP to the contractor.
The balance work of the STP was awarded (June 2006) to another contractor for Rs
96.50 lakh. Thus, improper planning and failure of the department to provide
requisite land to the contractor in time, had resulted in extra avoidable expenditure
of Rs 27.71 lakh5
.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that Government land measuring 344.30
square metres was made available to the contractor. The contention is not tenable, as
a land measuring 3569.11 square metres was required for the construction of STP.
The work relating to laying of sewerage network alongwith STP of 2.57 MLD
capacity at Lanka Bekar for zone-II of Kullu town was taken up for execution in
April 2000 by the Kullu division No.I. It was noticed (December 2005) in audit that
the sewerage network costing Rs 2.06 crore was completed in April 2004 but the
work of STP awarded (April 2000) to a contractor for Rs 67.70 lakh had not been
taken up for execution as of March 2004 due to change of site. The contractor was
provided (September 2001) an alternative site, but he neither signed the agreement
nor executed the work. The work was cancelled after four years (April 2004) and
was again awarded (August 2005) at a cost of Rs 1.11 crore to another contractor
with a stipulation to complete it in six months. However, the work had not been
taken up for execution for want of transfer of forest land.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that the permission for transfer of forest
land had been received recently and that the work was being started. The reply of the
Principal Secretary indicated improper planning, as timely action in selection of
proper site before award of work had not been taken by the department, which
resulted in unfruitful expenditure of Rs 2.06 crore and
Rs 20.21 lakh + Rs 96.50 lakh (-) Rs 89.00 lakh = Rs 27.71 lakh.
avoidable extra expenditure of Rs 43.30 lakh (Rs 111 lakh minus Rs 67.70 lakh).
3.2.8.9 Avoidable delay in completion of sewerage scheme and infructuous
expenditure
The Phase-II work of providing sewerage facilities to Rampur town was completed
in July 2000 at a cost of Rs 2.25 crore except for laying and jointing of 400 metres
trunk sewer line in steep rocky portion and flushing tank.
Test-check of records of Rampur division revealed (October 2005) that the sewerage
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
100 | P a g e
system was badly damaged due to flash floods in river Sutlej on 31 July 2000. It was
further noticed that the approval to the estimate for restoration works was not
accorded by the CE and a revised estimate for Rs 4.56 crore, which included a
provision of Rs 35.27 lakh for various flood protection works was sent by the EE in
February 2005 to the CE. This estimate was, however, received back in April 2005
with some observations which had not been attended to as of October 2005.
In the meantime, flash floods in river Sutlej re-occurred on 26 June 2005 and
damaged the STP at Khopri and trunk sewer line. The damages were assessed at Rs
39.41 lakh.
The EE stated (October 2005) that protection work could not be carried out for want
of approval of the estimate by the competent authority. The Principal Secretary
stated (June 2006) that the restoration works of damages due to floods, which were
likely to cost Rs 39.42 lakh had been undertaken. Had the department carried out
the flood protection works on time keeping in view the likelihood of flash floods
ocurring in river Sutlej, the damages of Rs 39.41 lakh caused to the scheme could
have been minimised.
The reconstruction of STP at Chuhabagh (Rampur town) as a safe alternate site was
awarded (2000-2001) to a contractor at a tendered cost of Rs 29.84 lakh but the work
could not be taken up for execution due to nonfinalisation of the site. However, site
development works and laying and jointing of trunk sewer line at the proposed
alternate site were carried out during 2000-2002 at an expenditure of Rs 17 lakh. As
the work of construction of STP was not taken up by the contractor, the agreement
was cancelled in June 2004 by the EE. Scrutiny of the records further revealed that
the developed site was taken over by the EE, B&R division Rampur in July 2003 for
construction of a new bus stand.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that the matter regarding adjustment of Rs
17 lakh incurred by the department on the old site was under correspondence with
the PWD authorities. Thus, delay in finalisation of site for construction of STP and
non-handing over of the same to the contractor resulted in infructuous expenditure of
Rs 17 lakh besides depriving the beneficiaries of the intended sewerage facilities.
3.2.9 Other deficiencies
3.2.9.1 Unauthorised splitting of works
The CEs, Dharamshala and Mandi accorded technical sanction to the detailed
estimates of various works of five sewerage schemes6
for Rs 20.78 crore between
September 1998 and February 2004. Test-check of records of five divisions7
revealed
that major portions of works (estimated to cost Rs 7.95 crore) of these schemes were
split up into 173 agreements and awarded to 57 contractors between December 2001
and November 2005. These works were awarded to the contractors at a consolidated
cost of Rs 11.75 crore. The tendered rates quoted by the contractors ranged between
35 per cent below and 500 per cent above the amount put to tender. The abnormal gap
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
101 | P a g e
between the lowest and the highest offers of the contractors was indicative of the
irrational award of works by the EEs. Benefit of competitive rates was thus not
derived by floating single tender for each work. Approval of the competent authority
to split up sanction had also not been obtained.
The Principal Secretary informed (June 2006) that detailed instructions had been
issued to the field officers to avoid splitting of the works and to ensure that
competitive rates were availed after giving proper publicity through the newspapers.
3.2.9.2 Irregular payments
In three divisions, 11 works relating to construction of STPs and laying and jointing
of cast iron (CI)/ductile iron pipes were completed between March 2001 and
October 2005. It was noticed that gross payment of Rs 20.05 crore was made to the
contractors which included Rs 3.15 crore on account of deviated/substituted items.
Approval of the competent authority for the deviated/substituted items had not been
obtained as of March 2006 as required under rules.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that the deviation would be got approved
from the competent authority at the time of finalisation of bills. The contention is
not tenable as codal provisions should have been adhered to.
3.2.9.3 Undue financial benefit to contractors
A sewerage scheme for Joginder Nagar town was technically sanctioned in
December 2002 for Rs 4.35 crore. The sub-works i.e. providing, laying and testing of
sewer lines including construction of manholes, RCC supporting pillars, flushing
tanks and allied works were awarded (March 2003) to four contractors (estimated
cost: Rs 2.41 crore) by splitting the work into five agreements at a tendered cost of Rs
4.23 crore.
Test-check of records of Padhar division revealed (January 2006) that the contractors
were paid a secured advance of Rs 1.89 crore against the admissible amount of Rs
1.55 crore resulting in undue financial benefit of Rs 34 lakh.
The EE admitted (January 2006) the facts. The Principal Secretary stated (June
2006) that the secured advance had almost been recovered from the running bills of
the contractors. The reply is not tenable as undue benefit was extended to the
contractors in contravention of the rules.
The EEs of three divisions9
awarded 16 sub-works of providing sewerage schemes to
Dharamshala, Hamirpur and Joginder Nagar towns between January 2001 and
March 2005 for Rs 8.11 crore. The contractors neither completed the respective
works within the stipulated period ranging between 3 and 18 months nor did they
apply for extension of time. Action under the agreements to levy compensation had
also not been taken. This resulted in non-recovery of Rs 1.14 crore10
from the
contractors and undue benefit to them to this extent.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that action to grant extension in time limit
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
102 | P a g e
or levy compensation was being taken on merits in each case. The contention is not
tenable as timely action to levy compensation and recovery thereof should have been
taken as per the provisions of the agreement.
3.2.9.4 Avoidable payment of interest
In Kullu division No.I, in the case of construction of STP of 1.823 MLD capacity
under the sewerage scheme, an arbitration award for Rs 41.24 lakh was announced
(November 1997) in favour of the contractor. This award included Rs 7.98 lakh on
account of interest at the rate of 12 per cent for two years.
It was noticed in audit that the EE drew Rs 33.26 lakh (excluding interest) and
deposited the same with the Deputy Commissioner, Kullu in March 1998 for
keeping it in small savings instead of depositing the same with the Registry of the
High Court, till a decision on an appeal filed by the Department in the High Court of
Himachal Pradesh was received. The appeal was, however, dismissed (January
2004) and the award of the Arbitrator was upheld. Consequently, the department
paid Rs 89.16 lakh which included interest of Rs 47.92 lakh at the rate of 18 per cent
as required from the date of award (November 1997) to the date of payment (May
2004).
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that “the entire delay was caused by the
High Court which could not be challenged”. The contention is not acceptable
because in terms of DG (Works), CPWD, Memo No. DG (W)/Con/59, dated 9th
June 1993 (also part of the CPWD Manual as Para 36.45), in cases where the awards
are interest bearing and are proposed to be challenged, the awarded amount may be
deposited in the court as provided under the provisions of Order 24 of CPC in order
to avoid the accrual of interest thereon.
3.2.9.5 Blocking of funds due to non-utilisation of pipes
The EE, Hamirpur division procured 1445.50 metres CI pipes valued at Rs 41.61
lakh between October 2002 and April 2004 from a Kolkata based firm for providing
sewerage system to three zones of Hamirpur town. It was noticed in audit that the
work of laying and jointing of CI pipes in zones-I and II awarded to two contractors
during January and March 2003 had not been taken up for execution (February
2006) due to disputes in the alignment of laying of the pipes. As a result, the CI pipes
purchased for providing sewerage system for Hamirpur could not be put to use. It
was further noticed that 40 metres of CI pipe of 350 mm dia was transferred to
Dharamshala division during February 2004. The balance 1405.50 metres pipe
valued at Rs 40.65 lakh was lying unutilised in the material at site account register of
the works, resulting in blocking of funds.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that action to terminate the contract was
under way and that tenders would be invited afresh to complete the balance work in
tough terrain. The reply is not tenable as pipes should have been procured only after
site disputes were resolved.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
103 | P a g e
3.2.9.6 Procurement of material without requirement
The EEs, Kullu -I and Mandi divisions procured cast iron bends, tees and pipes
valued at Rs 11.20 lakh between December 2000 and June 2001. It was noticed in
audit that the material was not required for use in sewerage schemes for Kullu and
Mandi towns and the entire material had been lying unutilised.
The EE, Kullu-I division stated (December 2005) that reasons for procurement of
material were not available on record. The EE, Mandi division stated (February
2006) that the material could not be utilised due to change in alignment and the same
was not required now for use on the scheme. The Principal Secretary stated (June
2006) that in unplanned hilly towns the requirement of special fittings could not be
assessed accurately. The contention is not tenable as the fittings were procured
without any requirement.
3.2.10 Lack of internal control
3.2.10.1 Inadequate inspection of works
To ensure quality and timely completion of the works, E-in-C issued instructions in
June 1994 and April 2000 for inspection of major and targeted schemes at least once
a month by the EE concerned, once in 2 months by the SE and once in three months
by the CE. No mechanism was evolved for inspection of completed works.
A perusal of the inspection notes/records in eleven test-checked divisions revealed
that in respect of 13 completed/ongoing sewerage schemes, 260, 390 and 780
inspections were required to be conducted during 2001-2006 by the CE, SE and EE
respectively against which, only 35, 69 and 281 inspections respectively were
conducted. None of the test-checked divisions produced any inspection notes of the
works inspected by the EEs during the period. In Solan division, 16 and 19
inspections were stated to have been conducted by the CE and SE respectively during
2001-2006 but no inspection notes were produced to audit. Evidently, the works
were not inspected adequately.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that the department had observed such
negligence and consequently issued (April 2000) instructions to the CEs/SEs/EEs to
submit inspection notes of works to the Government.
3.2.10.2 Accounts of completed works not closed
In three divisions, four sewerage schemes (Sri Naina Devi Ji, New Bilaspur town,
Manali town and Mandi town) were undertaken between 1997-98 and 2004-2005 at
a total cost of Rs 28.05 crore but the requisite completion reports were not prepared,
as required. The divisions were thus, not aware of unadjusted liabilities of completed
schemes. This is fraught with the risk of accommodating fraudulent accounting
adjustments. The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that necessary directions for
preparation of completion reports had been issued by the E-in-C during June 2006.
3.2.11 Monitoring and evaluation
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
104 | P a g e
The execution/completion of works was required to be monitored effectively by the
E-in-C to ensure that for each work, targets relating to time, cost, services, etc., were
achieved. However, no monitoring cell was created to watch the progress of works.
The Principal Secretary stated (June 2006) that the execution and completion of
works was being monitored effectively by the SE (Planning and Investigation).
It was, however, noticed that periodical progress reports (physical and financial)
received from the field officers were neither scrutinised properly nor effective follow
up action taken. The reports did not indicate time frame fixed for completion of
schemes and held up works. As a result, 16 sewerage schemes taken up for
construction more than five years back remained incomplete. The works taken up
for execution had, however, not been monitored resulting in unplanned execution of
works as pointed out in various paragraphs.
Although the programme was implemented in the State during 1985, no evaluation
studies had been conducted as of (March 2006) to assess the level achievement of its
objectives.
3.2.12 Conclusion
The State Government had not prepared a master plan to provide sewerage facilities
to cover all 56 towns of the State in a phased manner. Funds provided for sewerage
schemes amounting to Rs 5.13 crore were unauthorisedly diverted to irrigation and
water supply schemes. In disregard of Government policy, smaller towns were taken
up for sewerage schemes in preference to district headquarters and famous pilgrim
and tourist centres. There were cost and time overruns in several schemes, and some
schemes were under-utilised or not utilised. Audit also noticed instances of undue
financial benefits being provided to contractors.
3.2.13 Recommendations
A long term master plan for providing sewerage schemes to various towns within a specified
time frame needs to be prepared.
Adequate funds need to be provided to accelerate sewerage facilities in classified towns in a
time bound manner.
It needs to be ensured that sewerage facilities provided through huge investments do not
remain unutilised and the STPs are utilised to their optimum capacity.
A system may be evolved to ensure adequate inspection and monitoring of
completed/ongoing schemes.
Performance Audit of Implementation of Watershed Development Programmes
(2006) by Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Chhattisgarh .
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
105 | P a g e
Highlights
Watershed Development Programmes were taken up to obviate the drought
conditions, prevention of desertification and for improving the land fertility thus
improving the socio-economic conditions of economically weaker section.
Implementation of Watershed Development Programmes during 2001-06 was
hampered as the planning of watershed projects and selection of villages under the
programmes was defective. Components were not executed in prescribed sequence
and some were neglected. The progress of activities in test-checked districts
during the first four/five years was 62 per cent.
3.3.1 Introduction
Watershed development projects were undertaken in the State to overcome the
problems of drought, prevention of desertification of lands and improve the socio-
economic condition of economically weaker sections. The projects were taken up
under the Centrally sponsored schemes viz., Drought Prone Area Programme
(DPAP) for non-arable lands since 1987, Integrated Wasteland Development
Programme (IWDP) for developing wastelands since 1989 by the Rural
Development Department, National Watershed Development Project for Rainfed
Areas (NWDPRA) and River Valley Project (RVP) by the Agriculture Department.
This review covers the implementation of DPAP and IWDP. The primary objectives
of both programmes, inter-alia, included conservation of soil, water and other natural
resources through watershed development with the help of low cost and locally
accessible technologies such as in-situ soil and moisture conservation measures,
afforestation etc. Involvement of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and people's
participation in planning and implementation, adoption of local technology in the
projects and maintenance of assets were key features of these programmes. Total
expenditure on DPAP and IWDP was Rs.149.62 crore during 2001-06.
3.3.2 Organisational Set-up
At State level, the Development Commissioner (DC), Panchayat and Rural
Development Department is in overall charge of implementation of watershed
development programme. A watershed development cell was established in March
2005 under Development Commissioner to sanction new watershed projects, review
the progress reports and monitor and supervision.
At the district level these programmes are being implemented by the Chief Executive
Officer (CEO), Zila Panchayat (ZPs) through the Project Implementing Agencies
(PIA)1
headed by Project Officers (PO). Each PIA supervises one or more watershed
projects2
.
At watershed3
level, the programmes are executed through Watershed Committees
(WCs)4
in association with Self Help Groups (SHGs)5
and Users Groups (UGs)6
.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
106 | P a g e
3.3.3 Audit Objectives
Audit objectives were to assess whether:
The financial management was effective and efficient;
the planning for watershed projects was adequate;
projects were selected as per prescribed criteria and approved
guidelines;
all the components of the projects were implemented as prescribed and in proper
sequence to achieve the desired results;
completed projects were handed over to watershed committees for maintenance; and
the maintenance of records, supervision and monitoring were effective
3.3.4 Audit Criteria
The audit criteria were:
Guidelines issued by the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India
(Guidelines).
DPAP manual prepared by GOI.
Circulars and orders issued by Government of Chhattisgarh, Panchayat and Rural
Development department.
Project plan of each watershed project and records pertaining to its implementation.
3.3.5 Audit Coverage and Methodology
The implementation of DPAP and IWDP for the period from 2001-02 to 2005-06
was reviewed during April to June 2005 and July to August 2006 in the offices of the
Development Commissioner (DC) and Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), Zila
Panchayats at Durg, Jagdalpur, Korba, Raipur and Rajnandgaon. Out of 792 DPAP
and 49 IWDP watershed projects in the State, 486 DPAP and 10 IWDP watershed
projects were test checked involving expenditure of Rs. 86.25 crore out of total
expenditure of Rs. 149.62 crore for the State. Audit objective/criteria were finalised
after entry conference with the Special Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development
(February 2006). The exit conference was held with the Secretary, Panchayat and
Rural Development Department (September 2006), to discuss the audit findings,
conclusion and recommendations of the review. Views expressed in the conferences
have been taken into account while finalising the performance audit.
Audit findings
3.3.6 Financial Management
Both the programmes are Centrally Sponsored on cost sharing basis between the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
107 | P a g e
Government of India (GOI) and the State Government in the ratio 75:25 (DPAP)
and 11:1 (IWDP). GOI and the State Government release their shares to ZPs which
are kept in bank account. ZPs in turn release funds to PIAs and WCs through
Account Payee cheques, which are deposited in the bank accounts. Eighty per cent
of funds are earmarked for development works by WCs. Funds for training (5 per
cent) and community organization (5 per cent) are transferred to PIAs. The
administrative expenses (10 per cent) is shared between PIAs and WCs. WCs, PIAs
and ZPs prepare accounts annually which are audited by Chartered Accountants
(CA). WCs and PIAs submit monthly reports on physical and financial progress to
ZPs. ZPs submit their annual account along with Utilisation Certificates (UCs) to
GOI. During 2001-06 an amount of Rs.95.98 crore and Rs.53.64 crore was incurred
under DPAP and IWDP respectively.
3.3.6.1 Retention of money by PIAs and WCs
In test checked districts, ZPs had reported expenditure of Rs.37.78 crore (Durg
Rs.9.42 crore, Jagdalpur Rs.9.83 crore, Korba Rs.7.64 crore and Rajnandgaon
Rs.10.89 crore) in UC to GOI for both the programmes during 2001-05 as against
actual expenditure of Rs.29.95 crore (Durg Rs.8.04 crore, Jagdalpur Rs.9.10 crore,
Korba Rs.6.79 crore and Rajnandgaon Rs.6.02 crore). Rs.7.83 crore was retained by
PIAs and WCs. The amount was lying unutilised in the Bank accounts of PIAs and
WCs.
3.3.6.2 Diversion of earmarked funds
According to the guidelines, any shortfalls in utilisation of earmarked components
shall be duly refunded to the ZP and the expenditure under project components shall
be limited to the percentage ceilings fixed. However in Durg, Jagdalpur and
Rajnandgaon an amount of Rs.1.17 crore (Rs.1.10 crore DPAP and Rs.7 lakh
IWDP) earmarked for administrative overheads, community organisation and
training component was not refunded to the ZPs concerned and was used by PIA
and WCs for Entry Point Activities7
(EPA) and works components in excess of
ceilings fixed without obtaining approval of the ZPs, CEO.
3.3.6.3 Non-refund of unspent amount
An amount of Rs.24 lakh (Korba Rs.21 lakh and Jagdalpur Rs.3 lakh) pertaining to
86 completed projects of Phase-I was lying (July 2006) in the Bank account of Zila
Panchayat (Rs.10.72 lakh), PIAs and WCs (Rs.13.26 lakh) since November 2002 and
was required to be refunded to GOI and State Government. CEO, ZP Jagdalpur
replied that amount would be refunded after getting guidance from DC and CEO,
ZP Korba replied (June 2005) that the amount will be refunded after getting back the
amount from PIA and WCs. The reply was not acceptable in view of clear cut
instructions in the guidelines.
3.3.7 Programme Management
Implementation of programme was to be designed to prevent soil erosion and
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
108 | P a g e
improve land fertility through contour/vegetative bunding in the first year and
improve moisture content through water harvesting engineering structures and allied
activities in subsequent years of the project.
3.3.7.1 Planning for watersheds
The programmes provided for preparation of five year perspective plans and annual
plans. The watershed treatment plans were to be prepared according to targeted area
and nature of activities which were to be carried out on the nonarable land including
degraded land, wasteland, Government land and community land. Only physical
and financial targets and set of activities to be carried out every year were shown in
plan documents. There were no descriptions of studies or assessments of local needs,
topography, hydrological profile, soil components etc. to justify/explain how the
selected activities would fit in with the holistic development of the watershed. In the
absence details an adhoc selection of works were put in project plans with little
correlation to each other. Consequently, the execution was also adhoc and
unplanned, the prescribed sequence of activities/works was not followed.
Project Implementation Agencies (PIA) were to be selected from the State
Government Departments, Universities and voluntary organizations working in
projects. Each PIA had to select watershed development teams (WDT) with
members from multiple disciplines such as Agriculture, Engineering, Horticulture,
Sociology etc. within three months from the date of formation of PIA. It was noticed
during test check that PIAs had only Government officials from different
departments. Thus participation of various groups at PIA level was virtually non-
existent. It was observed in sample check that 276 out of 295 PIA members were
Government officers.
3.3.7.2 Selection of Watershed Projects
The main criteria for selection of watershed projects was preponderance of
wastelands, common lands, acute shortage of drinking water and where actual wages
were lower than the minimum wages. Scrutiny showed that in many projects these
criteria and size norms were not followed as described in succeeding paragraphs.
Watershed projects in areas with preponderance of Agricultural land
In three districts8
eight watershed projects were selected by concerned ZPs under
IWDP. Of the total 45,028 ha geographical area in these three districts, an area of
44,778 ha land was selected by ZPs which included 36,595 ha (82 per cent)
agricultural land. Thus of the cost of work undertaken at Rs.26.87 crore for 44,778
ha land, Rs.16.90 crore was spent in areas which had preponderance of agricultural
land. CEO, ZPs stated that the selection was made as per Government instructions.
Reply of CEOs was not acceptable as watershed projects were selected by PIAs and
ZPs and then sent to the Government for approval. It was further seen from project
plans of DPAP blocks of Rajnandgaon district that 179
villages were selected where
percentage of agricultural land ranged between 70 to 100 per cent. CEO, ZP
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
109 | P a g e
intimated that being declared DPAP blocks, complete block was to be treated hence
these villages were selected. Reply of CEO, ZP was not acceptable as selection was
to be made from those villages in these blocks which were drought affected and
where wasteland existed.
Variations on prescribed watershed size
As per guidelines recommended size of watersheds was 500 ha to facilitate effective
supervision and development in time frame of five years. Test check of project plans
of DPAP 6th, 7th and 8th batches of ZP Korba showed that areas of villages under
watersheds were grossly overstated as shown below:
Name and total geographical area of
villages in
Area of village inflated and
selected for
DPAP 6th batch watershed development
Barbahari - 300 ha 500 ha
Bhalwaltikra-160 ha 500 ha
Patpara-47 ha, Baharapara 50 ha 125 ha, 125 ha
Mahuapani-173 ha 200 ha
Duggupara-35 ha 250 ha
Lalmatia-53 ha 250 ha
Bagdeva-66 ha 250 ha
Consequently, much higher resources were utilized in these villages (based on per
hectare rate of Rs.6000) by overstating the area.
In 7th and 8th batch DPAP projects, small portions of many villages were combined to
form watersheds in Korba. Eight villages with 2433 ha, 5 villages with 1511 ha, 6
villages with 1041 ha and 8 villages with 1570 ha respectively were combined to form
watersheds of 500 ha each.
CEO, ZP Korba stated that the selection of villages was made by the geohydrologist
posted at Bilaspur. Reply was not acceptable. The overstatement of area of villages
could not be attributed to the geohydrologist. It was also observed that Korba was the
only district to have small portions of as many as eight villages in a single watershed.
Against the prescribed norm of 500 ha, area of 47 under sized watersheds ranged
between 42.124 ha to 400 ha in Durg, Jagdalpur, Korba and Rajnandgaon districts
were irregularly taken up for treatment at a cost of Rs.4.55 crore. On the other hand, in
Durg and Raipur districts, the area of 40 . over sized watersheds ranged between 619 to
1371 ha. Reasons for selection of under sized/over sized watersheds were not on
record and not clarified by CEO, ZPs.
3.3.7.3 Physical Achievements
As per guidelines, the targeted areas were to be treated within a period of five years
from the date of sanction by GOI. Position of land treated under 274 watershed
projects sanctioned and completed/largely completed during 200106 in test checked
districts Durg, Jagdalpur, Korba, Raipur and Rajnandgaon was as under:-
(Area in hectare)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
110 | P a g e
Name of
watershe
d
program
me
Sanctione
d project
period
No. of
years
complete
d as on
March
2006
Target
of land
treatme
nt
Proportiona
te target
Achieveme
nt
Shortfa
ll
Percenta
ge of
shortfall
DPAP 6th
and 7th
batch
2001-06 05 97925 97925 62205 35720 36.5
DPAP 8th
batch
2002-07 04 34000 3060010 16208 14392 47.0
IWDP II
Phase
2001-06 05 49169 49169 32051 17118 34.8
Total 181094 177694 110464 67230 37.8
Thus, during the last five years, only 110464 ha (62.1 per cent) area, out of targeted
area 177694 ha were completed and the shortfall was between 34.8 per cent to 47 per
cent.
CEOs attributed poor physical achievements and slow progress of works to shortage
of funds. The reply was not acceptable as Rs.6.15 crore were lying unutilized with
ZPs (Durg Rs.1.74 crore, Jagdalpur Rs.1.01 crore, Korba Rs.6 lakh and
Rajnandgaon Rs.3.34 crore) in addition to balances of more than Rs.7.83 crore lying
with WCs and PIAs (Durg Rs.1.39 crore, Jagdalpur Rs.72 lakh, Korba Rs.85 lakh
and Rajnandgaon Rs.4.87 crore) during 2001-05.
3.3.7.4 Non-adoption of ridge to valley strategy
For conservation measures ridge to valley strategy was to be ensured. This implied
that in the first year, soil conservation was to be carried out in the higher reaches of
watersheds and in second and third years, water conservation works and other
activities were to be carried out in lower reaches.
In test checked districts it was noticed that ridge to valley strategy was not followed
and works were first executed in lower reaches. Some district wise illustrations are
mentioned below:-
Water conservation works were carried out in lower reaches ahead of soil
conservation works in upper reaches.
Name of Name of
watershed
Duration of Date of execution of works
district project treatment Upper reach (soil Lower reach
(water conservation conservation
works)
works)
Durg 6th Batch
Tengananala
2001-04 09.12.04 01.09.02
7th Batch
Sonarinala,
2003-04 04.12.04 28.03.03
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
111 | P a g e
Andodinala
8th batch
Kampanala
2005-06 No works carried
out
24.04.05
Korba 6th batch Podi
Uprora
2001-04 04-01.04 12.12.01
6th batch
Katghora
2001-04 22.12.03 26.11.01
Jagdalpur 6th batch
Jamawada
2001-02 16.06.03 05.12.01
9th batch
Soargaon
2002-04 09.07.04 25.11.03
Rajnandgaon 6th batch
Palukasanala
2002-06 20.02.06 08.02.02
9th batch
Kotrinala
2004-06 06.06.05 10.06.04
The unplanned execution was further corroborated by a compilation of the
expenditure incurred on the two main activities, during the first five years, for a
sample of 41 watersheds for which full information was provided to audit.
Only five per cent (Rs.4.31 lakh) of total expenditure (Rs.85.28 lakh in five years)
was incurred on soil conservation works in the first year and 30 per cent (Rs.25.92
lakh) incurred in second year, whereas, 24 per cent (Rs.64.17 lakh) of the total
expenditure on water conservation works was incurred in the first year of the project
which should have been taken up from the second year after completing soil
conservation works. Thus the maximum achievement would not have been achieved
due to maximum expenditure on water conservation.
3.3.7.5 Prioritization of sectoral activities
In 274 watershed projects under DPAP 6th, 7th and 8th batch and IWDP-II in Durg,
Jagdalpur, Korba and Rajnandgaon districts showed that activity wise cost ceiling for
development works was not adhered to as detailed below:-
(Rupees in crore)
High priority was given to water conservation works by diverting Rs. 9.31 crore
from other activities.
Sl.
No.
Activities with per cent Expenditure
as per norms
Actual
expenditure
Per cent Percentage of
excess/less over
norms 1. Soil conservation (30 per
cent)
13.33 13.30 29.92
2. Water conservation (40 per cent)
17.78 27.09 60.94 (+) 21
3. Afforestation (10 per
cent)
4.45 2.69 6.05 (-)4.1
4. Pasture development (10 per cent)
4.45 0.26 0.59 (-)9.4
5. Other activities (7.5 per
cent)
3.33 0.52 1.17 (-)6.3
6. Self Help Group (2.5 per 1.11 0.59 1.33 (-)1.2
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
112 | P a g e
cent)
Total 44.45 44.4511
Out of total expenditure of Rs.44.45 crore, Rs.27.09 crore (61 per cent) was incurred
on water conservation works viz. construction of percolation tanks, farm ponds,
dabri12
, deepening of ponds etc. by diverting Rs. 9.31 crore meant for soil
conservation, afforestation, pasture development and SHGs activities. Under soil
conservation works Durg (37 per cent) and Jagdalpur (35 per cent) had incurred
more than the prescribed norms whereas Korba (21 per cent) and Rajnandgaon (27
per cent) had incurred below the prescribed norms. The afforestation programme
aimed at increasing productivity of degraded land and providing fuel and fodder to
the local people. Against Rs. 4.45 crore (10 per cent) provided for afforestation an
expenditure of Rs. 2.69 crore (6 per cent) only was utilised. While Jagdalpur had
incurred (15 per cent) more than the prescribed norm Durg (2 per cent), Korba and
Rajnandgaon (4 per cent) had incurred much below the prescribed norm. Pasture
Development for providing fodder as well as preventing soil erosion and works under
other activities were either marginally covered or totally ignored in all the districts.
3.3.7.6 Sub-standard work of Cattle Proof Trench
Panchayat and Rural Development Department, prescribed (October 2001) the
standard size of Cattle Proof Trench (CPT) as top width 2.5 metre, bottom width
1.25 metre and depth 1.5 metre but they were constructed during 2001-06 with top
width 1.5 metre, bottom width 0.6 to 0.7 metre and depth 0.75 to 0.9 metre in 2
districts (Jagdalpur and Rajnandgaon). This resulted in sub-standard work to the
tune of Rs.1.04 crore. CEO, ZP Jagdalpur assured to adhere to standard size laid
down for CPT and CEO ZP, Rajnandgaon cited (July 2006) orders of Government
of M.P. from 1995. The reply was not tenable in view of subsequent orders of
October 2001.
3.3.7.7 Overspending on Cashew plantation
In 15 watershed projects of Jagdalpur 4.62 lakh cashew plants were planted during
2001-05 at a cost of Rs.23 lakh in 532.46 ha at an average of 868 plants per ha
against norms of 400 Cashew plants per hectare. This resulted in excess expenditure
of Rs.12 lakh on excess planting of 2.49 lakh cashew plants. CEO, ZP assured to
adhere to norms in future.
3.3.7.8 Loans to Self Help Groups (SHGs)
As per guidelines, a revolving fund not exceeding Rs.one1 lakh was to be created in
each PIA for providing seed money to SHGs at a rate not exceeding Rs.10000 per
SHG for undertaking income generating activities. This was to be recovered in 6
monthly instalments and given again to other SHGs.
Seed money of Rs.34.47 lakh provided to SHGs in 129 watershed projects in three
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
113 | P a g e
districts under DPAP Phase-I during 1997-98 to 2001-02 was not recovered from the
members of the SHGs in completed projects. Similarly, in 276 watershed projects
under DPAP 6th, 7th, 8th batches and IWDP Phase II and III, 1555 SHGs were
formed and seed money of Rs.18.25 lakh in 4 districts provided during 2001-06 were
not recovered from the members of the SHGs in on going projects. On this being
pointed out CEO, ZPs stated (May 2005 to July 2006) that loan money would be
recovered at the end of the project period. Reply was not tenable, as the seed money
was to be recovered in six months to ensure rotation.
3.3.7.9 Non-transfer of Assets
As per guidelines and Panchayat and Rural Development Department's order No.20
(March 1999) assets created in the completed watershed projects were to be handed
over to the watershed committees for their operation and maintenance with the help
of watershed funds.
Out of 168 completed projects test checked, 86 projects were not transferred to
watershed committees. This included 52 watershed projects completed in Korba in
2000-01 at a cost of Rs.3.63 crore and 34 watershed projects in four blocks of
Rajnandgaon completed at a cost of Rs.5.39 crore in 2004-05. CEO, ZP Korba and
Rajnandgaon intimated that transfer was under process. Thus due to non-transfer of
the assets to WCs, the maintenance of assets was not assured.
3.3.8 Achievements
The objective of improving the economic conditions of weaker sections through
watershed development was not assessable as this depended on diverse socio-
economic factors and these schemes would at best play a small contributory role. As
far as drought prevention was concerned, it was observed that 496 watershed projects
had been under taken in 26 blocks in the five test checked districts and during 2002-
04, 70 to 100 per cent of these blocks had been declared drought affected. It was
evident that watershed development programmes being executed for 10 years since
1995-96 and all other measures for drought prevention had met with little success.
It was observed that in Jagdalpur 59 watershed development projects were
sanctioned in year 1995-96 in first phase of DPAP for treatment of 38728 ha area at a
cost of Rs. 15.49 crore. They were reported as completed in February 2005 at a cost
of Rs. 11.59 crore covering area 30174.11 ha in 10 years against project period of
four years. The completion reports of these 59 watershed projects showed an increase
in agriculture land by 3360.136 ha, land under horticulture by 3686.042 ha and
decrease in cultivable wasteland by 1645.153 ha, fallow land by 3738.039 ha, grazing
land by 780.224 ha, barren land by 755.60 ha and forest land by 127.162 ha.
The records of the Superintendent Land Records, Jagdalpur were also checked for
classification in 2001 and 2004 of the land area in six DPAP blocks, where all these
projects were located. A comparison of status of classification of areas as per revenue
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
114 | P a g e
records and achievements reported under DPAP Phase-I to GOI showed opposite
trends as net sown area decreased by 837 ha in revenue records as against reported
increase of 3360.136 ha of agricultural land under watershed, total area of
wastelands/barren land increased by 2962 ha as per revenue records (current fallow
land 722 ha, old fallow land 310 ha, wasteland 1898 ha, barren land 32 ha) during
2001-04 while in completion report to GOI decrease of 6138.792 ha area (wasteland
1645.153 ha, fallow land 3738.039, barren land 755.600 ha) was shown. Thus the
achievements reported to GOI were not reflected in Land Revenue records.
CEO, ZP Jagdalpur intimated that instructions had been issued to POs to get the
changes registered in the Revenue records. It was necessary to reconcile the totally
divergent facts in the two sets of records.
3.3.9 Training
Diversion of training funds
In two PIA's (Durg and Rajnangdaon) it was noticed that expenditure of Rs.35 lakh
(Durg Rs.4 lakh and Rajnangdaon Rs.31 lakh) booked during 2001-06 as training
expenses were actually diverted and utilised on purchase of sign boards, vegetable
seeds, chemicals, fish food, fish seeds and smokeless chulhas etc.
3.3.10 Non-maintenance of Records.
As per guidelines watershed volunteers were responsible for the maintenance of
accounts records and measurement of works done. While measurement of works
were kept in 111 watershed projects, an expenditure of Rs.4.09 crore was incurred in
seven projects in Raipur and Jagdalpur through muster rolls without recording the
progress/measurement of work in part-II of muster rolls as prescribed. Consequently
the correctness of payments could not be ascertained in audit.
Government instructions (March 1996) provided for maintenance of registers at ZPs
(11 registers), PIAs (14 registers) and WCs (17 registers). In ZP, Raipur, Durg and
Korba and its PIAs and WCs the prescribed registers were either not maintained or
were incomplete at all levels. In the absence of essential details in the works registers,
the authenticity of the works executed could not be verified.
Similarly Watershed Development Fund (WDF) register detailing the contributions
made by the beneficiaries was not maintained to ascertain the amount contributed by
individual beneficiaries and user groups. CEOs, Durg and Korba assured for issuing
instructions to PIAs and WCs for maintaining/completing the records.
Though the deduction from the wages of labourers for watershed was commented
upon in the Report of the CAG of India for the year ended 200405 (Para no.4.4.1)
the practice was continuing in Rajnandgaon.
3.3.11 Monitoring and Supervision
The implementation of watershed development programmes was to be monitored at
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
115 | P a g e
the State level by a State Watershed Development Committee (SWDC) under the
Chairmanship of Development Commissioner and other representatives of line
departments. It was required to meet twice a year and was responsible for the over all
supervision, guidance and monitoring and evaluation of progress of implementation
of watershed development programmes. District Watershed Development
Committees (DWDC) for supervision of implementation of watershed development
programmes were to be constituted at district level. The State level supervising
committee was not constituted and in test checked districts the committee was found
functional only in Rajnandgaon district.
It was observed that 71 NWDPRA13
projects were being implemented parallelly in
29 DPAP blocks and 24 blocks where IWDP watershed programmes were in
operation. This indicated duplication in implementation due to inadequate
coordination between the Rural Development and the Agriculture Department.
3.3.12 Conclusion
The watershed projects were being implemented through inadequate project plans.
Project selection was faulty and some were selected in areas which did not qualify.
Components were not executed in prescribed sequence necessary for proper
development of watersheds. The programmes were being implemented with limited
scope, major emphasis was given to construction of structures under water
conservation measures and other components were either partially covered or totally
ignored. Many completed projects had not been handed over to WCs. Prescribed
records were not properly maintained. The limited effectiveness was borne out at a
macro level by the continuance of drought in many of the blocks covered by the
programmes.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
116 | P a g e
Water Management by Panchayat Raj institutions in Alappuzha District
Highlights
In Kerala the important functions of PRIs in relation to water management include maintenance of
traditional drinking water sources, setting up of water supply schemes, implementation and
maintenance of minor irrigation and lift irrigation projects, development of ground water resources etc.
Audit Review revealed that the utilisation of funds for water supply schemes was much below the
requirement. The PRIs do not have any focussed programme for protection and conservation of
traditional drinking water sources and ponds.
Introduction
3.3.1 Water is one of the most important physical requirements of human beings.
Communities and individuals use water resources for drinking, sanitation, agriculture,
industry, transportation and several other purposes. It is not sufficient merely to have
access to water; the water also needs to be of adequate quality to support its intended
use. Alappuzha District in Kerala was identified as the worst hit district with no safe
source and with acute problem of safe drinking water. There were also reports that
tourist operators the world over had cautioned the prospective visitors to Alappuzha, not
to use pipe water. Further, the water in the wells, ponds and back waters was polluted by
the industrial wastes generated from the coir industry units, which were widespread in
Alappuzha. Thus, a provision for drinking water of good quality was imperative for the
health of the people of Alappuzha and for the economic future of the district.
Audit objectives
3.3.2 A review of the water management by Panchayat Raj Institutions in Alappuzha
District was conducted during the period April-August 2005 to assess the effectiveness of
the measures taken by them in:
• Maintenance of traditional drinking water sources.
• Preservation of ponds and tanks.
• Maintenance of waterways.
• Setting up of and maintenance of water supply schemes to ensure supply of potable water to
the rural population.
• Effective implementation of watershed management.
• Extending assistance to individual beneficiaries to augment their efforts to meet water
requirements and
• Ensuring quality of drinking water to prevent water borne diseases.
Audit coverage
3.3.3 For the Review on water management, 25 out of 73 Grama Panchayats in the District,
four out of 12 Block Panchayats, the District Panchayat, two Divisional offices of Kerala
Water Authority (KWA), Office of the Chief Engineer (Southern Region), Kerala Water
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
117 | P a g e
Authority (KWA) Thiruvananthapuram and Office of the District Medical Officer,
Alappuzha were taken up.
3.3.4 The profile and pattern of allotment of funds in respect of the 25 Grama Panchayats
during the period 2000-2005 are given in Appendix XIV & XV respectively. On an average
each Grama Panchayat was allotted Rs.68 lakh per annum as grants-in-aid from State
Government, Eleventh Finance Commission Grant and Rural Infrastructure Development
Fund.
Institutional structure for service delivery
3.3.5 The water management function assigned to each tier of Panchayat is given below:-
Government did not fix specific criteria for allotment of funds for water management
schemes, except during 2004-05.
Grama Panchayats Block Panchayats District Panchayats
• Maintenance of
traditional drinking
water sources
• Management of
water supply
schemes within a
Grama Panchayat
• Setting up of water • Implementation
supply schemes and taking over
within a Grama Water Supply
Panchayat. Schemes covering
more than one
Grama Panchayat.
• Preservation of
ponds and other
water tanks.
• Maintenance of
water ways.
• Maintenance and • Implementation and • Construction and
implementation of maintenance of all maintenance of
all minor/micro lift irrigation and minor irrigation
irrigation projects minor irrigation schemes covering
schemes covering more than one
more than one Block Panchayat.
Grama Panchayat.
• Development of
ground water
resources.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
118 | P a g e
The functions of the three tiers of Panchayats are clearly delineated to avoid overlapping. None
of the Panchayats covered in the review owned or managed water supply schemes. The sources
of drinking water were open wells, bore wells and street taps and house connection maintained
by KWA for which water charges were paid to the KWA by the Panchayats and the consumers
respectively. Water from open wells, street taps and bore wells was used for drinking. The
requirements for sanitation and irrigation were met by water drawn from wells, ponds and
canals.
Water management by Grama Panchayats
Availability of funds - Poor allocation and under utilisation of funds
3.3.6 It was one of the statutory obligations of the Grama Panchayats to provide safe potable
water to the rural inhabitants. Government did not fix specific criteria for allotment of funds for
the purpose, except during 2004-05. Owing to lack of awareness of the importance of water
management, the Grama Panchayats did not allocate adequate funds to cover the entire rural
population as envisaged in the Ninth and Tenth Five Year Plans. Average utilisation of funds for
Water Supply Schemes by 25 Grama Panchayats in Alappuzha District during 2000-01 to 2004-
05 was only Rs.1.27 lakh per Panchayat and it was 1.94 per cent of the total plan fund (Appendix
XV & XVI) on an average as shown below.
Year Total Plan fund allotted to the Grama Panchayats (Rs in lakh)
Funds utilised for WSS (Rs in lakh)
Average utilisation by a Panchayat (Rs in lakh)
Percentage of funds utilised for WSS to the total plan fund allotted to GPs
2000-01 1364.03 22.60 0.90 1.66
2001-02 1148.27 19.37 0.77 1.69 2002-03 1819.48 12.39 0.50 0.68 2003-04 2468.28 71.65 2.87 2.90 2004-05 1429.05 33.35 1.33 2.33 Total 8229.11 159.36 1.27 1.94
Short fall in utilisation of funds for water management in Productive Sector
3.3.7 Government in March 2004, ordered that one-third of the funds allocated to the
productive sector∗ should be earmarked for Water Management Schemes during 2004-05.
But the actual utilisation of funds during 2004-05 (Appendix XVI) for the Water
Management Schemes in twenty five Grama panchayats was only 8.77 per cent as against
the required quantum of 33.33 per cent as shown below:
Plan Fund allotted for Productive Sector -Rs.380.16 lakh
Fund that should have been allotted and
utilised for Water Supply Schemes - Rs.126.71 lakh (33.33 per cent)
Fund actually utilised -Rs.33.35 lakh (8.77 per cent)
Failure in providing drinking water to the rural population
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
119 | P a g e
3.3.8 Out of 1,65,380 households in 25 Grama Panchayats, 38,601 households did not have
proper access to drinking water facilities such as open wells, piped water and bore wells
(Appendix XVII). Twenty three per cent of the families had to depend on community taps,
or wells of the neighbouring houses for drinking water. The Panchayats did not maintain
updated registers showing the location or the date of installation of street taps for which they
paid water charges to KWA. Consequently the panchayats paid water charges for street
taps, the number of which exceeded the number as per the register of the panchayats. Due
to non-implementation of protective measures to preserve surface water and due to
uncontrolled sand mining, many of these open wells ran dry during summer. Further, as the
houses of the BPL families were built in four or five cents of land, the latrines, cowsheds
etc., constructed adjacent to open wells, contributed to the pollution of under-ground water.
Water quality monitoring programme
3.3.9 Quality of under ground water in Alappuzha district was not safe due to high
concentration of chloride, fluoride and iron. Fluoride content was above the permissible
limit of 1 ppm (mg/1) in almost all wells as reported by Kerala Water Authority (KWA).
Because of the high fluoride content, Alappuzha was declared as an endemic area with
respect to fluoride. A recent study by a medical team revealed that 35.64 per cent of the
school children in Ambalapuzha taluk were affected by dental fluorosis and its prevalence
was 55.28 per cent in urban area. Possibility of defluorinating tube well water was found not
viable due to technical and financial limitations. It was found not prudent to depend on
ground water any more because of the increasing trend of salinity and depletion of ground
water table.
3.3.10 Mention was made in para 7.14.10 and 7.14.11 of the Report of Comptroller and
Auditor General of India for the year ended 31 March 2001 (Civil), Government of Kerala
regarding two Sub Mission projects sanctioned by Government of India during 1997-98 and
eight projects by the State government during 1998-2000 at a total estimated cost of
Rs.54.67 crore for controlling excess salinity and fluoride problem. But none of those
projects was implemented. A comprehensive project viz. „Augmentation of Rural Water
Supply Scheme‟ to six villages in Ambalapuzha Taluk, costing roughly Rs.126 crore was
formulated by Kerala Water Authority in 2004 to cover both the urban and rural areas. The
water source of the Scheme was Pampa river at Cyclemukku where 10 metre diameter
intake well cum pump house was also proposed. But due to paucity of funds these projects
had not been implemented (August 2005).
3.3.11 Though Alappuzha was identified as the worst hit district with no safe source (NSS)
in the Annual Report on Quality Monitoring programme 19992000, prepared by the Chief
Engineer Investigation, Planning and Design, Kochi, no safe source habitation could be
provided and no scheme for control of salinity, fluoride, iron content etc., was planned and
implemented by the PRIs so far.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
120 | P a g e
Incidence of 3.3.12 A report from the District Medical Officer (June 2005) shown below
water borne revealed that incidence of water borne diseases continued, including causalities
in diseases the Alappuzha District.
continued Incidence of water borne diseases in Alappuzha district during 2002-05
S
l.
N
o
Name
of
Diseas
e
2002 2003 2004 2005A
(u
p
to
pr
il)
Cas
e
Dea
th
Cas
e
Dea
th
Cas
e
Dea
th
Cas
e
Dea
th
1
Acute
Water
Diarrh
oea
213
93 Nil
208
92 2
208
68 Nil 6722 Nil
2 Choler
a 35 Nil 3 Nil 1 Nil Nil Nil
3
Persista
nt
Diarrh
oea
129 Nil 95 Nil 52 Nil 5 Nil
4 Dysent
ery
160
8 Nil
126
7 Nil 988 Nil 199 Nil
5 Hepatit
is – A 93 Nil 58 3 152 1 163 2
3.3.13 Despite the incidence of water borne diseases due to water pollution and
unhygienic practices of the rural inhabitants, Government did not take any
comprehensive measures to co-ordinate with the PRIs, KWA, Ground Water
Department and Health Department to solve the acute problem of safe drinking water in
Alappuzha.
Delay in implementation of Water Supply Schemes through Kerala Water Authority
3.3.14 The plan fund deposited with KWA for implementing the water supply schemes was
to be utilised within the financial year. During the period 2000-01 to 2004-05, 73 Panchayats
in Alappuzha District entrusted 147 water supply schemes to KWA for execution as deposit
works. The Panchayats paid the estimated cost of the schemes as advance, out of which
Rs.1.81 crore remained unadjusted at the end of 2004-05. As at 31 March 2005, the work
relating to 114 schemes remained incomplete, leading to non-achievement of the social
objectives targeted. The details are given below:
3.3.15 The Panchayats failed to ensure the timely completion of water supply schemes by
KWA for which the Panchayats had deposited the estimated amount in advance. The
accountability obligation of the KWA towards legislature can be fulfilled only by executing
the works within the financial year and by presenting the accounts of the schemes to the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
121 | P a g e
panchayats. Since the panchayats do not have any control over KWA, Government have to
take suitable steps to ensure that the KWA execute the works in time and submit accounts
to the panchayats
Year No. of
Schemes
entrusted
with
KWA in
the
district
No.
remained
incomplete
of schemes which Advance
amount
pending with
KWA (in
Rupees)
2000-
01
13 7 25,21,560
2001-
02
14 - () 2,839
2002-
03
30 18 18,90,652
2003-
04
75 74 1,13,12,074
2004-
05
15 15 23,69,660
Total 147 114 1,80,91,107
Non-transfer of assets worth Rs.46.19 crore to PRIs
3.3.16 Government decided, in November 1998, to transfer all Water Supply Schemes within a
Panchayat maintained by KWA to the Grama Panchayat concerned. In Alappuzha district,
KWA listed for transfer 94 schemes belonging to 53 Grama Panchayats. The above schemes
included 12148 street taps and 31435 domestic and 2233 non-domestic connections. The water
charges payable by the Panchayats to KWA were Rs.2.13 crore per annum for the 12148 street
taps at the rate of Rs.1750 per tap. The Grama Panchayats could not take over the schemes due
to inadequacy of technical staff to maintain the schemes. The assets to be handed over
(including arrears of water charges from local bodies and charges for house connection till the
date of transfer) were valued at Rs. 46.19 crore. By taking over the assets worth Rs.46.19 crore,
the Grama Panchayats would have been in a position to deliver better service in accordance with
their expectations. Further, the domestic and non-domestic connections would have been a
potential source of revenue to the Grama Panchayats.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
122 | P a g e
Government did not transfer assets worth Rs46.19 crore to PRIs.
Non-preservation of ponds and other water tanks
3.3.17 Preservation of ponds and other water tanks is the function of the Grama Panchayats in
terms of the third schedule of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Ponds were originally used
for domestic and irrigation purposes. But with the widespread digging of open wells and bore
wells, use of the water in ponds was restricted to non-domestic and irrigation purposes. Ponds
were filled with wastes generated from fish markets and other industrial discharges causing
environmental pollution. In the projects formulated by the selected 25 Grama Panchayats during
the period 2000-05, there was no provision for construction of retaining walls or for removal of
wastes from ponds. Non preservation of surface water prevented improved level of underground
water and supply of water for irrigation purposes.
Implementation of Minor Irrigation Schemes
3.3.18 Implementation of minor irrigation schemes is one of the important activities under water
management. Sixteen out of 25 Grama Panchayats test checked had not implemented any
minor irrigation scheme during the years 2000
-05. The number of schemes and expenditure incurred in each year by the remaining nine∗
Grama Panchayats were also very low as shown below:
Year No of
Panchayats
No. of
Schemes
Expenditure
incurred (Rs
in lakh)
2000-01 5@ 11 37.24
2001-02 5£ 9 6.87
2002-03 3# 3 3.75
2003-04 5$ 17 11.87
2004-05 6• 11 32.00
Total 51 91.73
3.3.19 The number of minor irrigation projects taken up by the nine Grama Panchayats during
the five years (2000 - 05) was only 51 and the expenditure incurred thereon was Rs.91.73 lakh.
The amount, spent by the nine Grama Panchayats over a period of five years for implementing
51 minor irrigation schemes was very negligible and the Grama Panchayats could not make any
achievement in irrigating the barren cultivable land.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
123 | P a g e
Large scale filling up of paddy fields mainly due to poor water management.
3.3.20 Majority of the villagers seek their livelihood through cultivation of paddy, coconut,
tapioca etc. But 1024.2 ha of cultivable paddy field in 11# Grama Panchayats (March 2005)
remained barren due to lack of irrigation and drainage facilities, scarcity of agriculture labourers,
low quality seeds, flood during rainy season etc. An area of 548.33 ha (March 2005) of paddy
field was also filled up for shifting to other cultivations or for construction of buildings. Poor
water management resulted in lack of irrigation and drainage facilities and consequent slow
down of agricultural activities.
Water management by Block Panchayats
Failure to implement Water shed Management Scheme
3.3.21 Water shed (Neerthadam) is an area lying on either side of a river or rivulet starting from
a hilly place down to an outlet point. Watersheds are categorised in five types namely micro,
small, simple, sub and large watersheds based on the area in hectare covered ie. 1 ha to 100 ha,
100 ha to 1000 ha, 1000 ha to 10,000 ha, 10,000 ha to 50,000 ha and 50,000 ha and above
respectively. The main objectives of watershed development are:
• conservation, upgradation and utilisation of environments like bird, water, plant, animal and
human resources in an integrated manner,
• improvement of environment and restoration of ecological balance through scientific
management of land and rain water
• generation of massive employment, and
• increase in irrigated areas.
3.3.22 Though the Tenth Five Year Plan was envisaged as „water shed oriented‟, after
identifying the water sheds in each Grama Panchayat, no action plan was discussed and
formulated in the Grama Sabhas. The Panchayat failed to evoke the interest of the people on
such core issues. District Planning Committee also did not point out the lapse. None of the 87
water sheds identified by the twenty five Grama Panchayats was developed. Thus, during Tenth
Five Year Plan the target of conservation and utilisation of natural resources based on water
sheds could not be achieved.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
124 | P a g e
Water management by District Panchayat
Idling of Funds with Ground Water Department consequent on noncompletion of
works.
3.3.23 Ground Water Department (GWD) was entrusted with the construction of tube
wells which were one of the sources of water supply schemes of the PRIs. In view of the
urgent nature of the drought relief works, pipe laying was also entrusted to GWD as a
special case. The District Panchayat, Alappuzha deposited Rs.71.66 lakh with the
GWD between 2003-04 and 2004-05 for digging bore wells and tube wells and extension
of pipe lines for drought relief works as detailed below.
(Rupees in lakh)
Year Amount
deposited
Amount
utilised
Balance
as on
2005
June
2003-04 32.39 3.66 28.73
2004-05 39.27 1.06 38.21
Total 71.66 4.72 66.94
1. 3.3.24 The GWD utilised only seven per cent of the amount and Rs.66.94
lakh remained idle (June, 2005). When there remained an unspent balance of
Rs.28.73 lakh at the end of 2003-04, there was no justification in further advancing
Rs.39.27 lakh to the same Department in 2004-05. The idling of funds and the
consequent non-attainment of social objectives was the result of non-monitoring of
the schemes by the District Panchayat and non-fulfilment of obligations by the
GWD. The District Panchayat and Government have to take necessary steps for the
speedy implementation of the above schemes.
.3.3.25 Conclusion
. • The Panchayats test checked were facing shortage of drinking water
and the quality of available drinking water was poor. The amount allocated and
expended for this core sector was very small compared to the total fund allotted to
the productive sector. None of the Panchayats had followed Government direction
regarding earmarking of funds for water management schemes.
. • The PRIs do not have any focused programme for protection and
conservation of traditional sources of drinking water and ponds.
. • Adequate attention was not paid to setting up and maintenance of
water supply schemes. They failed to closely monitor implementation of schemes for
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
125 | P a g e
which money was advanced to KWA. Though KWA was prepared to transfer
certain water supply schemes to PRIs, they were not ready to take over and maintain
them
. • Ambitious project of water shed management could not take off due
to lack of interest of the PRIs. Filling up of paddy fields and ponds led to drying up
of wells resulting in shortage of availability of ground water.
. • Due to poor quality of drinking water, incidence of water borne
diseases were on the increase.
.
Performance Audit of Tsunami Relief and Reconstructions
Revenue (Relief and Rehabilitation) Department, Andhra Pradesh
.
Highlights
An earthquake induced tidal wave, called Tsunami, hit all the nine coastal districts in
Andhra Pradesh on 26 December 2004 causing a loss of 107 human lives with four
missing, besides loss and damages to houses, fishing boats and other infrastructural
facilities. A performance audit of “Tsunami Relief and Reconstruction” revealed that even
after 18 months of the disaster, rehabilitation of the affected fishermen and reconstruction
of infrastructure facilities had not been completed (June 2006). Replacement and repairs to
damaged boats had yet to be done in Krishna, East Godavari, Nellore and Prakasam
Districts. Rural water sources had not been fully repaired or damaged roads restored.
Unauthorised/inadmissible/ excess expenditure, etc. were also noticed in the six districts.
[Paragraphs 3.5.6.1, 3.5.6.2 and 3.5.7.1]
[Paragraph 3.5.9.8]
[Paragraph 3.5.9.2]
[Paragraphs 3.5.9.6 and 3.5.9.11]
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
126 | P a g e
[Paragraph 3.5.9.7]
[Paragraph3.5.9.9]
3.5.1 Introduction
Tsunami is a series of waves with a longer wavelength and period (time between two
crests), generated by large, impulsive displacement of the seabed level mainly due to
earthquakes, which cause vertical movement of the sea floor. It is also triggered by
landslides under the water surface or impacts by volcanic activity and meteor. A
great shallow focus earthquake of a magnitude of 8.6 on the Richter Scale occurred
with its epicentre off the west coast of Northern Sumatra on 26 December 2004 at
06.29AM (IST). This earthquake generated massively destructive Tsunami waves
which hit the Coastal States and Union Territories of Pondicherry and Andaman
Nicobar Islands causing extensive loss of lives and property. In Andhra Pradesh, the
tidal waves entered villages along all the nine coastal districts inundating 301 villages
in 69 Mandals affecting a population of 2.12 lakh. As per the preliminary survey,
there were reports of 107 deaths, and four missing persons. While, damages were
reported to 481 houses, 10683 country boats, 180 mechanised boats and 1362
country boats were claimed as lost. 47370 Fishing nets belonging to marine
fishermen were also reported as lost/damaged due to Tsunami. The total estimated
loss (as per the initial assessment) was Rs 75.27 crore which was re-assessed at Rs
51.84 crore.
3.5.2 Organisational setup
A State Level High Power Standing Committee had been constituted (May 1978) to
deal with natural calamities including relief, reconstruction and rehabilitation under
the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary to Government. A State Level
Commissionerate for disaster management had been functioning under the
administrative control of Revenue Department for coordinating and rescue
operations.
The relief operations of the Tsunami disaster were being implemented by the
Commissioner, Disaster Management (Commissioner) with the assistance of various
departments56
. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Indira Kranthi Patham (IKP)
through Project Directors, IKP had assessed the loss of boats, nets of marine
fishermen at village level in the affected mandals in coordination with the Fisheries
Department. The other damages were assessed by Chief Engineer (CE) (R&B) –
Roads; CE (RWS) – Rural water supply sources; MD, Andhra Pradesh State
Housing Corporation (APSHC) – Housing; Commissioner of Agriculture –
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
127 | P a g e
Agriculture; Director of Animal Husbandry – Animal Husbandry; Principal Chief
Conservator of Forest – Forest respectively.
3.5.3 Audit objectives
The audit objectives framed for the performance audit were to assess whether:
• there were any deficiencies in the assessment, release of funds and utilisation
thereof and the expenditure conformed to the norms
• the process of identification of beneficiaries and the need assessment of
affected areas/population was scientific
• the institutional mechanism for disaster management, mitigation, prevention
and preparedness was effective
• the steps taken for providing immediate assistance, procurement and delivery
of relief and rehabilitation and restoration of infrastructural services were
adequate and
• the system of monitoring of relief and rehabilitation operations was effective.
3.5.4 Audit criteria
The criteria used for the Performance Audit were as under:
• Assessment report on the loss on account of Tsunami, allocation of funds
made by GOI, releases to executing agencies and their utilisation in
accordance with GOI guidelines
• System of identification of beneficiaries and policies formulated for
rehabilitation of affected people
• Guidelines issued by the GOI/Planning Commission for effective
implementation of Tsunami Rehabilitation Programme and the Coastal Zone
Regulation Act, Town Planning Act and Municipalities Act, etc.
• Coordination amongst various departments including NGOs involved in
Tsunami Relief operations and timeliness of delivery of relief and
rehabilitation and
• Monitoring system instituted by the State Government
3.5.5 Scope and Methodology of Audit
Performance audit of the relief, reconstruction and rehabilitation operations in the
aftermath of the Tsunami, covering the period December 2004 to June 2006 was
conducted (November 2005 – June 2006) by test-check of records of the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
128 | P a g e
Commissioners – Disaster Management, Fisheries, Agriculture; Director, Town and
Country Planning; Managing Director, APSHC; CE (R&B); CE (RWS) and other
implementing departments/ agencies in the six57
out of nine affected districts. The
results of the review are presented in the succeeding paragraphs.
Discussions were held with the departmental officers in an entry conference held in
January 2006, wherein the objectives and scope of performance audit and the audit
criteria were discussed. Views of the Commissionerate of Disaster Management and
other departmental officers were considered while
arriving at the audit conclusions.
In the exit conference held (August 2006) with the departmental officers all the
points included in the draft report including the recommendations were discussed
with the entity.
Audit Findings
3.5.6 Financial Management
3.5.6.1 Funding pattern
All financial assistance to the States affected by natural calamities is provided under
Calamity Relief Fund (CRF) and National Calamity Contingency Fund (NCCF). In
case these funds are insufficient additional Central assistance is provided from
NCCF.
Based on the preliminary assessment reports received from the district authorities
(through teleconference), the State Government submitted (December 2004) to GOI,
a memorandum containing sector-wise damages requiring assistance of Rs 317 crore
besides 19500 MT rice (under Sampoorna Grameen Rojgar Yojana (SGRY)) – Food
Assurance Programme (FAP) to restore damages (Rs 75.27 crore) and also to
undertake mitigation measures. The funds for reconstruction of damages caused by
Tsunami were received from the following sources:
(Rupees in crore)
Source Purpose Amount received
GOI
NCCF Relief and
Rehabilitation
69.32
RGRP Housing 2.30
RGNDWM Rural Water Supply 3.00
CRF Housing 20.00
State
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
129 | P a g e
CMRF Housing 20.00
Fishing crafts 0.90
Total 115.52
Note: In addition to the above, an NGO - Indian Red Cross Society had
contributed Rs 1.06 crore (Nellore: Rs 49 lakh (expenditure Rs 33.50 lakh);
Prakasam: Rs 57 lakh (expenditure Rs 52.05 lakh)) for procurement of boats
through respective District Collectors. Besides, some NGOs also assisted the
beneficiaries to meet the cost of construction of house, over and above Rs
40000 (Para 3.5.9.4 refers).
3.5.6.2 Sanctioned outlay and expenditure
As against Rs 115.52 crore sanctioned/received from various sources, only Rs 90.30
crore were released to the districts, CE(RWS), CE(R&B) and MD, APSHC under
„Relief and Reconstruction‟ (Rs 45.20 crore); Housing (Rs 42 crore); RWS (Rs 3.10
crore).
The Commissioner, Disaster Management had no information on the total
expenditure incurred on the „Relief and Rehabilitation' activities in the State. In the
six test-checked districts, an amount of Rs 4.49 crore (including the additional rice
supplied in Srikakulam and Visakhapatnam Districts) was incurred by the respective
District Collectors to provide immediate relief. The district-wise releases and the
expenditure as of June 2006 under the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation activity in
the six test-checked districts
(Rupees in crore)
Rs 40.18 crore
District Releases Drawn Expenditure
(Percentage)
East Godavari 9.17 7.13 4.85 (68)
Krishna 6.29 6.29 4.51 (72)
Nellore 15.34 14.95 12.94 (87)
Prakasam 9.20 9.20 6.13 (67)
Srikakulam 0.98 0.98 0.58 (59)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
130 | P a g e
Visakhapatnam 1.63 1.63 1.58 (97)
Total 42.61 40.18 30.59 (76)
Thus, in the six districts, only Rs 30.59 crore (72 per cent of the releases and 76 per
cent of the amount drawn) was spent, leaving Rs 9.58 crore59
unutilised. The sector-
wise details are given in Appendix 3.7.
Further, as against Rs 5.13 crore released to CE (RWS) for restoration of rural water
supply sources, Rs 3.10 crore was released to Superintending Engineers, RWS in the
six affected districts; the balance Rs 2.03 crore was still lying with the CE, (RWS)
(June 2006). The expenditure reported was only Rs 1.27 crore (25 per cent of the
releases) leaving Rs 1.83 crore lying unutilised (June 2006) with the PAOs.
In Prakasam District, the entire amount of Rs 3.10 crore released to the DM,
Housing in May 2005 had been lying unutilised (June 2006) in the form of Demand
Drafts (Rs 2 crore) and in a savings bank account (Rs 1.10 crore).
Full amounts could not be utilised in these districts mainly because the district
authorities had initially inflated the requirement of funds and that the rehabilitation
operations could be managed with less funds. Further, in the Fishing sector, of three
out of six sample districts, overstatement of losses also resulted in excess
sanctions/releases.
Besides, under-utilisation of funds amounting to Rs 9.58 crore was also noticed in
Fisheries (Rs 5.94 crore), Roads (Rs 1.20 crore), Housing (Rs 1.55 crore) and RWS
works (Rs 0.69 crore).
3.5.7 Identification of beneficiaries and need assessment
3.5.7.1 Improper initial assessment of damages/loss
Immediately after occurrence of Tsunami, the damages of property and loss of life
was assessed (December 2004) by the District Revenue authorities with the help of
Fisheries Department. Subsequently, another micro survey was conducted (July
2005) by the Project Directors, IKP in all the affected districts as per the orders of the
District Collectors and the victims of the calamity (mainly fishermen) were identified
by gramasabhas in the presence of officers of the Revenue and Fisheries Departments
and the Village elders. The resolutions were passed confirming the losses. The
subsequent assessment of damages to boats/nets, etc. were arrived at Rs 51.84 crore.
According to the assessment, the requirement of funds had come down in all the
districts (except in Viskhapatnam District), resulting in excess sanction/releases in
most cases as discussed below. Thus, it was evident that the initial assessment had
been unrealistic. The final assessment of damages has yet to be done by the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
131 | P a g e
Commissioner, Disaster Management (August 2006), even after 18 months of
occurrence of Tsunami.
3.5.7.2 Excess sanctions/releases due to improper survey
After the micro survey of the assessment of losses conducted in July 2005, the
requirement of funds came down. Therefore, although the State
Government/Commissioner had released amounts for the replacements/repairs to
boats, nets, etc. on the basis of the figures projected in the initial survey the supplies
were made on the basis of subsequent assessment. On verifying the releases towards
replacements/repairs of boats and nets in the six test-checked districts, unspent
balances amounting to Rs 4.12 crore were lying with the District Collectors,
PDs/IKP, PAOs and JD/Fisheries in three districts as follows:
* the reduction in expenditure was due to limiting of repairs to Rs 2000 on the
basis of extent of damages as against the ceiling of Rs 10000 per craft
In Prakasam District it was further observed that Rs 10.01 crore was sanctioned
(March 2005) for replacement of 8998 fishing nets based on the initial assessment.
Subsequently, as per micro assessment, the actual requirement was found to be 4312
nets only which cost Rs 2.66 crore. Instead of restricting the release and drawal to
this extent, the Commissioner in March 2005, had released Rs 5 crore as the first
instalment. However, the resultant unspent balance of Rs 2.34 crore instead of being
remitted back to Government, was placed (March 2006) at the disposal of the PD,
IKP. Moreover, the Commissioner further released Rs 72.54 lakh and the District
Collector authorised the Assistant Director, Fisheries to draw the amount even
without requirement. The entire amount of Rs 3.07 crore was thus kept
unutilised/unremitted by the PD, IKP as of June 2006.
3.5.7.3 Non–implementation of Marine Fishermen Regulation Act
As per Marine Fishermen Regulation Act, fishermen who acquire a boat of their
own for fishing purpose have to register the boats with the Fisheries Department. It
was observed that this practice was not being followed and no data on the number of
boats registered/ purchased were available with them. The Fisheries Department
therefore, was not in a position to assess the number of boats lost/damaged and had
to rely on the recommendations of gramsabhas to extend financial assistance. This
was indicative of poor planning and poor implementation of the provision of the Act,
by the Department.
3.5.8.1 Preventive measures not implemented
Guidelines on Tsunami Rehabilitation programmes with regard to Institutional and
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
132 | P a g e
fund flow mechanism, norms, community participation and involvement of NGOs
and programme monitoring issued (February 2006) by the Planning
Commission/GOI after the Tsunami, have yet to be adopted and implemented by
the State Government. The Director, Town and Country Planning proposed
(December 2004) to the State Government, for amendments to Andhra Pradesh
Town Planning Act, 1920 and Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 by
suggesting model amendments to Town and Country Planning, Land Use Zone
Regulations, Building Regulations for National Hazard Zone. He had also mapped
(December 2004), vulnerable coastal areas with reference to high tide line. No action
was, however, taken by the Government as of June 2006. In fact, the Coastal Zone
Regulations (1981) of GOI prohibiting all kinds of artificial development within 500
metres from the high tide mark, had not been adhered to while sanctioning houses to
the affected fishermen. The Marine Fishermen Regulation Act requiring the
registration of boats with Fisheries Department was also not implemented.
Training courses under National Programme for Capacity Building on earthquake
risk management, were being conducted regularly. The State level and district level
training programmes on disaster management were organised by APARD60
only for
two to five days for 2024 district/village level staff (State level: 456 participants;
District level: 1568 participants) during 2005-06 and 2006-07(as of July 2006).
Details of trainings imparted to Engineering and Medical staff were not furnished.
Thus, the State had not geared up sufficiently to meet the disasters like Tsunami.
3.5.9.1 Immediate Relief
District collectors of the nine affected coastal districts had quickly evacuated 34264
people into 67 relief camps, and provided food and drinking water and later 25 kg of
rice per family on their return home from relief camps. Where no relief camps were
organised, 10 kg of rice was provided to each family. A total number of 101
stationary, 72 mobile and 568 para-medical teams were speedily deployed to take up
healthcare and sanitation measures in the affected areas. Some 132470 houses and
8015 water sources were chlorinated and the affected villages sanitised to prevent the
outbreak of any epidemic. The Commissioner, however, had no information on the
relief provided to the Tsunami victims in the nine Coastal districts of the State as a
whole.
3.5.9.2 Delay in providing rehabilitation
Despite the availability of Central assistance in January 2005 itself, although 18
months had elapsed after the Tsunami, the delivery of assistance for reconstruction
in respect of supply of boats (in four test-checked districts) and for repairs to boats (in
three test-checked districts) was not completed (June 2006) as follows:
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
133 | P a g e
There were huge shortages in supply of boats/repairs of boats
District East Godavari
Krishna Nellore Prakasam
SrikakulamVisakhapatnam
Sanctioned
for supply
107 215
756 518 -
5**
Number of
boats
Supplied
(Percentage)
Sanctioned
for repairs
64 (60) 1822
76 (35) 1742
535 (71)
3503 446
(86)* 2491 -
247 30 540
Repaired
(Percentage)
1822 (100)
1500 (86)
2367 (68)
1920 (77)
247 (100)
657 (100)
* Exclusive of 321 dinghies supplied
** In Visakhapatnam district, five boats were sanctioned based on the
initial assessment of Fisheries department in Urban area. Later the IKP
had assessed the loss in rural areas. Hence the excess in supply of boats
(Para 3.5.9.3 refers)
It will be seen that the extent of short supply of new boats was very high in Krishna
(65 per cent), East Godavari (40 per cent), Nellore (29 per cent) and Prakasam (14 per
cent). Also, 32 per cent and 23 per cent damaged boats were not repaired in Nellore and
Prakasam Districts respectively.
Delay in repairs and supply of new boats adversely affected the earnings and the
livelihood of the fishermen (42162 families).
3.5.9.3 Improper assessment of loss of boats in Visakhapatnam District
According to the preliminary report on loss of assets in Visakhapatnam District, only
five boats were lost and for which Government had released Rs 0.68 lakh for their
replacement. In a later assessment done as per the orders of District Collector, the
loss was reported as 93 boats (90 wooden boats and three Fiber Reinforced plastic
boats-FRP) and 108 mechanised boats needing repairs. It was however, seen that no
further funds had been released by the Government so far (June 2006) to cover all
these boats though asked for by the PD, IKP. In the meantime, the PD, IKP had
procured 30 boats (cost: Rs 3.37 lakh) and repaired all the 108 mechanised boats (Rs
5.21 lakh out of IKP funds) leaving a balance of 63 boats yet to be replaced due to
non-receipt of additional funds of Rs 19.02 lakh sought for by the District Collector
in November 2005. Non-provision of additional funds for this purpose, though funds
were lying unspent with the district level authorities, in all test-checked districts was
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
134 | P a g e
indicative of lack of proper monitoring of expenditure at the Commissionerate level.
3.5.9.4 Non-utilisation of relief made available by NGOs
The Commissioner had no information with regard to the number of NGOs and
assistance rendered by them in the nine affected coastal districts. The district
administration did not also coordinate effectively with the NGOs in distribution of
relief to the affected families. In the three out of six test-checked districts, it was seen
that 20 NGOs (Krishna : three, Prakasam : 13, Nellore: four) were involved in the
Tsunami relief operations.
It was observed that Indian Red Cross Society (IRCS) had extended (July 2005)
financial assistance of Rs 49 lakh for supply (subsidy: Rs 75000, loan: Rs 20000 and
beneficiary contribution: Rs 5000) of 100 FRP boats in Nellore District. These funds
were kept at the disposal of the District Project Directors, IKP. As against the 100
boats sanctioned, only 79 were supplied as of June 2006 (part payment made: Rs
33.50 lakh). There was also delay on the part of the Fisheries Department and the
PD, IKP in identifying the beneficiaries for supply of FRP boats (instead of wooden
catamarans). Due to the delay, the beneficiaries were deprived of the boats in spite of
the funds being provided by the NGO way back in July 2005.
3.5.9.5 Doubtful utilisation of funds under Boat repairs
Government fixed (March 2005) the ceiling of Rs 10000 per boat for repairs. In
Prakasam District tenders were called for by the PD, IKP and rates obtained for units
of repairs and identified the firms for taking up the repair works. It was observed that
out of 2479 boats damaged (2491 as per initial assessment) in the district, the
maximum amount (Rs 10000) fixed by the State Government was allowed for all the
547 boats repaired (Rs 54.70 lakh) as of January 2006. For the remaining boats also
(boat-wise expenditure for another 1373 boats repaired as of June 2006 was not
furnished to Audit) a provision of Rs 10000 per boat was made, not adhering to the
approved rates for units of repairs. It was also seen that the extent of damages was
not indicated by the Fisheries Development Officers concerned in the damage
assessment reports. On a comparative study made by Audit in East Godavari and
Visakhapatnam Districts, it was found that the average expenditure incurred per boat
was only Rs 2000 and Rs 2570 respectively. Thus the expenditure incurred by the
PD, IKP, Prakasam District towards repairs of boats appears to be on the higher side
and hence doubtful. Government while accepting the audit point stated
(July 2006) that a Senior District Officer was being appointed to investigate into the
matter.
3.5.9.6 Non-utilisation of SGRY funds in Krishna District
In Krishna District, an amount of Rs 15.86 lakh in cash and 793 MTs of rice (Rs
63.44 lakh) was sanctioned under SGRY (Special Component) for 5285 Tsunami
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
135 | P a g e
affected families for relief employment works for three months. It was, however, seen
that although the cash component of Rs 15.86 lakh was drawn by the District
Collector, Krishna in January 2005 and deposited in the PD Account, no
expenditure had been incurred so far (June 2006). The rice sanctioned under SGRY
(FAP) was, however, not drawn as no works were identified for the affected families
under SGRY in the district.
3.5.9.7 Non-execution of major repairs to road by R&B Department
Government had released (March 2005) Rs 1.20 crore for execution of repair works
to road in the Tsunami affected mandal (Kakinada Rural) of East Godavari District.
The CE (R&B – Roads) had drawn the amount and deposited (March 2005) it with
the Assistant Pay and Accounts Officer, Yeleru Reservoir Scheme, Kakinada. In
response to the tender call (October 2005), a single tender was received (November
2005). This was however, disqualified as the firm did not produce the certificate
showing experience in „gabion structure‟ or the Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU). Hence, re-tenders were called for in January 2006. The work could not be
taken up (June 2006) as there was no response to the tender calls. Government stated
(July 2006) that the proposal of work was now being modified with an alternative
workable design. This itself indicated the department‟s failure to formulate a suitable
design for execution of work at initial stage.
Thus, despite the funds being provided in March 2005, the envisaged repairs to road
works in the Tsunami affected mandal had not been undertaken even 18 months
after occurrence of Tsunami causing inconvenience to public.
3.5.9.8 Rural Water Supply scheme works not executed
Government had sanctioned and released Rs 3.10 crore (estimated cost: Rs 5.13
crore) in August 2005 for restoration of 55 drinking water sources61
affected due to
Tsunami in the six61
(out of nine) districts. As of April 2006, only 19 works61
had
been completed at an expenditure of Rs.1.27 crore in the five districts. It was also
observed that seven of the eight works sanctioned in Guntur District have not even
been taken up so far for want of revised administrative sanction by the Government
for the modified proposals submitted by the SE (RWS) in September 2005. The
remaining 29 works were at different stages of completion (June 2006). Thus a
crucial requirement of providing drinking water facility to the Tsunami affected
mandals was still pending. Based on the report submitted by the Commissioner, GOI
had sanctioned/released (January 2005) Rs 2.30 crore for construction of 500 houses
for reconstruction of the fully damaged houses along with land acquisition if required
under Rajiv Gandhi Rehabilitation Package (RGRP). Out of Rs 2.30 crore received
from GOI, the State Government had released Rs 2 crore to the MD, APSHC for
construction of 481 houses at Rs 40000 per house in the five (out of the nine coastal
districts) districts (including the three test-checked districts). The houses were to be
constructed on Self help Mutual help basis. Physical Progress of the construction of
houses as of July 2006 was as under:
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
136 | P a g e
District East
Godavari Guntur
KrishnaNelloreWest
Godavari Total
Allocated
152 9 21
280 19
481
Taken-
up 152
9 21
280 19
481
Completed
Number of
Houses 3 3
Under
Construction
38-3 113 7
161
Not
started
111 9
18 167
12 317
Coastal Zone Regulations were violated in sanction of houses to fishermen
Thus, of the 481 houses proposed for which funds were released by GOI way back in
January 2005, only three houses had been completed, 161 houses were at different
stages of construction and 317 houses were not yet started due to non-availability of
land, delay in acquisition of land and resistance from the beneficiaries to move out of
Costal Regulatory Zone (CRZ). Government attributed (July 2006) the delay in
completion of houses inter alia to the slow progress in making availability of the land
since the houses were proposed in coastal areas outside CRZ. The fact remains that
the MD, APSHC/Government failed to provide shelter to the Tsunami affected
fishermen even 18 months after occurrence of Tsunami despite the availability of the
Central assistance.
3.5.9.10 Coastal Zone Regulations violated in providing housing to the affected
fishermen
The Coastal Zone Regulations (CZR) of GOI (1981) mandates keeping beaches free
from all kinds of artificial development at least 500 metres from the high tide mark.
The areas affected by Tsunami were falling mostly under CRZ Category I & II
representing areas lying between low tide line and high tide line and ecologically
sensitive area in which construction activities were not permissible. According to
CZR, clearance should only be given for construction of residential buildings and
infrastructure facilities in CRZ subject to norms specified under each category.
Government sanctioned (March 2005) 40000 houses to Tsunami affected fishermen.
Out of these, sanction was accorded (January 2006) by Government for construction
of 65 houses within CRZ in Prakasam62
District as a special case (based on the
circumstances stated by the District Collector) and in Visakhapatnam District,
construction of 504 houses was taken up within CRZ reportedly based on the verbal
orders of the District Collector on the request of the beneficiaries as they were
reluctant to move out of existing sites. The District Manager, Housing (DM) stated
(March 2006) that construction was ordered within CRZ as the sites were located at
elevated places. This was however, not in accordance with the CZR.
3.5.9.11 Extension of benefits to persons not affected by Tsunami
During test-check of records it was noticed that benefit of Tsunami relief was
irregularly extended to certain mandals, which were not affected by Tsunami to the
extent of Rs 1.40 crore in East Godavari (Rs 67.09 lakh) and Nellore District (Rs
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
137 | P a g e
73.35 lakh) as detailed below:
.• In East Godavari District the benefits under SGRY were extended to 2088
families in two mandals63
. 334.74 MTs of rice (cost: Rs 26.78 lakh) and Rs
1. 13.45 lakhcash was distributed resulting in unwarranted expenditure of Rs
2. 40.23 lakh.
• In three more mandals64
of East Godavari, nets and one boat were supplied
besides undertaking repairs to 66 wooden catamarans (cost: Rs 26.86 lakh)
reportedly as per the decision of the District Collector.
• „Tada‟ mandal (Nellore District) was provided relief by way of cash and rice
components under SGRY (SC) for six months on par with affected 10 mandals of the
district. The unwarranted expenditure on this account worked out to Rs 73.35 lakh
(Cash component: Rs 14.67 lakh; Rice (738.5 MT) : Rs 58.68 lakh).
3.5.10 Monitoring and Evaluation
Except releasing the funds to various District Collectors and other implementing
authorities, the Commissioner did not monitor expenditure on the various activities
of Tsunami relief operations. The releases made to the district authorities were being
shown as expenditure by the Commissioner even without ascertaining the actual
expenditure incurred. Thus, monitoring at Commissionerate level was absent and as
a result, the Commissioner was not in the knowledge of State-wide (for nine affected
districts) position of the relief and rehabilitation provided to the fishermen, etc.
It was observed that though district level coordination meetings were being held to
assess the progress of relief and rehabilitation measures, interdepartmental co-
ordination meetings were not conducted regularly at State level even though several
departments were involved in the delivery of Tsunami relief and rehabilitation
operations. The relief and assistance rendered were not evaluated so far (June 2006).
3.5.11 Conclusions
The State Government had not anticipated a disaster of the magnitude of Tsunami
and had, therefore, not established effective institutional mechanism to meet it. The
assessment of damages was not realistic and the projections were exaggerated except
in Visakhapatnam District where the loss was underestimated. The final assessment
of damage caused by Tsunami has not been made so far. Large amounts are lying
with the various implementing authorities unutilised and un-refunded. Though
immediate relief was promptly provided to the Tsunami victims, rehabilitation of the
affected fishermen (42162 families) and reconstruction envisaged still remain to be
completed (June 2006) even 18 months after Tsunami. A large number of damaged
boats have yet to be replaced/repaired particularly in Prakasam, Nellore, Krishna
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
138 | P a g e
and Visakhapatnam Districts. Further, the lessons of the disaster have not been
learnt as the Marine Fishermen Regulation Act has not been implemented as yet and
the CZR of GOI are not being observed while providing housing to affected
fishermen. Reconstruction of the damaged houses of fishermen was also neglected.
Monitoring at State level was poor.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
139 | P a g e
3.5.12 Recommendations
Government should consider disaster management as a vital and crucial issue
and develop and establish adequate forecast and warning systems to minimise loss of
lives and property in the event of future calamities.
Registration of fishermen‟s boats as stipulated in MFR Act, should be enforced
so that loss can be properly assessed, affected people adequately compensated and
fraudulent claims prevented.
Coordination amongst all the departments including NGOs who are involved in
relief and rehabilitation activities should be ensured for speedy and proper delivery
of relief and for optimum utilisation of resources.
Coastal Zone Regulations should be strictly adhered to while according
permissions for construction of houses so as to minimise loss of life and property in
the event of any natural disasters in future.
The audit observations were discussed with the Additional Commissioner, Disaster
Management, Joint Director (Fisheries), General Manager (Finance), APSHC in
the exit conference held in August 2006 and the audit points were accepted by
them. The recommendations made by Audit were also accepted.
Performance Audit of Arsenic Alleviation Programme in West Bengal .
HIGHLIGHTS.
The State Government took up measures to combat arsenic poisoning in potable ground
water since 1994-1995. However, the schemes for arsenic alleviation were not executed in a
mission mode as warranted by the situation and there was inadequate monitoring. Despite
11 years’ effort and expenditure of Rs 721.24 crore on arsenic alleviation measures, only 43
per cent of the at risk population was supplied with arsenic safe drinking water as of March
2005 against the capacity created to cover 56 per cent.
Remedial measures were formulated with Acceptable Maximum
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
140 | P a g e
Contaminant level much higher (50 Microgram/Litre) than that
(10 Microgram/Litre) prescribed by the Government of India, World
Health Organisation and Bureau of Indian Standards. The State
Government did not ascertain the extent of actual contamination and
comprehensive mapping was also not done as of June 2005. Screening
results of 1.20 lakh out of 1.31 lakh tubewells in the eight affected districts
revealed that 27 per cent (0.32 lakh) of them were yielding water with
arsenic content even above 50 Microgram/Litre.
(Paragraphs 3.2.11)
Of 2252 Arsenic Treatment Units installed during 2000-2005, 989
remained non-functional while 135 were yielding water with arsenic
content more than permissible leaving 2.81 lakh people exposed to
contamination.
(Paragraphs 3.2.12)
Surface water supply schemes remained incomplete even after an expenditure of Rs
71.61 crore. Besides, no effective steps were taken to recharge the already depleted
ground water reserves despite concerns expressed by the State Government and
Government of India.
(Paragraphs 3.2.18 and 3.2.22)
Introduction
3.2.1 Arsenic contamination in ground water in the State was detected in the early
eighties through epidemiological1
studies. Ingestion of arsenic through drinking water
is responsible for various diseases like skin lesion, skin cancer, other internal cancers,
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
141 | P a g e
etc.
State Government constituted committees (1988, 1992) to study the nature, extent and
cause of arsenic pollution and formed a Task Force in April 1993 to co-ordinate
different activities to arrest arsenic contamination in the State. Public Health
Engineering Department (PHED) as the nodal department had been executing arsenic
mitigation measures/schemes from 1994-1995 in rural areas of the State with a
strategy for ensuring at least one safe source of drinking water for each habitation.
DISTRICTS OF WEST BENGAL
AFFECTED BY ARSENIC POLLUTION IN
considered arsenic content at 50µg /L in ground water as tolerable which was at par
with the limit fixed by GOI for cases where there were no alternative safe sources of
potable water in arsenic affected areas. Accordingly 83 blocks of eight districts2
of the
State were identified as affected by arsenic contamination in ground water as of March
2005. The risk population in these rural areas was 1.65 crore.
Organisational structure
3.2.2 Principal Secretary was in overall charge of the department
Districts affected : 1) Malda 2) Murshidabad 3) Nadia 4) North 24 Parganas 5)
South 24 Parganas 6) Howrah 7) Hooghly and 8) Bardhaman. Executive Engineers
(EE) for preparing, monitoring and executing arsenic alleviation projects/schemes in
addition to their normal duties of execution and maintenance of Piped Water Supply
Schemes (PWSS) in rural and urban areas of the State.
Audit objectives
3.2.3 Keeping in view the deleterious impact and serious risks associated with
increasing number of habitations becoming exposed to arsenic contaminated water,
the following audit objectives were set to assess whether :
⎯ the programmes and schemes to mitigate arsenic contamination problem in
groundwater were holistically designed and systematically planned to achieve the
intended purpose;
⎯ the available resources (manpower, financial and material) were sufficient and
were optimally utilised; ⎯ the programme and schemes were efficiently
implemented as per the guidelines; ⎯ the facilities created were effectively
functioning in accordance with the stipulated performance standard and ⎯ there
was adequate quality control mechanism.
Scope of Audit and Methodology
3.2.4 The performance audit with reference to the progressive status of arsenic
alleviation measures undertaken to mitigate arsenic contamination problem in ground
water of the rural areas of the State as of March 2005 was conducted by test check of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
142 | P a g e
records of PHED during May and August 2005. The urban and municipal areas were
not covered as the PWSS in these areas were stated to be better organised in supply of
arsenic safe water from deeper aquifer alternative sources.
The methodology adopted by Audit in addition to scrutiny of records at various levels
was formulation and finalisation of audit objectives taking into account the views of
Directors of Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) and All India Institute of Hygiene
and Public Health (AIIH&PH) of GOI at a meeting held on 20 May 2005. Water
quality reports prepared by departmental laboratories and NGO-run laboratories were
studied besides holding discussions with Arsenic Task Force, Health and Family
Welfare Department, State Water Investigation Directorate (SWID) of the State
Government, CGWB and AIIH&PH.
Identification of nature, cause and extent of arsenic pollution
3.2.5 State Government considered the sources of arsenic in ground water to be
geogenic. Experts opined that withdrawal of ground water was responsible for leaching
of arsenic into the aquifer. Survey by the Expert Committee (1994) disclosed that the
intermediate aquifers (second aquifer 20-80 metre below ground level (m bgl)) of the
affected areas were polluted with arsenic. In some cases, arsenic was also found in the
third aquifer where there was no clay parting in between the second and third aquifer.
The lateral extent of contamination within the affected blocks were, however, not
continuous and uniform.
Sample habitation survey was conducted in 1992 and 2003 by the PHED, jointly with
SWID and CGWB to identify areas having arsenic content in water more than 50µg
/L. Tubewell-wise detail survey in the affected eight districts of the State taken up in
1999-2000 was not completed. The position till March 2005 was as under:
As of March 2005, out of a total 1.31 lakh tubewells in the affected districts,
1. 1.20 lakh tubewells were screened of which 0.32 lakh (27 per cent) were yielding
water with arsenic content above 50µg/L. Ground water of four3
more blocks was
detected as contaminated beyond 50µg/L by SWID, but these blocks were not
declared as arsenic affected. The Department stated (June 2005) that necessary action
would be taken after rechecking the chemical quality of ground water of these blocks.
2. An analysis of the habitation survey (1992 and 2003) and tubewell-wise detailed
survey (2004-2005) in audit revealed that survey on arsenic contamination in spot
sources was limited to the meander zone of Padma and Bhagirathi river only. No
study was at all undertaken to substantiate absence of arsenic contamination in the
ground water of the other parts of the State. The extent and severity of contamination
in the three western districts of Bhagirathi (Howrah, Hooghly and Bardhaman) were
also not adequately investigated. Further, anthropogenic reasons of arsenic pollution
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
143 | P a g e
caused by random use of pesticides, rodenticides, chemical fertilizer, disposal of
untreated human wastes, chemical and industrial wastes in the surface water bodies
and flows and on account of mining activities in coal belt areas, could not be ruled out.
The Department, however, did not undertake any investigation of the anthropogenic
causes of arsenic contamination nor started comprehensive mapping.
As a result, the Government was not able to ascertain the magnitude of the problem of
arsenic contamination in the entire State as yet (June 2005).
Acceptable limit of arsenic content in potable water
3.2.7 The Ministry of Urban Development and Bureau of Indian Standard prescribed
the Acceptable Maximum Contaminant Level (AMCL) of arsenic to be 10µg /L in
India at par with the World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines. The GOI
Manual, however, specified that 50µg /L arsenic may be tolerated in the absence of
any alternative safe source of water.
Principal Secretary stated (October 2005) that it was not feasible to stick to the
acceptable limit of 10µg/L in all cases depending on the locational position. Scrutiny
in audit, however, revealed that Rs 306.80 crore were spent on arsenic alleviation
measures during this period. In reply, the Department stated that the balance amount
of Rs 414.44 crore were met out of funds available under PMGY, ARWSP and Rural
Water Supply which were, however, not identifiable as expenditure incurred on
arsenic alleviation measures out of these funds remained merged with normal
expenditure under the respective programmes.
3.2.10 PHED adopted short term, medium term and long term measures for execution
during 1994-1995 to ensure at least one safe source for each presently affected
habitation. These measures were primarily based on the recommendations of the 1994
Expert Committee, which recommended depth of tubewells to be 200 m bgl in
Murshidabad and Nadia, 150 to 300 m bgl in North and South 24-Parganas and 100 m
bgl in Bardhaman.
The Expert Committee also recommended that the tubewells should be sunk in arsenic
affected areas only after testing of chemical quality of ground water and to consider
environmental hazards in disposing off the used up media of ARPs and ATUs. The
Committee also observed that water of ringwells did not contain arsenic.
Short term measures included (i) new hand pump tubewells at alternative deep aquifer
and (ii) sanitary protected ringwells. The medium term measures comprised (i) Arsenic
Removal Plant (ARP) and Arsenic Treatment Unit (ATU) with existing PWSS and
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
144 | P a g e
hand pump fitted tubewells respectively
(ii) creation of deeper aquifer alternative spot sources for existing PWSS and
(iii) new ground water based PWSS. The long term measures included surface water
supply schemes.
Physical progress after 11 years as of March 2005 was that 56 per cent of the total risk
population (1.65 crore) in the affected districts were reported as covered under the
programme. The actual coverage was, however, found to be only 43 per cent (70.39
lakh) as of March 2005. The details are given in Appendix 3.4.
Scrutiny revealed that the Department did not set up any separate establishment to
deal exclusively with the arsenic alleviation schemes which were executed in addition
to normal work. Recommendations of the Expert Committee were ignored during
creation of a large number of spot sources and a considerable number of ATUs
remained inoperative due to non-maintenance or poor maintenance. As a result,
performance of the created facilities was poor and the desired quality of the yield was
not achieved.
Besides, there was unusual delay in completion of surface water supply schemes. Thus,
even after spending Rs 721.24 crore, 21.47 lakh people continued to remain exposed to
arsenic contamination above 50µg/L as discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.
1.70 lakh population remained exposed to arsenic contamination
Short term measures were intended for immediate relief to people by installation of
hand pump tubewells/ring wells at alternative spot sources where the existing
tubewells were defunct.
3.2.11 PHED created 8203 alternative spot sources (tubewell : sunk 8037 against target
of 7911; ringwell : dug 166 against target of 288) during 1994-2005 under short term
measures in the affected eight districts in replacement of the existing contaminated
ones and stated that 20.50 lakh people were provided with safe drinking water upto
March 2005.
However, according to the latest water quality test reports, 543 tubewells were yielding
water with arsenic content more than 50µg /L. Of those, 475 tubewells were sunk in
the second aquifer between 20-90 m bgl ignoring the recommendations of the Expert
Committee. Chemical quality of ground water/Litholayers was also not tested before
lowering tubewell assemblies. As a result, 1.36 lakh people continued to remain
exposed to arsenic contaminated drinking water although Rs 2.44 crore were spent on
sinking of the new alternative spot sources.
Further, water of 139 sanitary protected ring wells dug at Rs 59.77 lakh in three
districts was not utilised by 0.34 lakh population due to misgivings regarding the
quality of the water. However, PHED took no steps to remove the misgivings
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
145 | P a g e
regarding the safe quality of sanitary protected ring well water.
2.81 lakh people remained exposed to contamination beyond 50µg /L
Medium term measures consisted of installation of Arsenic Treatment Units (ATUs) in
existing hand pump fitted tubewells and installation of Arsenic Removal Plants
(ARPs) in the existing piped water supply schemes as well as new piped water supply
schemes.
Arsenic Treatment Units (ATUs)
3.2.12 PHED installed 23764
ATUs to the existing contaminated hand pump fitted
tubewells in five districts upto March 2005 and stated that 5.94 lakh people were
benefited in the process as of March 2005.
Scrutiny of latest water quality report of 2252 ATUs installed during 2000-2005
revealed that 989 ATUs remained non-working and 135 ATUs were yielding water
contaminated beyond 50µg /L due to use of defective adsorption media (35), non-
regeneration or non-replacement of adsorption media (982) and defects in ATUs (107).
Thus, 2.81 lakh people covered by these tubewells (cost Rs 4.78 crore5
) remained
exposed to contaminated drinking water as of March 2005. 4
In two districts 11
tubewells under 13 PWSS were yielding water with arsenic above 50µg/L
New PWSS under Arsenic Sub-Mission
3.2.13 PHED created 19 PWSS in five districts under Arsenic Sub-Mission (six in first
Phase Action Plan and 13 in second Phase Action Plan) and benefited population was
claimed to be 2.39 lakh. The Expert Committee recommended to tap aquifer 200 m
bgl in Nadia and Murshidabad districts.
The water quality test report of six PWSS (in four districts) created under first Phase
Action Plan was not made available to audit. Test-check of records of 13 PWSS under
second Phase Action in Nadia and Murshidabd district completed between 2000 and
2005 at Rs 14.10 crore revealed the following :
⎯ In Nadia, three out of eight PWSS commissioned during 2000-2005 at Rs 3.12
crore were yielding water with arsenic above 50µg/L (seven tubewells). The
tubewells of these PWSS were sunk between 58 to 153 m bgl against
recommended depth of 200 m bgl.
⎯ In Murshidabad district, four out of five PWSS commissioned during 2000-2003
at Rs 4.80 crore were yielding water above 50µg/L (four tubewells). All the
tubewells were sunk between 21 and 289 m bgl.
⎯ The arsenic content in different litholayers were required to be chemically
examined at boring stage, since if any arsenic content is found in the litholayers,
tubewells assemblies should not be lowered at the boreholes. However, ignoring
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
146 | P a g e
all the technical criteria, tubewells assemblies were lowered in the arsenic
contaminated aquifer by the PHED. As a result, 0.95 lakh people covered under
the seven PWSS (cost Rs 7.92 crore) were still exposed to arsenic contamination
beyond 50µg/L.
PWSS under Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme
3.2.14 PHED stated that 198 new PWSS were commissioned as of March 2005 in the
affected districts to supply safe water to 37.76 lakh people.
Test check of the water quality report of 64 PWSS in two districts6
commissioned
during 1995-2005 revealed that yield of 25 PWSS was contaminated above 50µg/L.
Thus, 5.08 lakh beneficiaries of these PWSS were still exposed to arsenic contaminated
water.
The expenditure incurred on these 25 PWSS was Rs 18.70 crore. All the tubewells
assemblies were lowered in the arsenic contaminated aquifer and also without
conducting required test of water quality of the aquifer beforehand.
Nadia-Murshidabad Ground Water Project
3.2.15 Nadia-Murshidabad Ground Water Project was sanctioned (March 2003) at Rs
11.76 crore with target of three years for completion to supply arsenic safe water to
1.12 lakh people of two blocks (Karimpur-I & II) of Nadia district and one block
(Jalangi) of Murshidabad district. The estimate was sanctioned without examining the
scope of getting safe water at the proposed borehole spots for the tubewells. PHED
incurred Rs 3.76 crore for construction of the civil portion of the project. The work was
in progress as of March 2005.
Test check of 13 tubewells sunk in Karimpur-I and II blocks at Rs 0.42 crore revealed
that the tubewells were sunk between 72.6 and 132.46 m bgl as against
recommendation for 200 m bgl. Out of those, yield of three tubewells sunk in
Karimpur-I block was contaminated above 50µg/L.
Executive Engineer (EE), Nadia Division, PHED lowered the tubewell assemblies at
the borehole although the chemical test of the litholayers indicated presence of arsenic.
The EE stated that there was no deeper aquifer available in the borehole point. EE‟s
contention was not tenable as the existing two PWSS in Karimpur-I Block were
yielding safe water indicating the presence of a safe aquifer in the area.
Long term measures envisaged tapping surface water sources for delivering arsenic safe
water to the people.
Four surface water projects were taken up under Arsenic Sub-Mission at a total
estimated cost of Rs 588.21 crore with a target of 33.65 lakh beneficiaries. The
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
147 | P a g e
expenditure as of March 2005 was Rs 492.31 crore. Two schemes (at South 24-
Parganas and Malda districts) were partially commissioned and two at North 24-
Parganas and Murshidabad districts were in progress as of March 2005.
South 24-Parganas Surface Water Supply Scheme
3.2.16 The scheme covering eight blocks was sanctioned in May 1997 at Rs 232.84
crore which was revised to Rs 325.37 crore in October 2003. Work in two arsenic
affected blocks (Bhangar-I and Joynagore-I) was not taken up under instruction of the
Department, reasons of which were not available on record. The scheme was
therefore, commissioned in six blocks in March 2003 at Rs 290.26 crore (March 2005).
Thus, 3.29 lakh arsenic affected people in the two blocks were not able to access safe
water.
The Department stated that 14.46 lakh people were provided with arsenic free surface
water as of March 2005 through 2550 street stand posts (existing and new
construction) and 8969 house connections under the scheme but did not furnish
evidence to substantiate the claim. Scrutiny, however, revealed that safe water through
2550 street stand posts and 8969 household connections was supplied to 6.92 lakh
beneficiaries at the rate of 250 beneficiaries per stand post and six per household.
Baruipur Municipality was supplied with
2.58 million litres of water daily which could cover a population of 0.65 lakh at 40
litres per capita per day. The actual coverage of population as of March 2005 was,
thus, only 7.56 lakh as against 14.46 lakh stated by PHED.
Only 7.56 lakh people were covered of
1. 14.46 lakh targeted
2. 3.68 lakh people were covered against
3. 8.90 lakh targeted
Malda Surface Water Supply Scheme
3.2.17 Malda Surface Water Supply Scheme was sanctioned in May 1995 at Rs 88.48
crore to supply safe surface water to the five7
arsenic affected blocks of Malda district.
The target population coverage was 8.90 lakh (2001) and projected population
coverage was 13.32 lakh (2021). The Northern Zone of the scheme was completed and
commissioned in February 2000 at Rs 88.01 crore and Southern Zone was partially
commissioned in March 2003 at Rs 42.43 crore.
A total of 1672 street stand posts were constructed and 515 household connections
provided as of March 2005 against target of 3588 and 61500 respectively. Under-
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
148 | P a g e
performance in house connection was attributed by the Department to lack of
awareness among the people and their reluctance to take house connection on
payment. As regards shortfall in construction of street stand posts concerned EE
stated (June 2005) that to encourage house connection, more street stand posts were
not constructed as a matter of policy but did not furnish justification for the higher
provision in the estimate of the scheme.
PHED stated that 7.71 lakh people were provided with safe surface water as of March
2005. However, number of actual beneficiaries as confirmed by EE was 3.68 lakh.
Materials (pipes and specials) of Rs 3.29 crore procured for the scheme stood surplus
after taking into account, the actual requirement of materials for completion of the
balance work as well as for operation and maintenance of the scheme. Thus,
injudicious procurement of materials in excess of actual requirement led to blocking of
Rs 3.29 crore.
Incomplete surface water schemes
1. 3.2.18 North 24-Parganas Surface Water Supply Scheme was sanctioned in
March 2001 at Rs 124.82 crore for completion within three years to cover
2. 4.65 lakh people in four arsenic affected blocks. Frequent changes of command
area and water treatment plant sites due to inadequate initial survey and court cases
arising out of improper decision led to the work remaining incomplete even after lapse
of four years after incurring an expenditure of Rs 70.24 crore.
Mahyampur Surface Water based scheme in Murshidabad district was sanctioned at
Rs 6.54 crore in June 2003 for completion by June 2006 to cover
0.37 lakh arsenic affected people of Beldanga-I block. Within a period of two years
there was no physical progress of work at site due to lack of initiative except
procurement of materials valued Rs 1.37 crore as of May 2005.
Due to the schemes remaining incomplete, 5.02 lakh people were yet to get safe water.
Thus, despite an expenditure of Rs 71.61 crore the benefits could not be realised due to
non-completion of the schemes.
Non-adherence to the criteria of prioritisation fixed by PHED
3.2.19 Although the areas with arsenic content in ground water above 50µg/L were to
be given priority, test check revealed that, in Murshidabad, 122 habitations in 15
blocks with arsenic content above 50µg/L remained uncovered by any of the arsenic
alleviation measures, while 431 ATUs were installed on the tubewells with arsenic
contamination below 50µg/L. Similarly in Nadia, 199 habitations in 16 blocks with
arsenic contamination above 50µg/L in ground water remained uncovered whereas 30
hand pumps with arsenic content below 50µg/L were fitted with ATUs. Thus, priority
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
149 | P a g e
fixed by PHED was not adhered to by these two executing divisions.
Inadequacy in exploration of cost effective alternative techniques
3.2.20 In Malda and Murshidabad, it was found that Ring wells dug under Arsenic Sub
Mission did not contain arsenic. Thus, surface water was arsenic safe. But a number of
shallow depth hand tubewells8
installed as substitute of ring well were yielding water
contaminated beyond 50µg/L.
A comparative study by audit indicated that the pond based schemes scored over
tubewell based ones in terms of life span (20 years for pond based schemes as
compared to 5 years for tubewells), population coverage (3550 as compared to 250),
economy (Rs 41 for per capita annual capital expenditure including maintenance as
compared to Rs 76) as well as sustainability. Further, unlike ATU fitted tubewells, the
pond based ones needed no community participation. In spite of such advantages,
PHED did not explore the feasibility of executing pond water based schemes elsewhere
although 10th
Plan envisaged exploring sustainable alternative source of natural water
bodies for drinking purposes.
Quality control system and Monitoring
3.2.21 PHED stated that water quality monitoring was done through departmental
laboratories and under Joint Plan of Action (JPOA) with United Nations International
Children Education Fund (UNICEF). UNICEF entered into a strategic alliance with
the State Government in 1999 through JPOA to develop a community based water
quality surveillance system. Chief Engineer stated (June 2005) that water quality of
1.31 lakh departmental tubewells in the 79 affected blocks was tested upto March
2005, of which 0.32 lakh tubewells contained arsenic above the tolerable limit of
50µg/L. Audit scrutiny revealed that some arsenic safe tubewells at a point of time
became contaminated beyond 50µg/L at a later period due to prolonged withdrawal of
ground water without adequate recharging. Thus, actual number of tubewells with
arsenic content beyond 50µg/L even in the affected areas remained unknown.
Department did not set up any separate cell exclusively to enforce testing of water
quality as per norms, cover the newly affected areas and to monitor timely
implementation of arsenic mitigation measures. PHED stated that water quality
management issues were looked after by one Chief Engineer as an additional charge to
his normal work of PWSS and Surface Water Supply Schemes and that support staff
was inadequate. Besides, there was no prescribed periodicity and time frame for
submission of quality control reports by the field offices to the monitoring cell. At the
divisional level also, EE failed to ensure the quality assurance measures particularly in
case of ground water based arsenic alleviation schemes as recommended by the Task
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
150 | P a g e
Force.
Inadequate recharging of Ground Water Reserve
3.2.22 Ground water reserve is recharged from surface water bodies like lakes, ponds
and water sheds and surface water flows. The rate of recharging, however, depends
upon the perviousness of the bottom layers of the surface water bodies. Surface water
flows with sand and gravel beds are considered to be the best media for ground water
recharging.
CGWB observed that 120µg/L of arsenic concentration was reduced to 1µg/L within
90 days after artificial recharging on shallow aquifer. The studies conducted by CGWB
also revealed that there was decadal depletion (up to 7 m) of ground water reserves due
to huge extraction for drinking and irrigation purposes.
SWID observed that rate of recharge was inadequate compared to the rate of draft in
48 arsenic affected blocks of 69
districts. Thirty three of these arsenic affected blocks
were categorised as dark and 15 as grey category.
This indicated that ground water reserves were not sufficiently replenished by
recharging. The depletion of ground water could be restricted and arsenic content
minimised if a part of huge fresh water received from precipitation (rainfall) was
utilised for recharging the ground water reserve.
But rain water harvesting measures like construction of low height weirs across these
surface flows to retain rain water for recharging ground water reserve were yet to be
devised.
Incidence of arsenicosis not assessed
3.2.23 A detailed investigative study was not conducted in the eight affected districts of
the State to ascertain the prevalence of arsenicosis. According to some researchers10
the
number of patients suffering from arsenic related skin lesions alone was around three
lakh as of May 2002 and number of death due to arsenic related cancer was 1373
between 1984 and 1998. Health and Family Welfare Department (HFWD), however,
stated that 13028 cases of arsenic related disease were detected from 1992 to March
2005.
The report of HFWD was based on the reports received from School of Tropical
Medicine and Arsenic Clinic of SSKM Hospital in Kolkata. Primary Health Centres
(PHC) in the State being not properly equipped to detect arsenicosis, the suspected
patients were generally referred to the above School/Hospital. HFWD recorded 91
cases of arsenicosis from North 24 Parganas and South 24-Parganas (78), one from
Nadia and 12 from Malda from January to March 2005. No reports of arsenicosis from
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
151 | P a g e
Murshidabad and Bardhaman districts were recorded, although media reported
(March 2005 to August 2005) 76 deaths in Bardhaman, 7 deaths in Murshidabad, 3
deaths from Malda and Nadia each.
Thus, the incidence of arsenicosis in the affected districts was not correctly assessed
nor was adequate machinery set up for the purpose.
Feasibility of in-situ solution in the areas not yet explored
3.2.24 Except for the mitigation measures already undertaken in the arsenic affected
areas, no in-situ solution was identified for arsenic alleviation in the contaminated
aquifers as of August 2005. Core Committee of Arsenic Task Force, however, was
coordinating one pilot study on in-situ arsenic remediation with Enviro Associates
International (USA) under USAEP Programme at Mohanpur, North 24-Parganas
district. The report was not submitted as of August 2005.
Environmental impact
3.2.25 The adsorption media used in ATUs/ARPs were required to be disposed of
scientifically after its capacity utilization. The Expert Committee recommended to
keep the used up media of the ATUs in a particular place under cowdung. Arsenic rich
sludges received from back washing of ATUs or received from ARPs were to be stored
in a concrete chamber and could be used for brick manufacturing or in cement
concrete casting.
But used up medias and arsenic rich sludges were not removed from at least 1667
ATUs and disposed of as recommended. This might cause serious environmental
hazards.
PHED admitted that safe disposal of arsenic laden sludge had not yet been fully
established.
Conclusion
3.2.26 Even after a decade of implementation of arsenic alleviation programme with an
expenditure of Rs 721.24 crore, only 43 per cent of targeted population (1.65 crore)
affected by arsenic contamination in drinking water could be covered, indicating
limited impact of the scheme. As of June 2005, no comprehensive mapping of arsenic
affected areas was done.
As of March 2005, screening of 1.20 lakh out of 1.31 lakh tubewells in the eight
affected districts of the State revealed that 0.32 lakh tubewells were yielding water with
arsenic content above 50µg/L.
Short term measures consisting of sinking of new tubewells (8037) and ringwells for
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
152 | P a g e
bringing down the arsenic content in water to 50µg/L and below did not succeed as
the arsenic content was more than 50µg/L. Of these 475 tubewells were not sunk to
the recommended depth and no chemical quality of ground water/ litholayers was
tested depriving 1.36 lakh people.
Medium term measures also did not yield the desired result as out of 2252 arsenic
treatment units (ATUs) and 77 PWSS installed with Arsenic Removal Plants (ARPs),
135 ATUs and 32 PWSS were yielding water contaminated beyond 50µg/L while 989
ATUs remained non-functional due to use of defective adsorption media, non
regeneration and non replacement of adsorption media affecting 7.89 lakh people.
Of four surface water supply projects taken up under long term measures, work of two
were under progress and the remaining two (North 24 Parganas and Murshidabad)
were partially commissioned covering only 11.24 lakh people against 23.36 lakh
people targeted.
Deficient monitoring on the part of PHE Directorate and its functionaries led to non-
observance of water-quality assurance measures, as even the number of tubewells with
arsenic contamination in affected areas remained unknown. Arsenic rich sludges
generated in ATUs were also not disposed scientifically leaving substantial risks of
environmental hazards.
Recommendations
⎯ Comprehensive mapping should be done covering the entire State to identify the actual
extent of arsenic contamination.
⎯ Government should undertake creation of spot sources only after chemical testing of
sediments of the aquifer and create awareness among the people as regards the safety of
sanitary protected ring well water.
⎯ The non functional arsenic treatment units may be made functional and the surface water
supply projects may be completed expeditiously.
⎯ Government should organise periodical medical camps in the affected
areas with active involvement of the Primary Health Centres/Local
Bodies/NGOs to take health care of detected cases of arsenicosis.
⎯ Government should ensure proper disposal of arsenic rich sludges and used up adsorption
media to prevent environmental hazards.
⎯ Government should set up a separate cell exclusively for the management, execution and
monitoring of quality assurance measures.
The matter was referred to Government in September 2005. The reply was not
received (January 2006).
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
153 | P a g e
Performance Audit of Flood Control Works in Himachal Pradesh .
Highlights
Despite serious threat of flood damages in the State, flood protection works provided were
insignificant. Minimal targets of coverage were fixed year after year due to non-mobilisation
of adequate financial resources. Non-preparation of a long term master plan resulted in
execution of protection works in an unintegrated and piecemeal manner which failed to
provide adequate protection to the areas prone to flood damages. The damaged protection
works were not restored and the completed works were not being maintained. Execution of
works was not monitored effectively. Some significant audit findings are given below:
(Paragraph 3.2.7)
(Paragraph 3.2.8)
(Paragraph 3.2.9)
** The works were taken up for execution in an unplanned and
piece-meal manner due to non-preparation of long term master plan.
Expenditure of Rs 3.06 crore incurred on five works was thus
rendered largely unfruitful as the entire area intended to be covered
was not protected.
(Paragraph 3.2.10)
(Paragraph 3.2.11)
** Failure to provide recommended foundation placed at risk flood
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
154 | P a g e
3.2.21)
Introduction
3.2.1 Himachal Pradesh being predominantly a hilly state forms catchment of five
major rivers -Beas, Chenab, Ravi, Sutlej and Yamuna and their tributaries. These
rivers and the tributaries flow through steep slopes at high velocity causing erosion of
culturable land besides heavy loss of life and property during floods.
Out of 55.67 lakh hectares area of the State, an estimated 2.31 lakh hectares is prone
to floods. The Department of Irrigation and Public Health had identified and
assessed immediate need for providing flood protection works (FPWs) for habitation
and culturable areas situated on the banks of various rivers/khads at an approximate
cost of Rs 620 crore during the ninth Five Year Plan (1997-2002). FPWs such as
embankments, spurs, etc., were being undertaken since 1984-85 to channelise various
rivers and khads to contain the floods. A total area of 12,169 hectares had been
covered by FPWs executed upto March 2005.
Scope of audit
3.2.2 Records pertaining to selection and execution of FPWs for the period from
2000-2001 to 2004-2005 were test-checked in ten1
out of 40 divisions entrusted with
the execution of the works covering seven2
out of 12 districts of the State. The sample
check in terms of divisions was thus 25 per cent and 58 per cent in terms of districts
which covered 74.34 per cent of expenditure. This was supplemented by information
obtained from Engineer-in-Chief (E-in-C) and Superintending Engineer (SE), Rohru
Circle in March-April 2005.
Audit objectives
3.2.3 The audit objective was to critically examine the aspects of efficiency and
effectiveness in planning and execution of various flood control works as per time
schedule and also the adequacy of the flood works in protecting the land and
property from frequent floods.
In addition, audit also tried to ascertain whether:
land and property prone to flood damages had been identified and a master plan
prepared for their protection.
estimates for providing flood protection works had been prepared after detailed
survey and investigation.
adequate funds had been provided for timely completion of flood protection works.
targets for protecting the land and property from floods had been fixed in order of
importance and works of emergent nature taken up first.
the works had been executed in accordance with the laid down specifications.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
155 | P a g e
flood protection works already provided were being maintained properly and
adequate funds had been arranged for maintenance.
effective internal control mechanism had been evolved to ensure periodical
inspection and monitoring of completed and ongoing works.
Audit criteria
► Identification of land and property prone to frequent flood damages and
preparation of master plan for providing flood protection works.
► Fixation of targets for flood protection works (FPWs).
► Arrangement of funds for providing and protecting FPWs.
► Mechanism evolved to inspect and monitor ongoing and completed works.
1 Chamba, Flood Protection Division, Gagret, Indora, Kullu-I, Kullu-II,
Nalagarh, Nerwa, Paonta Sahib, Rohru and Thural.
2 Chamba, Kangra, Kullu, Shimla, Sirmour, Solan and Una.
Audit methodology
3.2.4 Records relating to identification of land and property prone to damages
because of frequent floods, formulation of estimates, provision of funds and those
relating to actual execution and maintenance of various FPWs were scrutinised in
audit. Various reports and returns submitted by field formations to the higher
authorities and mechanism devised for monitoring the progress and effectiveness of
works were also seen. Audit conclusions were drawn after scrutiny of records,
analysis of available data by issuing audit memos and questionnaire and obtaining
the response of departmental functionaries at various levels.
Audit Findings
Financial Outlay and Expenditure
3.2.5 Expenditure on FPWs during 2000-2005 was met partly out of State funds (42
per cent) and partly from loans obtained from National Bank of Agriculture and Rural
Development (NABARD) (58 per cent). In addition, grant of Rs 100 lakh was also
received from Government of India during March 2005. Funds demanded, budget
allotment and expenditure thereagainst on flood control works during 2000-2005 was
as under:
Table: 3.3
(Rupees in crore)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
156 | P a g e
Year Funds
demanded
Funds Expenditure Variations Excess
(+) allotted incurred Saving (-)
2000-
2001
7.57 8.60 8.82 (+) 0.22
2001-
2002
6.32 6.71 7.45 (+) 0.74
2002-
2003
9.27 13.66 13.53 (-) 0.13
2003-
2004
13.05 15.62 15.87 (+) 0.25
2004-
2005
15.24 16.48 14.27 (-) 2.21
Total: 51.45 61.07 59.94 (-) 1.13
The Engineer-in-Chief attributed (August 2005) savings of Rs 2.21 crore during 2004-
2005 to non-approval of new schemes under NABARD.
Details of schemes financed out of State funds and NABARD loans have been given
in Appendix-XXII.
3.2.6 Test-check of records in the selected divisions revealed the following points:
-In Paonta Sahib division, Rs 21.92 lakh was spent on execution of FPWs during
2004-2005 by diverting funds meant for water supply and irrigation schemes.
-In Flood Protection Division (FPD), Gagret, Rs 30.58 lakh was spent on execution
of three FPWs between April and June 2004 out of NABARD loan funds meant for
execution of Swan River Channelisation Project (SRCP).
-In Chamba division, Rs 13.61 lakh was spent on FPWs upto September 2003
against the allotment of Rs six lakh resulting in excess expenditure of Rs 7.61 lakh. It
was noticed that the initial allotment of Rs 19 lakh had been reduced by the Tribal
Development Department without assigning any reasons.
-In Kullu division No. I, payments of Rs 28.83 lakh for execution of FPWs allotted
between 1998-99 and 2002-2003 had not been made to various contractors as of
December 2004 due to paucity of funds.
The above instances of diversion of funds and postponement of inevitable liabilities
were indicative of lack of control over expenditure and defective financial
management.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
157 | P a g e
-The Executive Engineer (EE), FPD, Gagret remitted (October 2000-November
2004) Rs 1.81 crore to various departments3
for carrying out activities related to them
on the reclaimed land under SRCP. It was noticed that utilisation certificates for Rs
79.50 lakh4
had only been received as of February 2005.
Planning and physical performance
Improper fixation of targets
3.2.7 Detailed survey to identify the land prone to frequent floods had not been
carried out by the State Government. However, according to an estimate made
during the Seventh Five Year Plan period, about 2.31 lakh hectares of area was
prone to floods in the State which required protection. Of this,
0.12 lakh hectares (State funds: 9,913 hectares and NABARD: 2,356 hectares) of
land had only been covered by FPWs as of March 2005 (Prior to April 2000: 9,171
hectares; 2000-2005: 2,998 hectares). Master plan for providing FPWs in a time
bound manner had also not been prepared. The works were thus being taken up for
execution in a selective manner except Swan River Channelisation Project in Una
district. Annual targets for coverage of 500-600 hectares were fixed during 2000-
2005. E-in-C admitted (April 2005) the facts. Considering the large number of works
required to be Agriculture: Rs 6.80 lakh; Fisheries: Rs 12.93 lakh; Forest: Rs 109.52
lakh; Horticulture: Rs 3.23 lakh; Krishi Vishav Vidyalaya, Palampur: Rs 2.00 lakh and
Medical: Rs 46.20 lakh. Agriculture: Rs 3.30 lakh; Forest: Rs 74.51 lakh and
Horticulture: Rs 1.69 lakh. executed to protect the remaining 2.19 lakh hectares area
the targets fixed were not adequate.
The E-in-C attributed low fixation of targets to paucity of funds. Thus, the
department failed to evolve suitable strategy and mobilise adequate financial
resources for executing the protection works in the affected areas.
Protection works
3.2.8 Survey, investigation and evolution of model for channelisation of Bata river
(Sirmour district) was entrusted (May 1988) to Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Research
Institute (Institute). According to the model evolved by the Institute in April 1993,
Bata river was to be channelised in a length of 12,700 metres (RD 8,300 to 21,000) to
save land and property from frequent flood damages. The department had estimated
annual damages of about Rs 5.23 crore being caused by floods in the river.
Audit scrutiny of records of Paonta Sahib Division revealed (January 2005) that no
action on the Institute‟s recommendations had been taken by the department till June
1999. An estimate of Rs 30.11 crore sent (August 2001) by the division to the
Government had not been approved as of March 2005.
In the meantime, an estimate for Rs 89.29 lakh was approved (August 2001) for
providing protection works in 1,200 metres long prioritised reaches for protecting 168
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
158 | P a g e
hectares of land in five villages5
. It was noticed in audit that embankments provided
on the left bank of the river between RDs 8,450 to 8,600 and 14,450 to 14,500
diverted the flood water towards right bank of the river thereby causing a threat to 96
hectares of land of Sainwala and Kundion villages. This necessitated construction of
additional 790 metres long embankment to protect the land of the aforesaid villages.
Thus, against the approved embankment of 1,200 metres, 1,990 metres long
embankment was actually provided as of March 2004 at a cost of Rs 1.42 crore. This
resulted in additional expenditure of Rs 52.42 lakh which had not been regularised as
of January 2005.
Failure of the department to visualise the impact of providing protection works in
isolated reaches resulted in additional expenditure of Rs 52.42 lakh. The remaining
10,710 metres long embankment still remained unprotected posing constant threat to
the land and property.
The EE admitted (January 2005) the facts and attributed non-execution of balance
protection works to paucity of funds. The plea is not tenable because adequate
attention for providing protection works to the land and property had not been paid
despite recurring losses sustained every year.
3.2.9 The department had identified 52 critical sites in Kullu district which sustained
extensive damages because of floods in Beas river during September 1995. A
proposal for construction of 44 kilometres long
5 Kheri Gunglon, Kiratpur Bhagwanpur, Kotri bias, Mazra and Puruwala.
embankment (estimated cost: Rs 53.47 crore) to protect these sites and 1,020 hectares
of land sent to Government in June 1998 was still to be approved as of December
2004.
In view of unprecedented floods caused by Ravi river during the rainy season in
1995, the State Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) decided (November 2000) to
consult Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune for designing
FPWs to protect Chamba town. Based on this Report (received in July 2002) an
estimate for providing FPWs at a cost of Rs 22.10 crore was sponsored (December
2002) by Chamba division. The Government had not approved the proposal as of
February 2005.
Unplanned execution of works
3.2.10 In the Ninth Five Year Plan period (1997-2002) need for providing immediate
FPWs was felt in eight6
river/khad basins at an estimated cost of Rs 620 crore.
Targets for protection/reclamation of 2,160 hectares of land were fixed under Swan
River Channelisation Project out of total targets of 2,500 hectares during the Tenth
Plan period (2002-2007) and only 340 hectares of land was proposed to be protected
in the remaining river basins during the plan. It was noticed in audit that no
integrated approach was adopted to carry out these works in any of the river basins
except Swan river channelisation. The works were executed in isolated reaches in
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
159 | P a g e
other basins. A few instances of unplanned execution of works are discussed below:
-Release of surplus water of Beas river by Bhakra Beas Management Board from
Pandoh dam during rainy season was causing extensive damages to the land and
property of five villages7
of Kangra district located on the right bank of the river
between Jaisinghpur and Alampur. A proposal for construction of 840 metres long
embankment and 16 spurs was approved (June 1991) by STAC for providing flood
protection works to the land and property of these villages. Model study for
providing protection works was also entrusted (May 1998) to Central Water and
Power Research Station, Pune (CWPRS). On the basis of final report of CWPRS,
received in June 1999, the STAC approved (June 2000) revised proposal for
construction of 795 metres long embankment and 14 spurs. Against this, 360 metres
long embankment and five spurs had only been constructed between January 1998
and March 2004 at an expenditure of Rs 1.37 crore. Thus, due to non-construction
of the remaining 435 metres long embankment and nine spurs, as envisaged in the
revised proposal, intended protection to the land and property of the aforesaid
villages remained to be provided.
-To protect 649 hectares of land of Sudanwala village along Sudanwala khad
(Sirmour district), construction of 19 spurs was approved (March 1985) for Rs 10.34
lakh. The work, stipulated to be completed in one year was taken up for execution
during 1984-85 and 13 spurs were constructed upto the year Balh valley, (Mandi
district), Chakki river Project (Kangra district), Integrated Giri and Bata rivers
Project (Sirmour district), Pabbar khad, (Shimla district), Seer khad Project
(Hamirpur district), Sirsa Nadi Project (Solan district), Suketi khad Project (Mandi
district) and Swan khad Project (Una district). Chambi, Dalu, Haler, Khalta and
Thampal. 1992-1993 at a cost of Rs 12.06 lakh providing protection to an area of 551
hectares. The balance work of six spurs to protect the remaining area of 98 hectares
was not executed. Meanwhile, floods caused heavy damages to land and property
and balance work was taken up (January 2003) to cover 60 hectares area of the
village by construction of four spurs at an expenditure of Rs 30.58 lakh as of
December 2004. The remaining 38 hectares of land still remained unprotected.
-Pabbar river and its tributaries flowing through the area of Rohru tehsil of Shimla
district caused extensive flood damages to land and property lying along its banks
which necessitated provision of urgent protection works. Test-check of records of
Rohru division revealed (March 2005) that five works (estimated cost: Rs 94.92 lakh)
covering 45 hectares of land and property were taken up for execution between
March 2000 and July 2004 and the same were still in progress. 29 hectares of land
had been protected as of February 2005 after incurring expenditure of Rs 47.62 lakh.
The EE, Rohru division attributed (March 2005) slow pace of work to non-
availability of funds.
-To protect 19.75 hectares land of villages Samolipul (6.70 hectares) and Sandhour
(13.05 hectares) in Shimla district, an estimate of Rs 48.13 lakh was approved (July
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
160 | P a g e
1997) with stipulated period of completion as three months. The work was taken up
for execution by Rohru division in March 2000. Expenditure of Rs 31.36 lakh was
incurred on part execution of the work covering 6.70 hectares area near Samolipul.
The remaining area of
13.05 hectares of village Sandhour was not covered for want of funds.
-To protect 50 hectares of land of Manpura and Kishanpura villages (Nalagarh tehsil)
from floods in Manpura khad and Sirsa river, Nalagarh division provided an
embankment of 550 metres between 1992 and January 2005 at a cost of Rs 47.16
lakh by covering 40 hectares of land against the proposed embankment of 850
metres. The remaining land of 10 hectares remained unprotected even after 13 years
from the date of start of work. The Executive Engineer attributed (March 2005) non-
completion of work to receipt of insufficient funds.
These instances were indicative of unplanned execution of FPWs as the land and
property of the people could not be fully protected despite substantial investment.
Avoidable/wasteful and infructuous expenditure on works
Protection work to Pekhubela farm
3.2.11 Agriculture Farm at Pekhubela (Una district) is located on the left bank of
Swan river. Damages were caused to the farm during the floods of 1995. To protect
the land and other property of the farm, 500 metres long embankment was provided
during 1995-1997 at a cost of Rs 25.54 lakh.
Test-check of records of FPD, Gagret revealed (June 2003 and February 2005) that
Project Report of Swan River Flood Management and Integrated Land Development
Project, Phase-I was prepared by the department in June 1997 and was approved
(April 2000) by the State Government for Rs 106.03 crore. The project intended to
provide permanent FPWs on both sides along the
16.67 kilometres length of the river from Jhalera bridge to Santokhgarh bridge. The
agriculture farm fell within the stretch of left side alignment of the proposed
embankment between kilometres nine and ten reckoned from Jhalera bridge point.
While the project proposal was under consideration of Government of India, an
estimate for providing permanent protection work to the farm was approved (August
1997) by the State Government for Rs 92.01 lakh. Accordingly, construction of two
wire-crated stone spurs of 75 metre each, was taken up by the division during April
1999 and completed in April 2002 at a cost of Rs 91.03 lakh. Both these spurs were
provided at a distance of about one kilometre from the approved alignment of the
embankment to be constructed along the left bank of the river. Hence these spurs
were not to form part of the protection works of the project which were taken up for
execution in April 2000. The embankment had already been constructed on both
banks of the river in a continuous stretch of seven kilometres reckoned from Jhalera
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
161 | P a g e
bridge and the work in subsequent reaches between kilometres eight and ten was in
progress as of January 2005. Construction of separate protection work for the farm
during 2000-2002 thus proved unnecessary.
The EE stated (February 2005) that the spurs were constructed as an urgent
protection work to the farm pending approval of the project. The contention is not
tenable as urgent protection works had already been provided during 1995-1997 and
no flood damages had occurred to the farm thereafter. The river was also flowing at
a safe distance of over one kilometre from the farm.
Failure of the Government to take into consideration the provisions of the aforesaid
project and to visualise that the farm would be fully protected after implementation
of the project resulted in the unwarranted approval of the estimate of Rs 92.01 lakh
in August 1997. The expenditure of Rs 91.03 lakh incurred on protection works to
the farm had thus gone waste.
Infructuous expenditure on excavation work
3.2.12 To provide protection to half hectare of land and other property of village
Manikaran (Kullu district) lying along the banks of river Parvati, FPWs were
approved (November 1999) for Rs 40.48 lakh. The estimate, inter alia, provided
for construction of 4.5 metres high concrete wall between RDs 120 and 220 on the
right bank of the river. It was noticed in audit that excavation upto a depth of 3.5
metres below bed level was done upto March 2002 in a length of 100 metres for
preparing the foundation bed between RDs 145 to 245 at a cost of Rs 6.39 lakh.
Loose strata consisting of a mix of volcanic ash and sand was encountered during
the course of excavation, which was not considered suitable for laying the
foundation of the proposed protection works. The excavated portion also got
filled up with loose soil. Accordingly, advice of CWPRS, Pune was obtained who
suggested (May 2002) to fill up the excavated portion with big boulders and
provide stone crate work thereon. It would thus appear that thorough
investigation of the site had not been conducted before taking up the work in hand.
Expenditure of Rs 6.39 lakh incurred on excavation was, thus, rendered infructuous.
Held up and abandoned works
3.2.13 Expenditure of Rs 16.78 lakh incurred on the following held up/abandoned
works was rendered infructuous:
-In Kullu division No. II, two protection works8
intended to protect 18 hectares of
land from floods in Beas river and its tributaries were approved (November 1999 and
February 2001) for Rs 1.18 crore and were stipulated to be completed within three
years. The works were taken up for execution in March and May 2001 and
expenditure of Rs 11.30 lakh was incurred on them by diverting the funds from other
works as meagre allotment of Rs 1.53 lakh was received for the works during 2001-
2004. Further execution of these works was held up since August 2001 and March
2004 after execution to the extent of five and 25 per cent.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
162 | P a g e
The EE stated (January 2005) that the works were taken up for execution as they
were of urgent nature but their further execution was held up due to non-allotment of
funds.
-Similarly, for providing FPWs to Lower Valley, Gagret (Una district) to protect and
reclaim 260 hectares of land and other property, estimate of Rs 52.63 lakh was
approved in June 1995. The work was taken up for execution in April 1995 by FPD,
Gagret and expenditure of Rs 5.48 lakh was incurred upto January 1999 on part
execution of the work despite allotment of sizeable budget of Rs 55.30 lakh during
1995-1999.
The EE stated (February 2005) that after part execution, the land owners objected to
further execution of the work and no action to acquire the land in question was taken
for want of provision in the approved estimate. Thus, taking up the work for
execution without ensuring availability of the land had resulted in abandoning the
same resulting in wasteful expenditure of Rs 5.48 lakh.
Execution of works below specification
3.2.14 The approved estimate of Swan River Flood Management and Integrated
Land Development Project (Phase-I) provided for channelisation of the river by
construction of earthen embankment along both the banks in a length of 16.67
kilometres. As the soil over which the embankment and the wire-crated stone apron
were to be constructed was sandy, the same was required to be excavated upto a
depth of 0.25 metre and filled with compacted earth so as to provide a firm
foundation to the protection works. CWPRS, Pune had also recommended (March
2001) founding of the structures below ground level on firm soil.
Test-check of the records of FPD, Gagret revealed (February 2005) that the
excavation work to the extent of 13,257 cum only was executed against the stipulated
quantity of 38,576 cum for the protection works constructed between June 2002 and
May 2004 in a length of 4,050 metres in six reaches of the alignment of embankment
between RDs 14,160 and 18,610. The shortfall in the excavation work in these
reaches ranged between 42 and 98 per cent. The recommended firm foundation was
thus not provided in these cases. The FPWs costing Rs 4.39 crore constructed at the
sites were, thus, below specification.
The EE admitted the facts (February 2005).
According to the decision of STAC, GI wire crate, 5mm thick, corresponding to
grade SWG-6 of 15cm x 15 cm mesh was to be used in all wire crate works including
embankments and apron. Further, welded wire mesh was not to be used for FP
works as per instructions issued by E-in-C in January 2005.
Test-check of records of Indora, Rohru and FP Gagret divisions revealed that below
specification work costing Rs 65.06 lakh was executed by using materials other than
that approved as detailed in Appendix-XXIII.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
163 | P a g e
-Estimate for providing FPWs to 19.03 hectares of land and 70 buildings of village
Bahang (Kullu district) was approved (September 1996) for Rs 1.35 crore. The
estimate provided for construction of 1,485 metres long wire crated, stone-filled
embankment in three layers alongwith apron of equal length. Test-check of records
of Kullu division No. I revealed (December 2004) that the work was reported as
having been completed in 1998-1999 by the division at an expenditure of Rs 92.17
lakh. However, the work was not executed according to the provisions of the
estimate in as much as the bottom layer (first) of the embankment was constructed
for enhanced length of 1,619.25 metres whereas the second and third layers were laid
over lesser length of 1,425 and 391.30 metres only. Besides, the apron was provided
in a length of 1453.05 metres, which fell short of the length of the first layer of the
embankment.
The EE attributed (December 2004) the deviation to site conditions and paucity of
funds. The plea is not tenable because provision in the estimate was based on site
requirement as recommended by the expert committee. Besides, STAC in their
meeting held in June 2000 had decided to provide apron in the entire length of
embankment. The protection work was thus below specifications.
Failure to execute the work according to the provisions of the approved estimate and
decision of STAC could thus not ensure protection of land and buildings.
Cost overrun
3.2.15 Delay in completion of works has an inevitable impact on costs. In eight
divisions, 15 protection works (estimated cost: Rs 5.94 crore) detailed in
Appendix-XXIV, were taken up for execution between December 1987 and June
2001. The works, stipulated to be completed within periods ranging from six to 36
months, were completed between March 1999 and March 2004 at a cost of Rs 9.10
crore resulting in time overrun ranging between six and 174 months and cost overrun
of Rs 3.16 crore. The cost overrun in individual cases ranged between 15 and 445 per
cent.
The concerned EEs attributed the delay in execution of works to non-allotment of
adequate funds and increase in cost of works with the passage of time.
Irregular expenditure
Expenditure incurred in anticipation of sanctions
3.2.16 In respect of 24 works (completed: 20, ongoing: four) of nine divisions9
estimated to cost Rs 6.82 crore, the expenditure incurred had exceeded the provisions
of administrative approval and expenditure sanction by Rs 4.41 crore which was
awaiting regularisation. The excess in respect of the individual works ranged
between 15 and 445 per cent.
In eight divisions10
, 33 works (completed: 25, in-progress: eight) administratively
approved for Rs 11.64 crore were taken up for execution during 1987-2003 in
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
164 | P a g e
anticipation of the required technical sanctions which were yet to be obtained.
Expenditure of Rs 12.46 crore incurred on these works was, thus, irregular.
Unauthorised splitting of a work
3.2.17 The CE (CZ), Mandi accorded technical sanction to the detailed estimate of
the work providing flood protection to village Manikaran (Kullu district) in
November 2000 for Rs 36.69 lakh. The work involved providing of plum concrete
walls along both banks of Parvati river between RDs 45 and 445. Test-check of
records of Kullu division No. II revealed (January 2005) that the EE had awarded
(January-February 2002) major portion of the work (estimated cost: Rs 32.56 lakh)
by splitting in five parts, to four contractors at a cost of Rs 1.45 crore at premia
between 270 and 369 per cent. Benefit of competitive rates was thus not derived by
floating single tender. Approval of the competent authority to split up the work had
also not been obtained.
The EE stated (January 2005) that the splitting was done to expedite the execution of
the work of an urgent nature. The reply is not factual as there was no urgency as the
works were still (January 2005) in progress.
Undue financial aid to contractors
3.2.18 The EE, FPD, Gagret awarded (2002-2004) 11 sub works of Swan River
Flood Management and Integrated Land Development
Project (Una district) for Rs 7.52 crore. The contractors neither completed the
respective works within the stipulated period of six months in any of the 11 cases nor
did they apply for extension of time. Action under the agreements to levy
compensation had also not been taken. This resulted in undue financial aid of Rs
75.19 lakh to the contractors.
While admitting the facts, the EE justified (March 2005) non-levy of compensation
to slow pace of execution of the works during rainy season. The contention is not
tenable as this fact should have been taken into account while stipulating the
completion period for the works.
-In Indora, Nalagarh and Rohru divisions, it was noticed that against 20,097 tonnes
of stone utilised by the contractors during 1999-2003 for execution of protection
works entrusted to them, certificates ('M' forms) for payment of royalty for 1,227
tonnes only were furnished. For the remaining quantity of 18,870 tonnes of stone,
neither the requisite certificates were obtained from the contractors nor royalty of Rs
1.89 lakh recovered from them. This resulted in giving of undue financial aid to the
contractors and loss of revenue to the Government. The facts were admitted by the
concerned EEs.
Non-restoration of damaged protection works
3.2.19 In five divisions11
, structures like embankments, aprons, etc., of 23 FPWs
constructed at a cost of Rs 9.06 crore to protect 2,270 hectares of land and other
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
165 | P a g e
properties had sustained flood damages estimated at Rs 2.09 crore between July 2001
and August 2004. Circumstances under which the same could not withstand the
impact of floods had not been investigated. The damages had also not been restored
except in one case12
where temporary restoration was done in March 2003 at a cost of
Rs 6.50 lakh.
The EEs contended that the damages were not required to be investigated as
occurrence of flood damages was a natural phenomenon. Non-restoration of
damages was attributed to non-availability of funds. The replies are not tenable as
exact reasons for the damages could not be known without an independent
investigation with a view to devising appropriate remedial measures.
Inadequate maintenance of completed works
3.2.20 Maintenance of assets is an important activity. Failure to maintain the assets
is tantamount to an act of disinvestment for it implies the sacrifice of past
investment.
As per the approved estimates of FPWs, provision for maintenance of the works was
required to be made at the rate of four per cent of the cost of works. In December
2003, Government approved the norm of engagement of one beldar for each four
kilometres length of embankment and spurs constructed
11 Flood Protection Division, Gagret, Indora, Kullu-I, Kullu-II and Thural.
12 Flood Protection Work, Manikaran damaged in August 2002 to the extent of
Rs 15.50 lakh (Kullu-II division).
for FPWs with a view to safeguarding the existing structures, protection of plantation
and reporting regular damages to the structures.
Test-check of the records of eight divisions13
, however, revealed (December 2004 to
March 2005) that in respect of 38 works completed between 1995 and 2004 at a total
cost of Rs 11.75 crore, funds amounting to Rs 88.73 lakh were required for their
maintenance during 2000-2005. However, budget of Rs 19.70 lakh was demanded
for operation and maintenance (O&M) of the works against which funds of Rs 5.83
lakh were actually received. Except Nerwa and Thural Divisions, the remaining six
divisions had not even demanded funds for 2002-2005. Kullu division No. I had
utilised funds of Rs.2.50 lakh allotted during 2000-2001 on this account on Lift
Irrigation Scheme, Neoli Therman. Further, none of the divisions test-checked had
engaged labour for properly safeguarding and maintaining the structures despite
norms fixed by the Government.
The EEs attributed non-maintenance of the completed protection works to non-
allotment of adequate funds and non-damage of works due to non-occurrence of
heavy floods in the concerned rivers/khads. The replies are not tenable as funds for
O&M of the works were not demanded by the concerned divisions and labour was
not deployed as per norms for day-to-day maintenance and safeguard of the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
166 | P a g e
structures.
For 30 protection works constructed under FPD, Gagret upto March 2004 at a cost
of Rs 6.41 crore, funds amounting to Rs 62.96 lakh (at the rate of four per cent of the
capital cost per annum) were required for O&M for the period 2000-2005. Funds
amounting to Rs 1.14 crore were actually allotted for O&M of the schemes against
which expenditure of Rs 1.73 crore was incurred. It was noticed in audit that Rs 1.47
crore were spent on minor works of original nature, cost of which was not to be met
out of O&M funds. Thus Rs 25.90 lakh were actually spent on O&M. It would thus
appear that the works already executed are not being maintained properly.
The EE attributed (February-March 2005) the diversion of O&M funds to urgency of
the works to which diverted. The reply is not tenable as the funds were meant for
utilisation on O&M of works only which were, thus, neglected.
Internal controls
Inspection of works
3.2.21 To ensure quality and timely completion of the ongoing works, E-in-C issued
instructions in June 1994 and April 2000 for inspection of major and targeted
schemes at least once a month by the EE concerned and to record inspection notes
which were required to be sent, inter alia, to the E-in-C and the Secretary of the
department. No mechanism for inspection of completed works had, however, been
evolved.
Chamba, Indora, Kullu-I, Kullu-II, Nalagarh, Nerwa, Paonta Sahib and Thural.
Perusal of the inspection notes in the divisions test-checked revealed that in respect of
195 ongoing FPWs, 2,329 inspections of EEs were required to be conducted during
2000-2005 against which only 22 inspections14
were conducted. The shortfall in
inspections ranged between 90 and 100 per cent in individual cases. Six divisions15
did not produce any notes of inspection of the works conducted by the EEs during
the period.
The EEs stated (December 2004-March 2005) that the works were inspected from
time to time but inspection notes were not recorded due to rush of work and oral
instructions were issued at the sites. EE, Kullu division No. I contended that the
works were being executed according to prescribed specifications and procedure and
there was no need of issuing inspection notes. This was, however, contrary to the
instructions of the E-in-C.
Inventory of completed works not maintained
3.2.22 For exercising effective control over the assets created, CE (CZ) had required
(November 2003) maintenance of inventory of completed schemes. It was, however,
noticed that inventory of assets created by completion of protection works had not
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
167 | P a g e
been maintained in any of the divisions test-checked. Physical verification of the
assets had also not been conducted. Thus, effective control over the completed works
was not exercised.
Monitoring and Evaluation
3.2.23 The Planning and Monitoring wing-II of the department had obtained
quarterly progress reports from the implementing units for the FPWs under
execution against NABARD loan funds which were also reviewed quarterly by a
high powered committee of the Government, headed by the Chief Secretary. The
works taken up for execution against the State funds had, however, not been
monitored resulting in unplanned execution of works as pointed out in various
paragraphs.
The E-in-C stated (April 2005) that since most of the protection works were executed
against NABARD funding, monitoring of these works only was done. The
contention is not tenable as several schemes were under execution against State
funds which should also have been monitored to expedite their completion as per the
prescribed time schedule.
Although the programme was under implementation since inception of the
department in 1984-85, evaluation studies, with a view to identifying the hindrances
in the smooth implementation of the programme and to devise suitable remedial
measures to remove the same, had not been done.
Conclusion
3.2.24 The coverage of 0.12 lakh hectares achieved upto March 2005 against the
overall target of 2.31 lakh hectares was minimal. Successive inadequate annual
budget allocations made and resultant fixation of low annual targets of coverage
were not likely to lead to achievement of the overall objective in the foreseeable
future. Non-preparation of a long term master plan and unplanned execution of
protection works had resulted in significant time and cost overruns on the one hand
and non-achievement of intended coverage by the individual schemes on the other.
Besides, the departmental failure to restore the damaged protection structures and to
maintain the completed works had made the capability of the same to protect the
intended areas from flood havoc doubtful. The contractors were extended undue
financial benefit. Inadequate inspection of works, non-maintenance of inventory of
structures constructed, no physical verification of the assets and improper monitoring
of the ongoing works were indicative of lack of effective internal control of the
department. Implementation of the programme was thus slow and ineffective.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
168 | P a g e
Recommendations
** A long term master plan indicating inter se priority of the proposed protection
works needs to be prepared and the works executed in an integrated and economical
manner.
** In view of the minimal area protected so far, adequate financial resources need to
be mobilised to provide effective flood protection to flood prone areas in a time bound
manner.
** Damages to the flood protection structures need to be investigated to ascertain the
reasons for the damages with a view to devising necessary remedial measures. The
damaged works also need to be restored promptly.
** Completed works need to be maintained properly so as to withstand flood havoc.
** System should be evolved to ensure adequate inspection of completed protection
works, to maintain inventory of the assets created and to ensure regular physical
verification of the same.
These points were referred to the Government in June 2005; their reply had not been
received (July 2005).
Performance Audit of Water Supply and Sanitation Programmes in Goa .
Highlights
The water supply demand in the State is met through seven regional water supply schemes
and sanitation in urban areas is provided through urban sewerage schemes being
implemented by the Public Health Engineering Wing of the State Public Works
Department (PWD). A review of the Regional Water Supply and Urban Sanitation
programmes revealed that against the present demand (March 2005) of 568 MLD (Million
Litres per Day) of water for the existing population, the Department could supply only 394
MLD leaving a gap of 174 MLD which adversely affected the public needs of sufficient
water supply.
It was seen that the augmentation of two regional water supply schemes out of the three
schemes taken up were not completed resulting in non-achievement of the intended benefit
of augmentation. Though 85 per cent areas of Panaji, 40 per cent of Margao and 80 per
cent of Vasco municipalities were provided with sewerage network, the percentage of
households connected to the sewerage network in Panaji capital area was 95 per cent,
whereas in the towns of Margao and Vasco in South Goa, the Department could provide
only seven and 19 per cent household connections respectively due to poor public response.
The salient highlights of the Review are:
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
169 | P a g e
(Paragraph 3.1.7)
(Paragraph 3.1.11)
The work of Sewerage Treatment Plant in Panaji was awarded to a
single bidder for Rs.13.33 crore without competitive offers as the
Department had not finalised the technology while calling for the
financial bids.
(Paragraph 3.1.14) (Paragraph 3.1.17)
The revenue from water charges was not only stagnant over the
period 2002-05 but also showed a downward trend despite the
augmentation schemes. The arrears of revenue, which stood at Rs.22.82
crore as of March 2005 constituted 43 per cent of the revenue from water
charges.
(Paragraph 3.1.21)
3.1.1 Introduction
The water supply demand in the State is met through seven regional water supply
schemes1
with a total installed capacity of 394 MLD (million litres per day) against
the State‟s existing demand of 568 MLD. In order to improve the service level of
water supply in the villages and towns to meet the increasing industrial, commercial
as well as domestic demand, and in view of the shortage of water supply against
present demand and the envisaged increase in future demand, the Government took
up augmentation of three supply schemes. Similarly the urban sanitation schemes
were also taken up in three towns2
with a view to improving public hygiene and for
creating sanitary awareness among the public. The schemes were implemented by
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
170 | P a g e
the Public Health Engineering Divisions of the Public Works Department under the
supervision of three circle officers and one Chief Engineer under the overall guidance
and supervision of the Principal Chief Engineer and the Secretary (PWD).
3.1.2 Scope of Audit
The review covered schemes taken up for augmentation of Regional Water Supply
and urban sewerage and the expenditure incurred there under for a period of three
years from 2002-03 to 2004-05. The review was conducted during July to September,
2005 by test checking the records of Chief Engineer I, two Circle Offices3
out of
three, Superintending Engineer (Monitoring & Evaluation) and six4
divisions out of
seven divisions.
3.1.3 Audit objectives
The review was conducted to assess whether;
• The programmes for augmentation of Regional Water Supply Schemes and
the Urban Sewerage Schemes were properly planned;
• The schemes were implemented as planned, with due consideration to
economy and efficiency;
• The revenue of water and sewage charges were demanded correctly and
collected.
3.1.4 Audit Criteria
The following audit criteria for achievement of audit objectives were adopted.
• Project feasibility reports;
• Work estimates and tendering procedures;
• Economy in execution of schemes;
• Coordination amongst agencies for inter-related works; and
• Collection and accounting of water charges and sewage charges.
3.1.5 Audit methodology
An entry conference was held with the Secretary (PWD), Principal Chief Engineer,
PWD alongwith other officers of the Department. Records relating to planning and
execution of the schemes covered under review maintained in the offices of Chief
Engineer, Superintending Engineers and Executive Engineers were examined and
data collected and analyzed with reference to Manuals, Codes, Act and Rules and
Government orders and instructions. Discussions/interactions were also held with
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
171 | P a g e
the executing authorities during the course of the review and their views have been
taken into account while finalizing the review.
3.1.6 Financial Management
The details of the budget provisions and expenditure incurred on Regional Water
Supply and Urban Sewerage and Sanitation programmes for the period 2002-05 are
given below:
(Rupees in crore)
(Source: Appropriation Accounts of Govt. of Goa)
The savings in Sanitation Programme were mainly due to non-taking up of major
works, changes in scope of works on technical as well as administrative grounds and
envisaged share capital investment aggregating to rupees seven crore in Sewage and
Infrastructural Development Corporation not being made by the State Government.
In addition to the expenditure indicated above, the Department incurred an
expenditure of Rs.11.145
crore (March 2005) through Goa Coastal Zone
Management Authority (GCZMA), Department of Science Technology and
Environment (STE) for the Scheme of “Environmental upgradation of Panaji City,
Phase-I”, a joint project of the Government of India (GOI) and the State
Government, for which the State Government contributed Rs.5.81 crore and GOI
contributed Rs.7.56 crore upto April 2005. The scheme consisted of sewage
treatment plant of 12.50 MLD capacity, renovation and remodeling of existing 5.7
MLD STP at Tonca, laying of under-water effluent disposal pipeline in Mandovi
estuary, extension of sewerlines to Tambdi Matti, Patto Colony and other left out
areas of Panaji city.
3.1.7 Planning
The existing total capacity of the Water Supply schemes in the State in the year 2001
was 314 MLD (Million Litres per Day) as against the present demand of 568 MLD,
and a futuristic demand of 775 MLD for the year 2030. The Department planned for
augmentation of three schemes totalling 80 MLD only during the five year plan
period, and augmentation of four schemes by a total of 275 MLD is under various
stages of planning.
The fact that augmentation of 80 MLD only was taken up as against a shortfall of
254 MLD between the existing capacity (314 MLD) and present demand (568 MLD)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
172 | P a g e
shows that the planning itself has not been consistent with the demand in the State.
The planned augmentation of 275 MLD was to be achieved through seven6
water
supply schemes and out of these only in three schemes the work has
As of March 2005, thus the Department could achieve 394 MLD capacity by these
three commissioned augmentation schemes, still leaving a gap of 174 MLD of water
supply on the present demand. Even in these three schemes where the work have
been commenced, despite incurring an expenditure of Rs.138.10 crore the actual
augmentation that has been carried out as of September 2005 is only 50 MLD. Thus,
against existing demand of 568 MLD, the capacity that had been created as of
September 2005 is 364 MLD resulting in a gap of 204 MLD with reference to
demand. Further, the balance four7
augmentation schemes involving plant
augmentation of 275 MLD, no work has commenced and even Detailed Project
Reports (DPRs) for these
Delay in implementation of Centrally sponsored Accelerated Urban Water Supply
programme
schemes have not been finalized. Consequently, the chances of completion of these
schemes by the end of the X five year plan appears remote and therefore the planned
augmentation of 275 MLD would be difficult.
Further, under the Accelerated Urban Water Supply Programme an additional
provision for supply of 2.88 MLD was being planned. The progress of the work
under the AUWSP was also tardy as discussed below.
3.1.8 Accelerated Urban Water Supply Programme
The Centrally sponsored scheme "Accelerated Urban Water Supply Programme
(AUWSP)” was launched (1993-94) through the Ministry of Urban Development
(MOUD). The scheme envisaged providing safe and adequate water supply in
smaller towns with population of less than 2000, as per 1991 census. The programme
was to be funded by the Central Government and the State Government on 50:50
basis.
Selection of towns/Urban Agglomeration for implementation of the scheme was to
be done by the State Level Selection Committee constituted for the purpose by the
State Government as per guidelines of the programme, after considering the DPRs
proposed in respect of individual towns.
During 2001-05, out of four towns8
planned for augmentation of water supply,
schemes in Ponda and Pernem were taken up, and works were commenced only in
Pernem. The DPRs submitted for Cuncolim and Benaulim towns were returned
(June 2002) by the GOI for modification as per AUWSP guidelines which were not
resubmitted by the Department as of August 2005. The details of schemes taken up
were as below:
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
173 | P a g e
(Rupees in lakh)
Thus, schemes sanctioned in 2001-02 and required to be completed by 200203 were
yet to be taken up/completed (September 2005). The delay in taking up the scheme
by the Department resulted in delay in extending the intended benefits of improved
water supply to the population of two towns of Ponda and Pernem, while as the
DPRs for Cuncolium and Benaulim towns not being approved, these two works have
not been sanctioned by GOI. Thus, the envisaged benefit on additional supply of
2.88 MLD through AUWSP could not be availed as works on these schemes have
been delayed.
3.1.9 Augmentation of Sanquelim Water Supply scheme -Extra expenditure to be
recovered from contractor
The work of laying of pipeline from Sanquelim Water Treatment Plant to Surla and
Usap Dumacem, a component work of Augmentation of Sanquelim Water Supply
scheme, was awarded in June 2001 to a contractor for Rs.1.42 crore to be completed
in January 2002. The agreement was terminated in May 2003 at the risk and cost of
the contractor due to undue delay on the part of the contractor, and the balance work
estimated to cost Rs.1.19 crore was awarded to another contractor in February 2004
for Rs.1.68 crore to be completed by August 2004. As the work was terminated at
the risk and cost of the original contractor, the extra expenditure was recoverable
from the original contractor. The extra expenditure recoverable from the first
contractor on the basis of the original tendered cost (Rs.142 lakh), the work
completed and paid (Rs.20 lakh) and the tendered cost of the balance work (Rs.168
lakh), amounted to Rs.44 lakh9
after adjusting the security deposit (Rs.2 lakh)
available. The Department has not claimed the above amount from the contractor so
far, though the balance work was tendered in February
2004, for which no reason was furnished.
3.1.10 Augmentation of Assonora Water Supply scheme
Though the laying of pipeline from Water Treatment Plant at Assonora to Porvorim
was completed by August 2003, and construction of Master Balancing Reservoir
(MBR) and Overhead Reservoir (OHR) at Porvorim was completed by March 2004,
however the works of rising main from MBR to OHR and pumping installations at
MBR were not completed.
Audit scrutiny revealed that though all the above works were inter related, and were
to be taken up simultaneously, tenders for the work of rising main from MBR to
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
174 | P a g e
OHR and pumping installation were invited only in July 2004 and the works
(tendered cost Rs.65.26 lakh) commenced only in November 2004, seven months
after completion of MBR and OHR. The delay in taking up of these works resulted
in not achieving the intended benefit of augmentation of water supply in three
villages10
of Bardez Taluka and idling of the MBR and OHR constructed at a cost of
Rs.1.01 crore.
3.1.11 Augmentation of Opa Water Supply schemes
The major part of the scheme 40 MLD Water Treatment Plant at Curti, laying of
pipeline from Curti to Banastarim (16 KMs) have been completed by April 2003 and
October 2004 respectively and the total expenditure incurred on the scheme upto
May 2005 was Rs.44.82 crores. However, the laying of pipeline from Banastarim to
Altinho/Panaji (Ch. 16 to 33 KMs) was yet to be completed due to delays in land
acquisition, finalisation of alignment from Chimbel to Panaji, supply of pipes and
getting clearance for cutting of trees and roads, etc. As a result, though the scheme is
designed for augmentation by 40 MLD, augmentation of 10 MLD only could be
achieved (October 2004) so far, even after four years of commencement of the
scheme which was planned for completion within two years, and even after incurring
more than 50 percent of the sanctioned expenditure (Rs.44.82 out of 83.83 crores).
3.1.12 Extra expenditure recoverable from the contractor
Audit scrutiny revealed that the work of laying of pipeline from Curti to Kundaim,
under augmentation of Opa Water Supply Scheme, awarded to a contractor for
Rs.4.43 crore was terminated (May 2004) at the risk and cost of the contractor for
slow progress of work. The contractor was paid Rs.2.73 crore upto October 2003.
The balance work was tendered in July 2004 and awarded (October 2004) to another
contractor for Rs.3.34 crore, and the contractor was paid Rs.3.11 crore upto October
2005, and minor works such as construction of some chambers for sluice valves,
refilling trenches at some places etc. were yet to be completed. The approximate
extra expenditure recoverable from the original contractor was Rs.1.64 crore taking
into account the original tendered amount (Rs.4.43 crore), cost of work done by the
original agency (Rs.2.73 crore), and the tendered cost of the balance work (Rs.3.34
crore). The Department had not taken any action to recover the excess cost although
termination of the work of the original contractor was carried out with invocation of
risk and cost clause.
3.1.13 Environmental upgradation of Panaji city
In Panaji city 85 percent area was covered under the sewerage network, and 95
percent of the households of the sewered areas were connected to the network. As
the existing sewage system in Panaji city installed in 1967 was inadequate, the
Department proposed to augment the sewage treatment system by 12.50 MLD
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
175 | P a g e
capacity. The proposed project included, additional sewage treatment plant of 12.50
MLD capacity, renovation and remodeling of existing
5.70 MLD Sewage Treatment Plant at Tonca, laying of under water effluent disposal
pipelines in Mandovi estuary, conditioning the secondary effluent for gardening,
extension of sewer lines to Tambdi matti, and Patto colony and other left out areas of
Panaji city. The project was proposed to be implemented during 2002-2005 out of
State Govt. funds (Rs.4.50 crore) and availing assistance (Rs.10.50 crore) from the
GOI.
The GOI sanctioned (May, 2002) the scheme of Environmental upgradation of
Panaji city, Phase-I, under National River Conservation Plan, for Rs.14.10 crore, on
cost sharing (70:30) basis and subject to completion by July, 2004.
The Executive Engineer, Division III invited (October, 2002) tenders in two sealed
cover system, namely technical and financial bids, for the main and ancillary
components of the scheme estimated to cost Rs.12.11 crore. The following
irregularities were noticed in awarding and execution of the work:
3.1.14 Acceptance of single tender
Though tenders were initially invited (October 2002), inter-alia, for
12.50 MLD Sewage Treatment Plant based on Activated Sludge Process specified in
the NIT, the concept of alternate offer was brought in (December 2002) before
submission of tenders and alternate designs were called from the bidders. The
Department deputed a technical committee (June 2003) to study the technologies
available in foreign countries (Germany and Austria) after receipt of tenders, and
accepted their recommendation to adopt the C-Tech process for which only one
agency M/s. H.N. Bhat & Co. had quoted (Rs.14.79 crore), thus vitiating the
tendering process. As the Department had not invited tenders for STP based on C-
Tech process, and M/s. H.N. Bhat & Co. only had quoted for the C-Tech Process,
the tender accepted was not competitive as it was a single tender. Besides, the rates
cannot be considered as reasonable as the Department did not prepare an estimate
for STP based on C-Tech process. On directions of the Goa State Works Board
(August 2003) negotiations were done by the Chief Engineer with M/s. H.N. Bhat
and the single tenderer was awarded the work for Rs.13.33 crore (October 2003). An
expenditure of Rs.11.14 crore was incurred upto March 2005.
3.1.15 Margao Sewerage Scheme
The project of underground drainage scheme to Margao town (revised estimated
cost: Rs.18.68 crore) was taken up in 1986. The scheme was broadly divided into
three drainage zones, namely North, Central and South Zone, covering 876 hectare
area to be sewered. Infrastructure comprising a network of 22 Kms. sewerline in
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
176 | P a g e
North Zone, 23 Kms. sewerline in Central Zone, covering 40 percent area of
Margao, and a 7.5 MLD Sewage Treatment Plant at Navelim were completed and
commissioned in the year 2000 at a cost of Rs.18.30 crore as of July, 2005.
The infrastructure created had capacity to provide sewerage connections to 12900
households. However only 906 households (7 percent) were connected upto March
2004 due to lack of response from the public in taking domestic connections as they
had already invested in construction of septic tank and soak pits. The Government
introduced a pilot scheme to provide house connection Departmentally charging a
nominal fee of Rs.2000 for single house unit and Rs.1000 per flat in apartments. The
scheme to provide 100 house connection was sanctioned by the Government in
January 2004 and 53 connections involving 419 households were provided upto
March 2005, at a cost of Rs.21.86 lakh. Thus only 132511
households were
connected to the network as of March 2005 and 5008 households were yet to be
connected.
Considering the response to the pilot scheme, the Government decided (January
2005) to extend the benefits to all the residents of Margao, Vasco and Panaji
wherever sewerage network is covered, on a nominal charge between Rs.500 to
Rs.3000 per household12
, for which applications were accepted during April to 1
August, 2005.
The Department assessed the total cost of 1008 connections to individual houses and
4000 flats (assessed through a survey conducted by the Department) in Margao at Rs.
six crore out of which Rupees one crore will be recovered as connection charges from
the consumers and subsidy would be Rs. five crore.
A preliminary estimate of Rs.2.27 crore for subsidized sewerage connection for
North and Central Zone of Margao was approved by the Government (February
2005) and the work was divided into six parts, tendered and awarded (July 2005) to
six different agencies for Rs.1.92 crore. The work was in progress (August 2005).
The Department‟s belated attempts to convince the consumers as well as
Government‟s failure to enforce the powers available under the Health Act, for
providing individual household sewage connections compulsorily, resulted in
underutilization of the existing infrastructure created at a cost of Rs.18.30 crore.
3.1.16 Vasco Sewerage Scheme
Vasco Sewerage Scheme covering 240 hectares drainage area consisting of a 14
MLD Sewerage Treatment Plant, seven drainage zones, six sewage pumping stations
and 41 Kms. sewer lines was commissioned at a cost of Rs.5.09 crore, in 1985 in
Baina, Sada and Mangore areas and in 1992 in Vasco area covering 80 percent area
of Vasco city.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
177 | P a g e
The infrastructure created had a capacity to provide sewerage connections to
approximately 23000 households. However, 4414 households (19 percent) only were
connected to the sewerage network as of 31 January 2005, and major part of the
sewerage network remained unutilized and did not serve the purpose for which the
huge expenditure was incurred.
Though the Department has prepared (March 2005) an estimate of Rs.1.24 crore,
under the subsidized scheme for providing concessional house sewer connection to
583 households, further action to commence the work was yet to be taken (August
2005).
3.1.17 Unfruitful expenditure on Project Report
Audit scrutiny revealed that on directions of the Government the Department had
transferred (December 2001) the unexecuted work of sewerage system of South
Drainage Zone, Margao, to a newly created corporation, Sewerage and
Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (SIDC), Panaji for execution.
The Corporation had prepared (June 2002), a detailed project report (DPR) for the
work through MECON LTD, a Government of India Undertaking at a cost of Rs.
29.50 lakh. As directed (August 2002) by the Chief Secretary, the Department
obtained (September, 2002) the project proposal from the Corporation. On verifying
the DPR, the Department noticed that there was no detailed hydraulic design for
sewer network, the cost estimate was on a lump sum basis without indicating the
quantity and basis of rates adopted. Area-wise length and diameter of pipelines,
details of types of manholes at various locations were also not shown in the project
report. In the absence of these details, the project report was not considered useful
by the Department as mentioned above.
Government subsequently empanelled (November, 2004), 11 firms as consultants for
water supply, sewerage and sanitation projects, and sought (December 2004)
financial offers for providing consultancy for preparation of DPR for the above
mentioned project. The offers received were opened in February, 2005 and the S.E.
Circle VI, accepted (May, 2005) the lowest offer of M/s Ramky Enviro Engineers
Ltd. for Rs.10.28 lakh and awarded the consultancy for preparation of DPR to them.
The work order was issued in June 2005 with stipulation to complete it by October
2005. The work was commenced in June 2005 and was in progress (August 2005).
Thus another consultancy for the same project was awarded for Rs.10.28 lakhs,
rendering the expenditure of Rs.29.50 lakh incurred for preparation of the DPR to
MECON unfruitful.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
178 | P a g e
3.1.18 Revenue receipts
The Department fixes water tariff based on the classification of consumers as
domestic, Small hotels, Industries and Commercial categories. The current tariff
which was revised in April 2002 and modified in August 2003 was Rs.2.50 per
cu.mtr. for domestic, Rs.10 per cu.mtr. for small hotels and certain other
establishments, Rs.20 per cu.mtr. for Industries and Rs.30 per cu.mtr. for
commercial category consumers. The sewerage charge was 50 percent of the water
charges. The year-wise revenue collected from water supply and sewerage charges
was as under:-
(Rupees in crore)
Year
Budget estimates Actual receipts Excess(+)/Shortfall(-
)
Water
Supply Sanitation
Water
Supply Sanitation
Water
Supply Sanitation
2002-
03 69.19 0.81 55.20 0.51
(-)
13.99 (-) 0.30
2003-
04 69.11 0.89 50.41
4.2513 (-)
18.70 (+) 3.36
2004-
05 76.02 0.98 54.41 0.40
(-)
21.61 (-) 0.58
The shortfall of revenue from water supply against budget estimates ranged from 20
to 28 per cent during the period under review. The actual revenue from water supply
indicated a declining trend despite augmentation of water supply schemes, as well as
new consumers. The reasons for shortfall in water supply revenue with reference to
budget estimates as well as downward trend in revenue collections were awaited.
3.1.19 Arrears of Revenue
The arrears of revenue of water charges, pending recovery as of 31 March 2005 were
Rs.22.82 crore which was 43 per cent of the average annual revenue of the
Department from water supply and sanitation. It was noticed that though arrears
amounting to Rs.17.39 crore were more than a year old, only Rs.5.59 crore
pertaining to 1623 cases were referred to the Revenue Recovery Courts as on 31
March 2005, revealing severe slackness in actions against defaulters.
The mounting arrears and slow progress in its recovery was mainly due to timely
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
179 | P a g e
action not taken against the defaulters, by disconnecting the water supply as required
under water supply bye-laws, laxity in referring the overdue cases to Revenue
Recovery Courts and its pursuance, and lack of proper internal control systems to
monitor all aspects of demand, collection and accounting of revenue including
prompt action for speedy recovery of revenue arrears, by the Chief Engineer‟s office.
3.1.20 Short billing against Raw water supply
As per Article-6 of the water supply bye-laws a minimum contract demand has to be
fixed for each consumer and water charges leviable should not be less than the
minimum contract demand, even when the meter is not working.
A consumer, M/s. Aparant Iron and Steel Ltd. has been drawing raw water since
July 2000 from Salaulim dam for industrial purpose, as per an agreement entered
into with the Government in July 1996, and further renewed in March 2001.
Though the demand of the consumer was supply of 4000 to 12000 cu.m. of water per
day, the Department did not indicate the minimum contract demand and the billing
has so far been done on actual consumption as per meter readings, which was less
than 1.20 lakh cu.m. per month.
Audit scrutiny revealed that though the Government had approved (Dec. 2001) a
proposal of the Department to fix minimum contract demand, the Department did
not fix such minimum contract demand. Thus, due to non-fixation of contract
demand at least at the minimum quantity of 4000 cu.m. per day as demanded by
consumer, and billing done on actual consumption basis, resulted in short billing of
Rs.43.06 lakh on the basis of minimum demand of 4000 cu.m. per day for the period
from April 2002 to July 2005.
On this being observed by audit, the Executive Engineer replied (September 2005)
that action has since been initiated to issue revised bills for recovery of revenue on
the basis of minimum demand of 4000 cu.m. per day, and a report has been
submitted to Government for amending the agreement with the consumer to fix up
minimum contract demand.
3.1.21 Loss due to non-recovery of cost of water supplied through water
tankers
In order to supply drinking water to the areas such as Balli, Adnem, Fatorpa
Khananginim and ONGC Complex at Betul from Salaulim Water Supply Scheme,
the Department had commissioned a water supply scheme in 1998. The ONGC's
minimum demand of water per day was 100 cu.m.
Based on the complaints of ONGC on short supply of water during
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
180 | P a g e
November/December 2001, and due to inadequate pressure at the tapping point of
the scheme, the Executive Engineer Division-XX, supplied water to ONGC from
April 2002 to March 2005 through water tanker by engaging a contractor, incurring
an expenditure of Rs.48.01 lakh.
Audit scrutiny (December 2004) revealed that against this expenditure of Rs. 48.01
lakh the Division had billed and collected water charges of Rs. 5.38 lakh only from
the ONGC during the period from April 2002 to March 2005. As the Department
had no obligation to supply water to ONGC through tanker at the cost of the
Department, the additional cost for supply of water through tanker exclusively
arranged for ONGC should have been recovered from them. The non-recovery of the
additional cost of water supply resulted in a loss of Rs. 42.63 lakh to the Department.
The Department stated that water supply through tanker was discontinued form
April 2005 and water supply position would improve after laying a pipeline from
Ambaulim to Bali for which work was in progress (July 2005).
3.1.22 Delay in installation of metering equipment
A water supply connection was released (February 2005) to M/s. Sesa Industries
Ltd. with supply of water to be made at the rate of Rs.20 per cubic metre and a
minimum contracted demand of 3000 cu.m. per month. As the billing was to be
made out on the basis of actual consumption it was important for the Department to
have ensured early installation of the metering equipment. It was however observed
that the meter was installed only after a delay of more than two months on 5 May
2005. Resultantly the billing for the period of March and April 2005 was made on the
minimum contracted demand in the absence of meters although consumption for the
subsequent months commencing from May (when the meter was installed) reflected
average monthly consumption of 31,155 cu.m. per month. Consequently due to non
timely installation of meters the Department had to forego an amount of Rs.11.26
lakh as the billing in the absence of meters was restricted to minimum contracted
demand while the actual as revealed from the scrutiny of bills of the subsequent
months reflects a much higher consumption.
3.1.23 Conclusion
As against the existing demand of 568 MLD of water, the Department could achieve
394 MLD capacity by the commissioned augmentation schemes, leaving a gap of
174 MLD of water supply. Although four augmentation projects were selected to be
completed by the end of X five year plan, no work has commenced as these projects
are in the planning stages only. The execution of schemes suffered from deficiencies
in implementation of the various terms of contract, absence of phased planning to
ensure co-ordinated completion of various components of work. The sewerage
treatment plants in the major towns were under utilized as individual sewage
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
181 | P a g e
connections have not been obtained by the residents. The system of collection of
revenue suffered from mounting arrears, losses on account of delays in installation of
meters, and defects in contract conditions.
3.1.24 Recommendations
• A comprehensive plan consistent with the forecasted demand should be made for phased
commencement and implementation of various augmentation schemes.
• Funds made available by GOI under Accelerated Urban Water Supply Schemes should
be utilized by expeditious action in preparation of DPRs and focused attention towards early
implementation of these schemes.
• The infrastructure created in terms of Sewerage Treatment Plant should be put to
optimum utilization by ensuring release of individual sewerage connections to the households.
• System to ensure liquidation of outstanding dues against water and sewerage charges
should be put in place.
• The clause pertaining to risk and cost as provided for in the contracts should be
invoked and enforced.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
182 | P a g e
Unfruitful expenditure on incomplete water supply schemes, Andhra Pradesh.
Out of 87 works relating to water supply schemes taken up during 1997-2001 by
the EE, RWS, Nagarkurnool (Mahboobnagar District), 68 works were left
incomplete rendering the expenditure of Rs 79.25 lakh unfruitful.
The Executive Engineer, RWS proposed to take up 87 works comprising spillover
works (21) of Protected Water Supply Scheme (PWSS), extension of pipelines,
construction of Over Head Storage Reservoir (OHSR) etc. with a view to providing
protected water supply to 15 mandals of Nagarkurnool Division (Mahboobnagar
District). All the 87 works were administratively sanctioned during June 1997-April
2000 at a total estimated cost of Rs 2.23 crore. Out of the 87 works, 80 works,
covering 107406 beneficiaries, were entrusted (May 1997 – July 2000) to contractors
on nomination basis with the stipulation to complete the works within three to nine
months from the date of entrustment. The remaining seven works were not
entrusted as of August 2005.
Audit observed that of the 80 works entrusted, only 12 works were completed (cost:
Rs 67.64 lakh) between July 1997 and March 2005. The remaining 68 works
(covering 87170 beneficiaries), which were due for completion between February
1998 and March 2001, were left incomplete (December 2003) at various stages after
incurring an expenditure (between July 1997 and December 2003) of Rs 79.25 lakh.
The work-wise details are given in Appendix 4.2. Even in respect of the completed
works, there were delays37
ranging from over three to five years (11 works).
The EE, RWS replied (January/June 2005) that the works could not be completed
due to paucity of funds and that the contractors had stopped the works due to non-
payment of bills to the extent of work done. They were not coming forward to
execute the remaining works at old rates due to escalation in costs over the period.
The EE also stated that action could not be taken against the contractors since the
payments were not made to them to the extent of work done and that the incomplete
works could not be taken up departmentally due to shortage of manpower. The EE
further stated that there were no proposals at present to finish the incomplete works
in the near future due to non-availability of funds under that grant.
Scrutiny also revealed that (i) the EE did not maintain proper record and that even
the measurement books could not be made available to Audit and (ii) he did not
organise the resources properly and the requirement of funds for each work was not
also assessed. Consequently, he could not segregate the drawals for each work
separately. Thus improper and inefficient planning of the EE, RWS in taking up a
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
183 | P a g e
large number of petty works simultaneously without ensuring the availability of
sufficient funds as well as the manpower not only resulted in the expenditure of Rs
79.25 lakh remaining unfruitful for five to eight years but also deprived 0.87 lakh
beneficiaries of water supply facilities.
The matter was referred to Government in February 2005 and July 2005; reply had
not been received (December 2005).
Performance audit of Flood Control Measures Water Resources Department,
Water Resources Department, Bihar.
Highlights
Department has not paid adequate attention on expanding the flood protection infrastructure
viz. construction of new embankments, construction of all weather roads on embankments and
raising/strengthening of existing embankments. The Department has primarily relied on anti-
erosion works*
to protect existing embankments. During the last five years, there has been no
increase in flood protected areas and only a fraction of the Tenth Five Year (2002-2007) plan
targets have been achieved. Meanwhile the loss due to floods has increased from Rs 1559 crore
in 2000-2001 to Rs 2216 crore in 2004-05.
Curtailment of plan allocations in the State budget on construction of new
embankments, raising/strengthening of existing embankments and
construction of all weather roads on embankments have resulted in poor
achievements against the targets set for 2000-05.
Introduction
Bihar is one of the worst flood affected States in the country, 73 per cent
(68.80 lakh hectares) of the geographical area covering 30 out of 38 districts is flood
prone and 10 per cent (9.41 lakh hectare) is perpetually water logged. Destruction of
forests for reclaiming areas for occupation in the catchments and upper reaches of
the perennial rivers1
of the State, heavy intensity of rainfall during monsoon and rise
in river-bed-levels due to deposition of silt are some of the main reasons of floods.
The Water Resources Department (WRD) of the State Government is implementing
long and short term schemes for mitigating flood hazards which affect over two crore
population of the State.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
184 | P a g e
3.1.2 Organisational set up
The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, WRD has overall responsibility for flood control
measures in the State. He is assisted by Engineer-in-Chief (North), Superintending
Engineer for Flood Control Planning and Monitoring Circle (FCPM) at the
Secretariat level and eight Zonal Chief Engineers, 19 Superintending Engineers and
48 Executive Engineers in the field formations.
Besides, the Department has three2
Technical Advisory Committees (TAC) all
headed by Engineer-in-Chief (Flood zone) and Scheme Review Committee (SRC) to
provide assistance regarding technical and financial aspects for finalisation of anti-
erosion works to be executed every year. Bihar State Flood Control Board (BSFCB)
headed by the Chief Minister is responsible for formulating policy, overseeing and
monitoring of the planning and implementation of flood control measures. Ganga
Flood Control Commission (GFCC), a Government of India (GOI) organisation is
entrusted with monitoring of the Centrally Sponsored Schemes in the State.
3.1.3 Audit objectives
The specific audit objectives were to assess:
planning and physical progress of implementation of flood protection
schemes, both State and Centrally Sponsored, with reference to budgetary
allocation and the Tenth Five Year Plan;
whether flood protection works have been executed efficiently and effectively
and
the impact of flood protection works in minimising the damage to life and
property.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
185 | P a g e
3.1.4 Audit Criteria
Departmental norms for execution of works, quality assurance and creation of
Divisions.
Budget estimates and expenditure reports.
Examination of measurement books and works related records.
Comparative analysis of Tenth Five Year plan and departmental targets with
achievements.
3.1.5 Audit coverage and methodology
Records of Engineer-in-Chief (North) and Superintending Engineer, Flood Control
Cell Planning and Monitoring in Secretariat, five Chief Engineers3
(out of eight), five
Superintending Engineers4
(out of 19) and 12 Divisional Offices5
(out of 48) along
with their Circle Offices in districts for the period 2000-2005 were test-checked
between August 2003 and March 2004 and April 2005 to June 2005.
The selection of auditee units for test check were made after taking into account
expenditure incurred and incidence of flood in the areas covered by them.
Exit conference was held with Secretary, WRD in September 2005 and the views of
the Department have been considered while finalising the reveiw.
Audit findings
1. 3.1.6 Under State plan for combating floods on a long term basis, the WRD
had three dam projects6
for construction of reservoirs in the upper reaches of these
rivers and their tributaries. But the Department did not take up any project during
2000-05. Primarily, anti-erosion works to protect existing embankments from floods
were taken up. During the period 2000-05, 1439 anti-erosion works valuing Rs
321.26 crore were executed whereas only Rs
2. 31.73 crore was spent on raising/strengthening of existing embankments,
construction of all weather roads on embankments and Rs 8.73 crore on drainage
works.
3.1.7 Financial management
The Budget provision and expenditure under plan and non plan head on the
establishment and schemes of the Department during 2000-2005 were as under:
(Rupees in crore)
Year Budget Provision Expenditure
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
186 | P a g e
Works Establishment Grand
Total
Works
Establishment
Grand
Total
2000-
01 78.46 60.53 138.99 73.89
57.75 131.64
2001-
02 79.98 57.83 137.81 77.87
55.70 133.57
2002-
03 97.92 58.22 156.14 96.1
56.24 152.34
2003-
04 77.15 59.83 136.98 76.09
57.13 133.22
2004-
05
110.2 59.65 169.85 110.16 49.07 159.23
Total
443.71# 296.06 739.77 434.11*
275.89 710.00
(Source :- Information furnished by the Water Resources
Department) # Out of which Central grant was Rs 88.23
crore
* Out of which Central grant was Rs 86.69 crore
As per norms (Bihar Public Works Department Code), expenditure on establishment
should be 12 per cent of works expenditure (Rs 52.09 crore) whereas it was about five
times above the norms (Rs 275.89 crore). Department in their reply (May 2005)
stated that establishment cost is proposed to be reduced by an amount of one third in
the near future.
During 2000-2005, plan outlay and budget provision on different short term
measures were as under:
(Rupees in crore)
2000-
2005
Sl. Scheme Plan
outlay
Budget Expen- Saving
Percentage
No. 2000-
05
provision diture allotment
to
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
187 | P a g e
outlay
1 On going
embankment
14.76 1.50 1.50 NIL 10
2 Raising/strengthening
of
83.63 20.51 20.51 NIL 25
embankments
3 Anti-erosion works 245.53 326.75 321.26 5.49 133
4 Drainage works 77.25 10.13 8.73 1.40 13
5 All weather road on 83.02 9.86 9.72 0.14 14
embankments
Total 504.19 368.75 361.72 7.03
Allocative priorities The funds provided for anti-erosion works was 133 per cent of
the proposed anti-erosion works plan outlay. Thus,
curtailment of plan outlay in the budget of the Department in
respect of flood protection measures other than anti-erosion
works resulted in marginal achievement of target fixed by the
Department and the Tenth Five Year Plan, as shown below:
Embankments
schemes
Status
as
2000-01 to 2004-
05
Target
as
proposed
under
10th
Five
Year
Plan
(200207)
(In km)
on
March
2000
Target
for
addition
Status
as on
March
2005
Completed scheme 2873.37 Nil 2873.37
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
188 | P a g e
km Km
On-Going scheme 557.10
km
36.00 557.10
Km
Total length of
embankments
3430.47
km
36.00
3430.47
Km
1880
Raising/Strengthening
of embankments
Nil 580 Km 123 Km 3082
Drainage works 1.50
lakh
0.61
lakh
0.15
lakh
4.591
lakh
hectare
hectare hectare hectare
All weather roads on
embankments
Nil 590.85 64.15 3300
The Department replied (May 2005) that due to financial constraints, available funds
were mainly utilised for the protection of existing embankments and flood fighting7
works. The Department again stated (October 2005) that anti-erosion works have
their own importance in a flood ravaged State of Bihar. It saves the lives and
properties of the affected areas and due to its emergent nature; it is given priority
over other schemes. The fact remains that during the last decade there has been no
increase in flood protected area of 29.16 lakh hectares. The flood protected area
covers only 42 per cent of the flood prone area (68.80 lakh hectare). Keeping in view
the fact that 30 districts of Bihar are flood prone, the flood protected area needs to be
increased by making investment in construction of embankments, drainage works
and roads on embankments.
Four Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) were implemented at a cost of Rs 86.69
crore out of which three CSS (Flood Protection Works: Rs 3.88 crore; Maintenance
of Flood Protection Works of Kosi: Rs 26.38 crore; and Flood Proofing Scheme: Rs
5.02 crore) valuing Rs 35.28 crore were examined.
Inadequate utilisation of Central funds Due to lack of initiative, schemes were not
sanctioned Platforms constructed in flood prone areas were not as per GOI
guidelines
3.1.8 Flood Protection Works
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
189 | P a g e
Under Centrally sponsored schemes, raising/strengthening of the existing
embankment on four rivers (Lalbakeya, Bagmati, Kamla and Khando) were taken up
during 1998-99. However, State Government proposed the scheme on only three
rivers . The GOI sanctioned grant of Rs 8.68 crore (October 1999) only for two
schemes (Lalbekya and Bagmati) and released Rs 6.30 crore during 2001-03. Against
this, only Rs 3.88 crore was utilised and the scheme remained incomplete as of
March 2005. The Department replied (May 2005) that the remaining work of
Lalbekya embankment will be taken up this year and the proposal for Bagmati
embankment was under consideration of GFCC.
Flood protection schemes on Kamla river was not sanctioned by the GOI as of
March 2005 though GFCC had submitted its proposal in December 2001. The
Department in its reply said (May 2005) that for Kamla embankment, the scheme
has been submitted to the GFCC while viability/ necessity of the Khando scheme
will be decided after investigation.
Under the scheme of maintenance of flood protection works on Kosi, expenditure
initially incurred by the State Government was fully reimbursed by Central
Government as grant. Rupees 26.38 crore were spent on completion of 231 anti-
erosion works under the scheme taken up during 20002005. Against this, only Rs
22.84 crore were reimbursed by GOI which led to extra burden of Rs 3.54 crore on
State exchequer. The Department replied (May 2005) that the State Government is
pursuing (May 2005) the matter with the Central Government to reimburse the
balance amount.
3.1.9 Flood proofing schemes
The scheme aims to save lives of people from heavy floods by constructing earthen
brick soled platforms 0.6 meter above the flood level. Audit noticed that the
platforms constructed were not as per the GOI guidelines and also lacked civic
amenities. Besides, out of one hundred flood proofing schemes sanctioned at a cost
of Rs. 11.31 crore, due to non-availability of land only 69 schemes were taken up at
an estimated cost of Rs 8.82 crore against which expenditure of Rs 5.02 crore was
incurred by the State Government during March 1992 to March 2002. No further
funds after 2002 were released by the GOI due to non-submission of utilisation
certificate.
3.1.10 Anti-erosion works
Every year (after floods, from October) a high level committee headed by Zonal
Chief Engineers (CE) has to submit the proposals of anti-erosion works to the
Technical Advisory Committee which submits its report to the Scheme Review
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
190 | P a g e
Committee and finally to State Flood Control Board for approval.
However it was found that only 1542 (45 per cent) of anti-erosion works valued Rs
319.75 crore (12 per cent) of the estimated value during 2002-05 were approved by
the SFCB out of the proposals originally submitted by the Zonal Chief Engineers
(Refer Appendix-XXX).
There was nothing on record to show that proposals submitted by CE were arranged
in order of priority based on survey of vulnerable points.
In their reply the Department stated (October 2005) that anti-erosion works were
executed on the basis of techno-economic viability in view of the resources available
at the State level. However, no specific prioritisation of anti-erosion works which
were to be executed before every flood was found on the records of the Department.
During 2000-05 against provision of Rs 110.50 crore to 12 test checked Divisions for
execution of 324 anti-erosion works expenditure of Rs 98.54 crore was incurred out
of which 129 anti-erosion works (expenditure Rs 57.74 crore) were test checked. The
deficiencies noticed are discussed below:
1. 3.1.11 There was avoidable expenditure of Rs 6.26 crore in three Divisions8
due to delay in execution of works. In Champaran Embankment Division (Motihari)
failure to execute anti erosion works on the embankment resulted in expenditure of
Rs 3.79 crore instead of the original estimate of Rs 74.15 lakh. In Padrauna Division,
due to non-approval of raising the height of spur before 2003 floods by SRC the
estimated cost of work went up from Rs 31.14 lakh to Rs 2.10 crore. In Lalganj
Division during the flood season of 2001 the Bihar State Construction Corporation
failed to supply boulders in time and complete the work as per specifications for
which it received Rs 1.97 crore. As a result anti-erosion works had to be redone at a
cost of Rs 1.35 crore.
2. 3.1.12 Incomplete works
In three Divisions, there was infructuous expenditure of Rs 2.52 crore on four works
executed by these Divisions due to works remaining incomplete.
Incomplete scheme
Sl.
No.
Name of
Division
Name of
work and
year
Infructuous/
wasteful/
doubtful
expenditure
Remarks
(Rupees in
lakh)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
191 | P a g e
1 Western
Flood
Embankment
Division,
Kunauli
Restoration
work of nose
apron of spur
at 2.25 km of
WFE (2001-
02)
97.00 The work was
left incomplete
after spending
Rs 40.00 lakh
and flood
fighting works
of Rs 57 lakh
was also carried
out at the same
point during
2001-05.
Sl.
No.
Name of
Division
Name of work
and year
Infructuous/
wasteful/
doubtful
expenditure
Remarks
(Rupees in
lakh)
2 Flood
Control
Division,
Dalsingsarai
Anti-erosion
work between
1255 and 2025
metre of left
bank of river
Ganga
(February
2004)
55.51 The work was
left incomplete
after spending
Rs 2.11 crore
and flood
fighting works
of Rs 55.51
lakh were
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
192 | P a g e
carried out by
the Division.
Further the
incomplete
work was
included in the
next year AE
work at a cost
of Rs 3.27
crore.
3 Champaran
Embankment
Division,
Motihari
Anti-erosion
works between
54 miles and
56 miles at
Nagdaha of
Champaran
Embankment
(April 2001)
29.77 The work was
left incomplete.
Anti-erosion
works between
54 miles and
56 miles at
Nagdaha of
Champaran
Embankment
(April 2004)
56.96 The work was
left incomplete
because non-
acquisition of
required land.
In their reply regarding Champaran Embankment Division, Motihari the
Department stated (October 2005) that the executed anti-erosion work (in 2000-01)
was damaged during flood and the payment beyond Rs 29.77 lakh for work done
was held up. The Department also clarified that land acquisition involves
cumbersome and lengthy procedure. Keeping these factors in view the Department
should not have initiated flood protection works in area where formalities for
acquisition of land had not been completed.
The Department also stated that due to changes in river courses and unpredictable
behavior regarding the intensity and angle of attack on critical points make it
necessary to supplement the executed AE works with flood fighting works. The
Department failed to reply to the point raised by audit that even after spending
substantial amount on AE, the works were left incomplete.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
193 | P a g e
3.1.13 Improper execution of work
Restoration of service road valuing Rs 50 lakh on West Kosi Main Canal (WKMC)
embankment from 0 to 4.23 km was allotted by the Head Works Division, Birpur on
March 2003, to a contractor who had no valid labour license on the date of
finalisation of tender. Further the contractor used substandard bricks (compressive
strength 70 kg/cm2
) worth Rs 15 lakh instead of 100A graded bricks (having
compressive strength 100 kg/cm2
) and delayed the work for almost one and half
years. However, payment of Rs 50 lakh was made (September 2004) to the
contractor.
3.1.14 Execution of work without model testing
Fifteen Spurs9
costing Rs 16 crore were constructed during 2000-2004 without
conducting any investigation and model testing though it was required as per the
recommendations of the KHLC (every year) and its project report (November 2001).
It was further noticed by audit that two spurs valuing Rs 2.25 crore (constructed by
FCD, Karhagola during 2001-02) were damaged during flood 2002 and in
restoration work of these two spurs, the Division incurred Rs 2.48 crore before the
flood of 2003.
Department replied (May 2005) that in emergencies, model test of spur in span of
two months was not possible. The reply is not tenable because as per the working
calendar of WRD, the work for next year's flood protection should commence from
16th October and should be completed by 14th June of the following year. Therefore
adequate time is available to plan and execute flood protection works.
3.1.15 Stores management
Deficiencies like misappropriation, extra cost in procurement of materials and non-
maintenance of records regarding stock noticed in 12 test-checked Divisions were as
under:
Western Flood Embankment (WFE) Division, Kunauli had paid Rs 22 lakh
(through proforma bill) to suppliers against the supply of 107 MT Black Annealed
Wire during 2001-05. But the Division had no records relating to the receipt and use
of these materials in the works executed by the Division.
The Division purchased 19371 m3
boulders (valuing Rs 1.24 crore) between July
2002 and April 2003. However only 17199 M3
boulders were used in 26 anti-erosion
and flood fighting works (out of 52 AE/ FF works) executed by the Division during
July 2002 to March 2005. As per the records of the Division only 574 m3
boulders
was balance in the stock instead of 2172 m3
. The shortage of 1598 m3
boulders
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
194 | P a g e
valuing Rs 10.27 lakh could not be explained by the Division.
3.1.16 Impact analysis
During 2000-2005 expenditure on flood relief was Rs 178.58 crore (ranging from Rs
21.18 crore to Rs 62.71 crore each year) and the extent of total damages caused by
flood during 2000-2005 were as under :
(Rupees in crore)
Year Affected
population
(in lakh)
Total
damage
Relief paid
to public
2000-01 82.41 1558.92 21.44
2001-02 90.91 1005.80 42.26
2002-03 160.18 2813.44 62.71
2003-04 81.61 143.93 21.18
2004-05 212.51 2215.68 30.99
Total 627.62 7737.77 178.58
(Source: Relief and Rehabilitation Department, Government of Bihar)
The WRD failed to increase the length of its existing embankments and there was
marginal achievement on raising/strengthening of embankments (only 123 km) and
construction of all weather roads on embankments (only 64.15 km) during 2000-05.
Though Rs 710 crore (including establishment) were spent (2000-2005) on
maintenance of embankments and anti-erosion works, incidence of floods increased
considerably and loss due to floods had been increasing progressively from Rs 1559
crore in 2000-2001 to Rs 2216 crore in 2004-05.
3.1.17 Manpower management
As per the norms of the Government (1987) one works Division required six
Engineers and 67 others staff (including Junior Engineers) for maintenance of 720
Km of embankment and five Divisions was to be supervised by one circle office.
In the State total length of embankments is only 3430 Km (up to 2004-2005). For
maintenance of these embankments only five Divisions and one circle office was
required as per norms. Against this 48 Divisions and 19 circle offices were being
operated. This resulted in excess deployment of 330 Engineers and 342 subordinate
staff involving payment of Rs 223.80 crore on their pay and allowances during 2000-
05.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
195 | P a g e
The Department replied (May 2005), that a proposal to abolish three Divisions and
reducing the total number of staff including Engineers to 46 in each Division has
been sent for the consent of the Finance Department.
3.1.18 Monitoring
The monitoring circle headed by a Superintending Engineer under Engineer-in-Chief
was responsible for co-ordination and monitoring of schemes with the assistance of
four Executive Engineers and five Assistant Engineers. BSFCB and GFCC were also
entrusted to monitor implementation of Centrally sponsored schemes. Though the
Department has an established mechanism for monitoring, execution of work
without model testing, delay in execution of work and use of substandard material
could not be avoided indicating lack of monitoring control.
3.1.19 Conclusions
The WRD mainly executed anti-erosion works and the plan allocations in the State
budget on construction of new embankments, raising/strengthening of existing
embankments and construction of all weather roads on embankments were curtailed
which resulted in only marginal achievement of targets set for 2000-05 in respect of
Raising and strengthening of embankments, Drainage works and embankments. The
physical progress in the implementation of short term measures like strengthening of
embankments and drainage has been far below the target fixed by the Department
and Tenth Five Year plan. The impact of flood protection works on containing the
damage to life and property was not felt as a sizable population continued to be
affected by floods and the incidence of damage to the property was also on the rise
during the period 2000-05.
Recommendations
Due to heavy reliance on anti-erosion schemes to protect the existing embankments, the
flood control infrastructure viz. construction of embankments and platforms, drainage
schemes have not been adequately funded during 2000-2005.
The Department needs to prioritise anti-erosion works to ensure that critical works
required to protect embankments do not get left out.
Execution of works should be completed within the working season (October to June).
The Department should rationalise its manpower as per norms.
The matter was referred to Government (July 2005); their reply (October 2005) has
been suitably incorporated.
PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Improper planning of drinking water scheme in Bibinagar, Andhra Pradesh.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
196 | P a g e
Improper selection of water source for a comprehensive water supply scheme had
deprived the targeted habitations in Bibinagar area (Nalgonda District) of fluoride
free drinking water. This also rendered the entire outlay of Rs 24.80 crore on the
scheme unfruitful.
Government of India sanctioned (February 1998) a comprehensive protected water
supply scheme under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme 'Rajiv Gandhi National
Drinking Water Mission' to provide safe drinking water to 115 fluoride-affected
habitations in Bibinagar (Nalgonda District) at a cost of Rs 26.77 crore.
For this purpose, the Chief Engineer, Rural Water Supplies (CE-RWS) proposed
(November 1998) to draw water from two minor irrigation (MI) tanks at Bibinagar
and Bhongir, and Chinna Musi. When consulted by the Government (December
1998), the District Collector opined that this was possible only after increasing the
capacities30
of the two tanks and constructing storage reservoir across Chinna Musi.
State Government approved the water supply scheme in March 1999 reducing the
scope from 115 to 108 habitations31
in the revised proposal. Although the work was
completed (outlay: Rs 24.80 crore32
) in March 2002 except for some minor works
estimated to cost Rs 22.13 lakh, the scheme could not be commissioned due to non-
availability of water.
Scrutiny revealed that the CE (RWS), while selecting the water source, did not take
into consideration the actual water levels33
of the MI tanks during the preceding three
years, which were far below the full tank level (FTL). The actual ayacut in the
surrounding areas of the MI tanks was also far less than Since the MI tanks could not
be used as the water source for the project, the Superintending Engineer (RWS)
proposed (September 2002) to draw water from the ongoing Nalgonda Rural
Drinking Water Supply (NRDWS) project by extending its pipeline to the Bibinagar
scheme at an additional estimated cost of Rs 7 crore. The work was proposed to be
executed34
in phase IV of the NRDWS project, for which tenders were finalised (June
2005) and targeted for completion by March 2006. Meanwhile the water supply
network constructed with an expenditure of Rs 24.80 crore remained idle and the
objective of providing fluoride free water was not achieved.
Thus, due to improper planning by the ENC (PR) and the CE (RWS), the objective
of the scheme remains unfulfilled rendering the whole outlay of Rs 24.80 crore35
unfruitful.
The matter was referred to Government in December 2004 followed by a reminder in
July 2005; reply had not been received (December 2005)
Performance of the Villupuram district Administration in selected areas, School
education, Health & Family Welfare, Municipal Administration & Water supply
& Social welfare Department, Tamil Nadu.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
197 | P a g e
Highlights
Villupuram District is one of the backward districts in the State and ranked 28th
among the
29 districts in the State in terms of human development index. As district head, District
Collector accords administrative sanction for the release of funds under various schemes
and the monitoring authority for them. Even three years after the issue of guidelines by the
State Planning Commission, neither District Development Plan nor the Annual Plans had
been prepared. Though the target for enrolment in respect of primary classes was 100 per
cent with no dropout under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, 4116 children were not enrolled in
primary classes as of March 2004 and dropout rate was six per cent in 2003-04. The couple
protection rate in the district stood at 43 per cent in 2003 as against the State level
achievement of 50 per cent and Ninth Five Year Plan goal of 70 per cent. Government had
not considered upgradation of more number of Primary Health Centres on priority basis
despite the backwardness of the district in terms of health indicators. 68 per cent of the
rural habitations, 75 per cent of the TownPanchayats and all the Municipalities in the
district were not providing adequate quantity of safe water.
(Paragraphs 3.1.60 to 3.1.63)
Provision of safe drinking water
1. 3.1.54 Review of this sector revealed (a) 68 per cent of Rural Habitations, 75
per cent of Town Panchayats and all Municipalities in the district did not provide
required quantity of safe water and (b) no augmentation work was taken up to meet
the increasing demand due to rapid growth of population and diminishing yield of
water in the existing sources, as discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.
2. 3.1.55 Ninth Five Year Plan envisaged provision of safe drinking water to
cover all habitations including all the water quality-affected habitations and to
monitor the water quality under surveillance system. According to the existing
national norms, all rural habitations, Town Panchayats and Municipalities were to
be provided with safe water at the rate of 40,70 and 90 litres per capita per day
(LPCD) respectively.
3. 3.1.56 The numbers of rural habitations in the district and availability of safe
drinking water therein, as of March 2004, were as follows:
4. 3.1.59 As seen from the above, 75 per cent Town Panchayats and
allMunicipalities did not provide the required quantity of safe drinking water
(September 2004). Government stated (January 2005) that water supply
improvement schemes are now under execution in urban areas and on their
completion all the towns in the district will be provided with the required quantity of
safe drinking water.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
198 | P a g e
Chapter III – Performance Reviews
Provision of Safe Drinking Water in urban areas
1. 3.1.60 In Villupuram municipal area the quantity of water supply ranged
from 25 to 45 LPCD against the norm of 90 LPCD.
2. 3.1.61 A major augmentation work was carried out in 1968 at a cost of Rs
26.05 lakh in Villupuram municipal area. However, no major augmentation work
was taken up subsequently to meet the increasing demand due to rapid growth of
population and diminishing yield of water in the existing sources.
3. 3.1.62 Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage (TWAD) Board prepared a
project proposal (October 1997) at a cost of Rs 12.23 crore to augment water supply
by one crore litres per day without ascertaining the capability of the municipality to
bear the expenditure. The Municipal Council, which discussed the proposal (March
1998), resolved to approach Government for 100 per cent grant to implement the
scheme, as the Municipality did not have enough resources to meet the project cost
and the recurring expenditure towards maintenance and repayment of loans. The
proposal was dropped after four years and a new proposal with lower cost (Rs 6.84
crore) was prepared and approved by TWAD Board in August 2002. As the
Municipal Council didnot meet for more than two years, no decision was taken on
the above Scheme as of February 2004.
4. 3.1.63 Government stated (January 2005) that the matter is being perused to
ensure early implementation of the scheme.
Construction of Baby Friendly Toilets in Anganwadi Centres
1. 3.1.69 Government sanctioned (January 2002) construction of 1575 Baby
Friendly Toilets in 21 districts at an estimated cost of Rs 4500 per toilet. Seventy five
toilets had been proposed for construction in three blocks of Villupuram District at
the rate of 25 toilets per Block. The construction of toilets was to be completed
within two months from the date of release of funds. The execution of the work was
entrusted to the concerned Block Development Officers (BDOs). The Project Co-
ordinator WBA ICDS-III Project released (May 2002) to the District Collector,
Villupuram Rs 1.69 lakh as 50 per cent advance for construction of 75 toilets in the
above three Blocks and the amount was kept in Savings Bank Account. After a delay
of morethan a year, the amount was distributed (June 2003) equally (Rs 56250 each)
to the three Blocks by the Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency
(DRDA) for execution of works. The balance amount of Rs 1.69 lakh was released in
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
199 | P a g e
June 2004. Thus, delay in release of funds had led to delay in starting/completing the
works.
2. 3.1.70 Out of 75 toilets, 54 had been completed, 15 were under progress and
six were not commenced as of September 2004. Programme Officer, WBA ICDS-III
Project, Villupuram reported (September 2004) that out of 54 completed toilets, 14
toilets constructed in one block (Tiruvennainallur) have alone been taken over by
Anganwadi Centres and the balance 40 completed toilets had not been taken over
due to incomplete/defective construction (seven), non provision of water facilities
and not handed over by the BDO (14). Thus, the scheme sanctioned in January 2002
was yet to be completed fully (September 2004).
Defective execution of works for augmentation of the sewerage system and its
poor maintenance by the Tamil Nadu water supply and Drainage Board.
4.1.2 Unfruitful expenditure on a sewerage scheme
Defective execution of works for augmentation of the sewerage system and its
poor maintenance defeated the objective of prevention of pollution of Ooty
lake despite expenditure of Rs 12.45 crore. Besides, Rs 1.42 crore was spent for
cleaning the lake.
To prevent pollution to the lake at Udhagamandalam (Ooty) by leakages from the
existing sewerage system and raw sewage from the uncovered areas through
Kodappamund Channel, the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
200 | P a g e
(Board) completed the work of Restricted Sewerage Scheme (RSS) in November
1998 at a cost of Rs 12.45 crore. The Municipality was reluctant to take over the
scheme for maintenance as there were defects in the planning and execution of the
scheme as detailed below:
The level of water closets in houses was below the level of sewerage lines laid.
Collapse of manholes.
� Hydraulic testing of the sewer system was not done and joints were not plugged
properly.
� Board had neither repaired nor relaid the existing old drainage system and
trunk sewers.
There was no main trunk sewer for linking drainage connection. However, the
Municipality had to take over (October 2000) the scheme on the directions of the
Government and spent Rs 13 lakh during 2001 to 2003 to carry out rectification
works such as inter-linking the sewers, laying parallel sewer along the existing
sewers to increase the capacity and construction of a weir to divert flow of the
Kodappamund Channel into a collection well for onward transmission to
treatment plant.
Scrutiny by Audit revealed the following:
(a) The Board had under RSS made provision for sewerage connections to only
3960 houses as assessed in April 1993. Due to omission of certain dwelling houses
and addition of new houses subsequently, 5000 house connections were not
covered by the Municipality. Consequently, against the designed sewage
collection of 8.32 million litres per day (mld) in 2001, the actual sewage collected
was only 2.96 mld. Thus, the system was not put to optimum use. The Board
decided to implement another underground drainage scheme and appointed a
consultant in December 2003 for preparation of detailed Project Report.
(b) Improper connections between houses and street sewers made by the
Municipality resulted in sullage from houses in some areas discharging directly
into the Channel.
(c) As the pipes laid by the Municipality to divert the flow from Kodappamund
Channel were at a higher level, they require be dismantling and rectifying.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
201 | P a g e
(d) There was back flow of sewage into the lake as the pumps at the collection
well were not operated during night hours.
(e) As there was continuous flow of pollutants in the lake, Public Works
Department (PWD) was entrusted with the work of cleaning of the lake through
Bio-remediation technique. The PWD took up cleaning work and spent Rs 1.42
crore upto March 2004.
Government stated (October 2004) that the defects in the execution of the scheme
were rectified by the Municipality and construction of the weir across the
Kodappamund Channel prevented the entry of sullage water into the lake.
Government further contended that all the houses in the scheme area were given
sewerage connection and the sewage generated by the present population of 58000
in the scheme area was treated and pollution is completely prevented in the lake.
The contention of the Government is not tenable as:
(i) the PWD reported (December 2003) to the Municipality that the purpose
of construction of weir was defeated due to its defective execution,
(ii) the Secretary, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department after
his visit to Ooty in September 2003 directed the District Collector (December
2003) that the remaining 5000 houses‟ service connections should be given by
February 2004,
(iii) as against the sewage of 5.20 mld generated by the present population of
58000 and the sewage generated by the floating population, only three mld were
treated under the scheme and
(iv) the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board observed (April 2004) that unless the
flow of raw sewage through the Kodappamund Channel was stopped, the
pollution of the lake would continue.
Thus, due to defective execution of the sewerage system by the Board and poor
maintenance by the Municipality, the main objective of preventing pollution of
Ooty lake was not achieved even after spending Rs 12.45 crore.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
202 | P a g e
Performance Audit of Management of projects relating to utilisation and
conservation of soil and water undertaken by institutes of Indian Council of
Agricultural Research (2004) revealed that objectives of the projects undertaken
were not achieved, there was improper maintenance of national register of soil
series and there was non-documentation of traditional wisdom.
Unfruitful expenditure on a sanitary sewerage scheme, Development and
planning department, West Bengal.
Revision of the comprehensive drainage and sewerage scheme at Digha without
assessing the availability of funds and failure of the department in timely
execution of the project resulted in unfruitful expenditure of Rs 4.63 crore and the
objective of averting pollution of sea-water and environment remained
unfulfilled.
With a view to protecting a population size of 7000 to 17000 from pollution hazards
at Digha and preventing pollution of sea-water adjacent to the shore, a
comprehensive drainage and sewerage scheme, known as “sanitary sewerage
scheme” was sanctioned (September 1996) by the Development and Planning
Department at an estimated cost of Rs 4.09 crore. Executive Engineer (EE) Tamluk
Division of Public Health Engineering (PHE) Directorate, being the executive
agency, started execution of work in 1996-1997. The target date for commissioning
of the project was March 2003. After laying about 22 per cent of the sewer line, the
work was suspended in 1997 due to severe sand boiling and heavy seepage of water
in some locations. Consequently, after redesign of sewer line (July 1999) the work
was resumed in March 2000 and continued up to March 2003. An amount of Rs 4.09
crore, released by the Department between September 1996 and March 2003, was
spent besides incurring further liability of Rs 0.54 lakh. By that time, merely 20 per
cent of the total target area was covered by the sewerage line.
To complete the project as well as to cover a larger population, a revised project, to
be completed in three phases, was proposed (June 2003) by PHE Department and a
new estimate was drawn up for Rs 6.10 crore for first phase including Rs 4.09 crore
already spent and Rs 2.22 crore for second phase on the ground of price escalation
on account of labour and material, revision of sewer design, etc. The estimate for the
third phase was to be prepared later. The estimate was, however, not vetted or
administratively approved so far.
As there was hardly any scope for provisioning of further funds from Government,
the department proposed for taking up the matter with the Housing and Urban
Development Corporation (HUDCO) for financing the scheme. Till July 2004 no
further development towards either completion of the project or arrangement of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
203 | P a g e
funds was noticed and pollution hazards at Digha persisted due to non-
commissioning of the project.
Thus, the objective of averting pollution of sea-water was not achieved due to failure
of the department in timely execution and drawing up a revised project without
assessing fund availability. The expenditure of Rs 4.63 crore on the incomplete
project remained unfruitful affecting both tourism and environment.
Government stated (February 2005) that the sewerage scheme would be put to
use after the funds were available.
In Orissa, review of provision of safe drinking water in one district of (2004)
showed that urban areas received less water than required. Nearly 15 per cent rural
habitations did not have water supply system. Only 25 per cent population of the
habitations covered under water supply system had piped water supply, the
remaining 75 per cent depended on tube wells/sanitary wells where the safety
aspect of the water was not ensured.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
204 | P a g e
Implementation of Welfare Schemes in Ganjam District
Highlights
Ganjam district comprises three sub-divisions, 22 blocks and 3171 villages covering an area of
8200 square kilometer with 32 lakh population. Chatrapur is its headquarters and Berhampur, the
main commercial centre. The population with a male female ratio 1:1 has 63 per cent literacy rate
and 55 per cent of its population (3.02 lakh families) live below the poverty line (BPL) according
to a survey in 1997.
Review of implementation of various welfare programmes relating to poverty alleviation, launch
of primary education, drinking water facility and primary health care in the district for the period
1999-2004 revealed the following.
Since the progress made by the States in supply of safe drinking water was not satisfactory,
Government of India (GOI) re-introduced in 1997-98 the Accelerated Rural Water Supply
(ARWS) Programme to provide access to safe drinking water within 1.6 km of all rural
habitations. The habitations were planned to be covered under tube wells (TW) / Sanitary wells
(SW). This could be augmented by introduction of piped water supply (PWS) schemes in the
areas affected by water quality problems or having inadequate quantity of water from TW. The
GOI provides hundred per cent assistance in the form of grants.
Two Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (RWSS) divisions at Berhampur and Bhanjanagar under
the Chief Engineer, RWSS were responsible for rural water supply in Ganjam district. Besides,
the District Water and Sanitation Mission (DWSM) set up in October 2000 under the Sector
Reform Programme (SRP) also undertook the rural water supply. The responsibility for urban
water supply rested with two Public Health Divisions at Berhampur and Chatrapur under the
control of the Chief Engineer, Public Health. The working of all these units was reviewed in audit
to ascertain the availability of drinking water supply in the district.
The review revealed that the pace of coverage was slow, quality of water was not ensured and
quantity of water supply was inadequate as discussed below:
3.3.15 Insufficient coverage of habitations
The amount spent on the rural water supply schemes during 1999-2004 was Rs.25.80 crore
against the allotment of Rs.28.59 crore excluding the expenditure incurred under the SRP. Of the
above allocations, Rs.28.41 lakh remained parked (since 1999-2000) in Civil Deposit as of March
2004.
The ARWS programme envisaged supply of one spot source for every 250 people by sinking
TW/SW while PWS was to be the additional source. The table below provides the details of
coverage of habitations in Ganjam district.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
205 | P a g e
Fully covered habitations
Period 1 April
1999 31
March 2004
Total
number of
habitations
5354*
6329*
Covered by TW/SW
Covered by PWS
5255 88 5395 337
Covered
by both
TW and
PWS 88
337
Total
covered
5255
5395
Balance
99 934
Thus, 934 (15 per cent) of the 6329 rural habitations were without any source of drinking water.
It could also be seen from the above that only 140 habitations were covered during 1999-2004
averaging 28 habitations per year. Even at double the above rate of coverage, 934 habitations
would take more than 16 years to cover. A time bound action plan to provide drinking water to
these habitations at the earliest was required.
When a spot source was found defunct in a fully covered habitation, the habitation was classified
as Turned NIL (TN) or Turned Partial (TP). Of the 5395 fully covered habitations, 314 (5.82 per
cent) turned nil and 742 (13.75 per cent) were partial. Out of these, 250 TN and 333 TP were
repaired/replaced with new ones, leaving 64 TN and 409 TP unattended as of March 2004. No
specific time bound plan had been prepared to undertake repairs to these 473 defunct sources.
3.3.16 Quality of water not ensured
The ARWS programme envisaged a system of quality monitoring and surveillance to ensure the
potability of water. It was noticed that of the 15849 tube wells sunk in the district during 1993-
2004, analytical test of water samples of only 3403 tube wells (21 per cent) could be carried out
during the said period. The test results indicated that the water discharged from 470 tube wells,
intended for 1.18 lakh population, was not safe for drinking due to either excessive iron content
(in 435 TWs) or chloride content (in 35 TWs). Thus, 470 TWs constructed at Rs.1.86 crore (at the
rate of Rs.39500 per TW) could not provide safe drinking water. Though the affected people were
to be provided with safe drinking water under the “Sub-mission project25
”, only seven PWS were
taken up covering 0.38 lakh population of which three were completed as of March 2004
covering 0.18 lakh population. Thus, quality of water in respect of 12446 TWs meant for the rest
of the population remained untested as of March 2004. As is evident from above, the water
testing was grossly inadequate as it was done on the samples from only 21 per cent of tube wells
in a decade. The safety of water from 79 per cent of the tube wells was yet to be confirmed
although the water from these TWs were being consumed by the people.
3.3.17 Inadequate supply of drinking water
The requirement of water was 40 litres per day per individual. With normal output of 12 litres per
minute, one hand pump was to cater to 250 persons. Accordingly, habitations were identified for
supply of drinking water. The table below provides details of total TW/SW available in the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
206 | P a g e
district.
Period Tube Wells
(TWs)
Sanitary Wells
(SWs) Total
As on 1 April 1999 12621 115 12736
As on 31 March
2004 15849 251 16100
During the five years, 3364 new TW/SW were sunk but 1147 TW/SW meant for 2.87 lakh
population became defunct. Thus, there was a net addition of 2217 TW/SW. As pointed out in the
foregoing paragraphs, the TW/SW sunk so far did not cover 934 habitations. Besides, water
shortages were experienced due to depletion in water levels in summer leading to consumption of
contaminated water from ponds. Neither any statistics relating to habitation-wise actual water
shortage nor any plan for its elimination was available.
The table below provides the details of Piped Water Supply (PWS) projects in the district.
Period Number of Number of Population covered
as on completed
projects
habitations
covered
1 April 1999 36 PWS 88 1.60 lakh
31 March 2004 275 PWS 337 6.34 lakh
During the five year period, the coverage of population through PWS increased substantially from
1.60 lakh to 6.34 lakh people (nearly 25 per cent of rural population26
). An amount of Rs.31.16
crore (SRP: Rs.17.22 crore and RWSS Divisions: Rs.13.93 crore) was spent on 239 newly
completed PWS. Another 33 PWS projects intended to benefit 1.32 lakh people were at various
stages of completion as of March 2004.
It was further observed that nine fully completed PWS projects (Rs.1.20 crore) covering 0.31 lakh
population were not commissioned for a period ranging from two to 14 months as of March 2004
due to non-energisation of pump houses though the amounts were deposited with the electricity
distribution company.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
207 | P a g e
3.3.18 Sector Reform Programme (SRP)
The District Water and Sanitation Mission (DWSM), Ganjam was registered as an NGO under
the Societies Act in October 2000 to implement the SRP. The reforms under the SRP were
moving towards a decentralised, demandresponsive27
, cost-sharing and community-friendly
system.
Implementation of the project under SRP required the beneficiaries to share a part (at least 10 per
cent in case of general and five per cent in case of SC/ST habitation) of the capital cost. A sum of
Rs.25.44 crore (GOI grant: Rs.22.44 crore, beneficiaries’ share: Rs.2.40 crore and interest:
Rs.0.60 crore) was received by the DWSM between year 2001 and 2003 against which Rs.24.91
crore were spent on start up, IEC28
, human resources development, hardware (PWS/TW/SW) and
administration. As of April 2004, all the 184 piped Water Supply schemes taken up by DWSM
were completed covering a population of 2.52 lakh.
Audit team visited two villages where PWS schemes were implemented by the DWSM. The PWS
scheme at Balibagada was completed at a cost of Rs.7.94 lakh (community contribution: Rs.0.80
lakh) and another at Turum at a cost of Rs 15.07 lakh (community contribution: Rs.1.56 lakh).
The villagers were found satisfied with the drinking water facility made available to them under
the SRP. The SRP, being demand driven and based on community participation, ought to be a
promising solution to the water supply problem.
3.3.19 Urban water supply
Urban area in Ganjam district comprised one municipality and 17 notified area councils with
approximate population of 6.10 lakh as of March 2004. The responsibility for water supply to
urban areas rested with the two Public Health Engineering Divisions at Berhampur and
Chatrapur. The divisions incurred an expenditure of Rs 42.14 crore on urban water supply during
19992004. The drinking water in 18 ULB areas was supplied through PWS schemes (household
water connections and public stand-posts) and TW. The number of stand-posts had gone up from
2817 in April 1999 to 3062 in March 2004. The corresponding figures for TW stood at 1424 and
2088 respectively.
It was observed that out of 18 ULBs in Ganjam district, 14 ULBs with a total population of 5.8
lakh were not supplied with minimum water as per the norms of GoI. Against the minimum
requirement of 742 lakh litres of water per day, these 14 ULBs29
were provided with 466 lakh
litres (nearly 63 per cent of the requirement) of water. The divisions attributed (June 2004) the
shortfall to inadequate water source and infrastructure. The Chatrapur division had taken up
(2001-02) augmentation work of water supply in three out of 14 ULBs (Hinjilicut, Khallikote and
Rambha) at a cost of Rs.2.94 crore. However, no such steps were taken under the Berhampur
division. Adequate action had not been initiated to recover arrears of water tax of Rs.94 lakh from
water connection holders in the urban areas.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
208 | P a g e
3.3.20 Conclusions
The supply of drinking water still remained a problem area in the district. Urban areas received
less water than required. Nearly 15 per cent rural habitations did not have water supply system.
Only 25 per cent population of the habitations covered under water supply system had PWS, the
remaining 75 per cent depended on TW/SW where the safety aspect of the water was not ensured.
Recommendations
• Drinking water supply to the new habitations needs to be speeded up. Testing of water quality
of the tube wells needed to be ensured before water consumption started.
The matter was demi-officially referred (July 2004) to the Principal Secretaries/Secretaries
of the concerned departments. Reply had not been received (November 2004) except from
the Planning and Co-ordination Department.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
209 | P a g e
Review of the availability of safe drinking water in Jharkhand .
Government of India (GOI) introduced in 1997-98 the Accelerated Rural Water Supply
(ARWS) to provide access to safe drinking water within 1.6 km. of all rural habitation. The
habitations were planned to be covered under tube wells (TW)/sanitary wells (SW). Piped
water supply schemes were also introduced in the area affected by water quality problem.
The Executive Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation (Civil) Division and Drinking
Water and Sanitation (Mechanical) Division, Dumka under the control of Chief Engineer,
Drinking Water and Sanitation are responsible for providing safe drinking water to the
people of Dumka district.
The review revealed that quality of water was not assured and quantity of water supply was
inadequate.
3.5.42 Quality of water not ensured
The ARWS programme envisaged a system of quality monitoring and surveillance to ensure
the potability of water. It was noticed that analytical test of water samples was not carried
out during 2001-2004, although a sum of Rs 0.43 lakh was allotted (September 2003) for
conducting bacteriological test but the entire amount was surrendered in 2003-04. The
Divisional Officer stated (July 2004) that due to non-posting of laboratory assistant, funds
allotted could not be utilised. Thus quality of water in respect of 14393 tube wells remained
untested as of July 2004.
Departmental inspection by the Superintending Engineer, Drinking water and Sanitation
Circle, Dumka (October 2003) revealed that Hijla Water filtration plant was in a poor
condition and the water supplied was dirty. It was however, stated by the Executive
Engineer-in charge that no impurity was found in the water. Reply is not acceptable in view
of the findings of Superintending Engineer.
Failure of Kerala Water Authority to monitor the execution of work relating Rural
Water Supply Scheme by Fisheries and water resources, Kerela..
Highlights
Kollam, an old sea port town on the Arabian coast is a land of backwaters. A review of the
Government Departments engaged in the activities of the district viz., availability of safe drinking
water, primary health care and fishing sector revealed several deficiencies such as non-utilisation of
funds, delay in implementation of schemes, shortage of manpower, idling of equipment, etc.
Availability of safe drinking water
3.2.8 The requirements of drinking water in the district were met mainly from open wells,
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
210 | P a g e
tube wells and piped water supply. The Kerala Water Authority (KWA), an autonomous
body, was the agency entrusted with the execution and maintenance of piped water supply
schemes. KWA also executes the water supply schemes sanctioned by the DC for the
benefit of the SC/ST population and that of local bodies as deposit works and maintains
them. In addition, District Panchayats implemented water supply schemes under „Sector
Reforms Project‟ in the district which were maintained by the beneficiary groups of each
scheme.
3.2.9 The implementation of the water supply schemes was reviewed by a test check of the
records in the office of both the KWA divisions, District Collectorate and District
Panchayat. The results of the review are discussed below:
3.2.10 The review revealed that the schemes were not commenced due to non-availability of
land, diversion of loan amount specifically obtained for water supply schemes, unfruitful
expenditure, diversion of funds, failure to ensure quality of drinking water, etc., as described
below:
Schemes executed by Kerala Water Authority
3.2.11 Fourteen water supply schemes were under execution and the expenditure on these
schemes as of March 2004 was Rs 19.22 crore as shown in Appendix XXX. However, only
three schemes were commissioned during the last five years. Of these, the scheme for World
Bank aided Water Supply Scheme to Chithara and adjoining Panchayats commenced in
1986 was completed only in 1999, thus delaying the project by about 10 years. The two
schemes sanctioned in 1991 and 1997 were under various stages of implementation. Work
in respect of remaining nine schemes sanctioned between 1993 and 1999 could not be
started due to non-availability of land.
Non-execution of schemes after availing of loans
3.2.12 KWA raised loans from financial institutions like Life Insurance Corporation of
India (LIC), HUDCO♠
, etc., for the implementation of various ongoing as well as new
schemes. Government accorded sanction between 1995 and 1999 to implement six rural
water supply schemes♦
with loan assistance from LIC in areas where the existing ground
water source was of poor quality. The population to be benefited was 2.06 lakh in the six
villages of the district. The estimated cost of the schemes and the eligible amount of loan
were Rs 49.54 crore and Rs 22.81 crore respectively. Loans released from LIC for these
schemes upto March 2004 amounted to Rs 9.49 crore.
3.2.13 In Rural Water Supply Scheme (RWSS) to Ochira and Karunagappally the original
source and site of treatment plant were changed due to non-availability of land and the new
site for the treatment plant was identified but not taken possession of. But pipes worth Rs
2.21 crore were purchased between March 1998 and October 1999 by KWA though the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
211 | P a g e
required land was not acquired. Thus the expenditure of Rs 2.21 crore remained idle for
more than four years.
3.2.14 The source of the remaining four RWSS (Chavara, Panmana, Thevalakkara and
Thekkumbhagam) was the existing well of Quilon Water Supply Scheme. The land
required for other common components (water treatment plant, balancing reservoir and 800
mm CI pumping main) was in possession of KWA. However, KWA did not commence the
execution of common components due to non-acquisition of land by KWA for the overhead
tanks for two of the schemes at Chavara and Thevalakkara.
3.2.15 The sanctioning of projects and obtaining loan for its implementation without
ensuring the availability of land for various components was irregular. Out of the loan of Rs
9.49 crore raised at interest rate of 13 per cent, Rs 6.99 crore availed specifically for these six
projects were used as resources for other activities of KWA and the works could not be
started as of June 2004.
Unfruitful Expenditure
3.2.16 The local bodies (beneficiary Panchayats) were to provide land required for the
construction of well-cum-pump house, treatment plant, overhead tank, in respect of cent per
cent centrally sponsored Accelerated Rural Water Supply Schemes (ARWSS). The
following two schemes could not be completed even eight years after the targeted date of
completion due to lack of appropriate and timely action by the Panchayats and KWA and
the expenditure on these projects became unfruitful.
3.2.17 ARWSS to Kulathupuzha and adjoining villages with an estimated cost of Rs 4.18
crore was sanctioned in October 1993. The scheme, targeted to be completed in October
1996, was to benefit four villages of Kulathupuzha, Eroor, Alayamon and Ittiva. The
scheme was taken up as the project area experienced acute scarcity of drinking water and
the villages were identified as problem villages as per criteria fixed by Government of India
(GOI). But the Forest department did not permit any construction in the forest land
identified for the construction of treatment plant, reservoir, etc. An alternative site (1.325
acre) was handed over by the Panchayat in November 2002. The change in site resulted in
deviation from the original plan. But the deviation proposal was not approved by KWA as
of March 2004. The expenditure incurred so far (March 2004) was Rs 1.14 crore for
purchase of pipes (Rs 0.98 crore) and preliminary expenses (Rs 0.16 crore).
3.2.18 Similarly, ARWSS to Pathanapuram and adjoining villages estimated to cost Rs 3.78
crore was sanctioned in October 1993. The scheme, targetted to be completed in October
1996 was to benefit a population of 1.40 lakh in the five villages of Pathanapuram,
Piravanthoor, Pidavoor, Thalavoor and Mylam. The construction of well-cum-pump house
was started in April 1996. While digging the well rock formation was struck. There was no
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
212 | P a g e
provision in the accepted schedule of contract for rock blasting. Hence the work was
stopped in November 1997. The revised estimate was pending approval of the Chief
Engineer. The total expenditure incurred upto March 2004 was Rs 1.14 crore.
3.2.19 The ARWSS to Kottarakkara and adjoining villages was intended to serve a
population of 1.14 lakh in the four Panchayats of Kottarakkara, Melila, Vettikavala and
Vilakkudy. The source was the treated water from “Bilaterally Aided Water Supply Scheme
to Kundara”. Works on the other components were commenced in April 1991 and trial run
started in December 2000. However, the scheme could not be commissioned owing to
insufficient water from the Kundara scheme. As no benefit could be derived the
expenditure of Rs 4.23 crore became nugatory.
3.2.20 KWA may investigate the reasons for the undue delay in implementing these
schemes and action taken against the persons responsible.
Non-implementation of drinking water schemes
3.2.21 Government sanctioned (October 2002) a project on „Basic Sanitation and Drinking
Water Supply Facilities‟, with Special Central Assistance in nine districts including Kollam.
Special Central Assistance of Rs 50 lakh was received (February 2003) for two drinking
water schemes (Rs 40 lakh) and for construction of 10 common sanitation facilities (Rs 10
lakh). This amount was deposited with the Harbour Engineering Department in February
2003. As the LSGIs could not identify the land required for the schemes, the funds
remained unutilised.
3.2.22 The department just passed on the funds meant for the schemes to the Harbour
Engineering Department and the matter was not pursued thereafter. The failure of the
department to ensure providing of required land by the LSGIs and convene beneficiary
committees were also the reasons for non-implementation of the scheme despite availability
of funds.
Delay in implementation of schemes for SC/ST
3.2.23 According to norms, 25 per cent and 10 per cent of the ARWSS funds were to be
utilised for undertaking original water supply schemes for Scheduled Castes (SC) and
Scheduled Tribes (ST) respectively. KWA released Rs 2.11 crore to the DC during the
period from 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2004 for implementation of the SC/ST components
of the scheme. But there was delay upto 18 months in encashing the cheques received from
KWA due to treasury restrictions imposed by Government. The inordinate delay in
implementation of the schemes financed by GOI resulted in non-provision of drinking water
to the SC and ST population.
Diversion of funds meant for the benefit of SC/ST
3.2.24 The repair and maintenance of commissioned water supply schemes was to be met
from the funds of KWA. However, thirty five schemes with an estimated cost of Rs 1.07
crore sanctioned in March 2003 by the DC was for the repair, maintenance and extension
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
213 | P a g e
works. One scheme sanctioned in March 2003 at an estimated cost of Rs 11.80 lakh was
not for SC/ST population which was a violation of the guidelines. The action of DC in
utilising Rs 1.19 crore for purposes not envisaged in the scheme resulted in diversion of
funds.
Poor quality of water
3.2.25 The Quality Control District Laboratory, Kollam was responsible for collection and
analysis of samples from the piped water schemes periodically and send reports of the result
to the implementing divisions of KWA for remedial action. During 1999-2004 the
laboratory collected and analysed 5944 samples and found that 2399 samples (varying from
33 to 46 per cent) contained high bacteriological, chemical and physical impurities indicating
that the water was not potable. This showed that the corrective measures like periodical
washing of tank, chlorination, leak rectification work, etc., were not adequate and therefore
the piped water supplied was not safe drinking water. The action taken on the findings of
the laboratory was, however, not furnished by the DC.
Hospital Waste Management
3.2.39 Bio-medical waste management rules require that every bit of infectious waste to be
properly treated and disposed off. In a study on Bio-waste Management in the district
conducted by the Indian Medical Association (IMA), it was estimated that about 7.3 lakh kg
of infectious wastes were produced in a year in the health care facilities, including private
institutions of Kollam District.
3.2.40 Government Victoria Hospital, Kollam, the only hospital in the district dedicated
exclusively to women and children with bed strength of 273 generated about 17900 kg of
bio-wastes a year. However, the hospital had not yet adopted a scientific way of disposal of
bio-waste and the primitive method of burning the waste in a pit was being followed.
Kerala State Pollution Control Board in its study reported that this could lead to spread of
contagious diseases and other health hazards and therefore the need for a properly planned
project for the management and disposal of hazardous waste is brought to notice. In fact,
none of the institutions other than the district hospital has installed an incinerator.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
214 | P a g e
Conclusions
3.2.53 KWA conceived and sanctioned schemes without ensuring availability of land for
various components like water source, water treatment plant, reservoirs, etc., and resulted in
non-commencement of execution and delay in completion of schemes. Thus KWA failed in
providing safe drinking water to 82 per cent of the targeted population though finance was
available. There were diversions of funds on schemes implemented through DC and under
utilisation of funds allotted to District Panchayats. Nearly 40 per cent of the water supplied
was found to be below the prescribed standards.
3.2.55 Drinking water and sanitation schemes were not implemented though funds were
available.
3.2.56 Recommendations
The land required for implementation of components of water supply schemes should be
ensured before sanctioning the scheme and raising loans.
Quality of drinking water supplied should be ensured by proper upkeep of facilities.
A properly planned project for the management and disposal of hazardous waste needs to be
implemented.
Provision of safe drinking water scheme in Madhya Pradesh, 2004
Highlights
Betul district, situated in the central southern part of the state covered an area of 10043 sq. km. of
which more than 53 per cent was arable land. Of 13.95 lakh population, more than 81 per cent was
rural and 50 per cent belonged to SC and ST. Most of the villages in the district did not have easy
access to medical facilities. Shortage of doctors and paramedical staff further added to already
insufficient medical facilities available in district. Supply of potable drinking water remained a dream
to the inhabitants of 665 villages of the district as these villages were not covered under any of the
drinking water supply schemes launched by the Government of India and the State Government.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
215 | P a g e
Government could not provide the minimum employment of 100 mandays per year per family as
envisaged under any of the Employment Generation Programmes.
3.3.9 Safe drinking water
Inadequate planning for supply of drinking water to the towns
GOI launched (1993) the Centrally sponsored “Accelerated urban water supply programme” for
towns with population less than 20000 (1991 census). Towns with supply of water of less than 70
litre Per Capita Daily (LPCD) were to be given priority. The towns with population in excess of
20000 with supply of less than 135 LPCD were to be taken up under the Urban Water Supply
Schemes by the State Government. According to 1991 census, there were five towns (excluding
Sarni where drinking water supply was maintained by Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board
(MPSEB) and the Western Coal Fields Limited) in the district with population ranging between
9605 and 63694 with availability of drinking water between 25 LPCD to 42.50 LPCD as shown
in Appendix-XXXV. The availability of potable water in all the towns during 2004 ranged
between 21 and 68 LPCD. Drinking water supply schemes (costing Rs.7.70 crore) were taken up
at Multai (Rs.5.75 crore) and Bhainsdehi (Rs.1.95 crore) in 1995 and 1997 respectively. It was
observed that Rs.1.35 crore (Multai Rs.0.90 crore and Bhainsdehi Rs.0.45 crore) were spent up
to March 2004 mainly on procurement of materials and advance payment. The physical progress
of both the schemes was nil even after lapse of about 8 to 10 years. Thus defective planning and
execution by the department had deprived 1.60 lakh urban population of adequate potable
water.
Non-prioritization of
villages for potable water
GOI launched (February 1986) the National Drinking Water Supply Mission to cover the
ongoing Centrally sponsored scheme of Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP)
to provide safe and potable water of 40 LPCD to all villages and habitations. Though 1528
villages were covered during 1996-2004, 1422 remained to be covered as of March 2004.
Information was not made available to show the names of villages and habitations already
covered, to be covered, and new additions. Thus, 1422 villages and habitations with 7,38,380
population (census 2001) including 665 in the category of not covered were still awaiting facility
of 40 LPCD potable water due to defective implementation of the schemes.
Non testing and non
closure of water sources having unsafe water
The progress report (June 2004) revealed that testing of 7812 water sources out of 7868 was done
during July 1990 to June 2004 in the District of Betul. The balance of 56 sources were not tested.
Further, of 1274 sources of water found unsafe for drinking in the tests in the departmental
laboratory, only 18 sources were closed. The inhabitants were consuming contaminated water
from 1256 sources of water which was hazardous to health. Executive Engineer, PHE, Betul
stated (July 2004) that the water sources would be closed after alternate arrangements are made.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
216 | P a g e
3.3.13 Drought Prone Area Programme (DPAP)
Watersheds of approximately of 500 hectares each in every village was to be identified and
developed. These were to be taken up in a phased manner and batches over a period which
should not ordinarily exceed four years. According to the prescribed funding pattern, funds were
to be released in instalments in the first year (25 per cent), the second year (40 per cent), the third
year (25 per cent) and one instalment in the fourth year (10 per cent). Funds provided under the
project were divided amongst the project components of watershed treatment/development (80
per cent), community organisation (5 per cent), training (5 per cent) and administrative
overheads (10 per cent). Out of allotted fund of Rs.20.61 crore during 1999-2004, expenditure of
Rs.19.44 crore was incurred under the programme. Audit observed:
Non completion of work and release of funds against norms
Eight watershed projects (area : 3830 ha) sanctioned during November-December 1997 (Rs.1.27
crore) could not be completed even in five years. The CEO intimated that these watersheds
could not be completed due to general elections. The reply was not tenable as these projects were
to be completed in four years. It was further observed that Rs.7.49 crore were released to Project
Implementation Agencies and watershed committees during 2001-04 in one instalment for
executing of works selected for six to eight batches against the norm of release of funds in
instalments. The CEO intimated that releases were made due to availability of sufficient funds.
The reply was not tenable as it was in disregard of the norms laid down by GOI.
Non refund of unspent amounts and excess expenditure
Against sanctioned project cost of Rs.11.53 crore for watershed development under phase I, total
expenditure incurred was Rs.10.87 crore. Thus there was a saving of Rs.0.66 crore which was to
be refunded to ZP but the same was not done (September 2004). Further it was also observed
that against permissible limit of Rs.9.22 crore for watershed treatment activities, expenditure
incurred was Rs.10.51 crore i.e. excess was of Rs.1.29 crore while the area treated was 36623 ha
i.e. 1486 ha less than the target of 38109 ha. No reasons for non refund and less coverage of area
were advanced.
3.3.14 Conclusion
Neither urban nor rural population of the district could be provided safe drinking water as per
norms. Towns with supply of less than 70 litre per capita water daily were not given priority
under the Accelerated Urban Water Supply Programme.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
217 | P a g e
3.3.15 Recommendations
Alternative
arrangement for supply of drinking water needs to be made so that the existing unsafe
drinking water sources could be closed at the earliest.
Under various
drinking water supply scheme launched by Government of India and State Government,
priority needs to be given to the villages/ habitations still awaiting facility of minimum
potable water.
Performance audit of measures to control pollution in the river Yamuna in Delhi.
This performance audit is the third in the series of reviews carried out by audit on
issues relating to sewage management and treatment aimed at controlling water
pollution in the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi. The earlier two reviews
printed in the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India relating to the
Government of NCT of Delhi presented to the Legislature during 2000 and 2004
highlighted inter alia the slow progress of construction of sewage treatment plants
(STPs) and sewage pumping stations (SPSs), rehabilitation of sewer lines, tardy
progress of construction and utilisation of common effluent treatment plants
(CETPs) to treat industrial effluents and continuing flow of large quantities of
domestic and industrial sewage into the Yamuna without treatment resulting in
pollution of the river water during its passage through the NCT of Delhi. Highlights
of each of the earlier reviews are at Annex I.
In view of the significant environmental risks associated with underperformance of
sewage treatment projects, this performance audit was carried out with a view to
assessing the cumulative status of the performance of STPs, SPSs and the connecting
sewer lines as well as the actual treatment of domestic and industrial sewage, the
quality of treatment and finally the impact on control of pollution in the river
Yamuna as at the end of March 2004.
Highlights
Domestic and industrial sewage generated within the NCT of Delhi is the main
source of pollution of the river Yamuna during its passage through the NCT.
Despite over ten years of efforts and expenditure of Rs. 872 crore since 19941
on
establishment of sewage treatment infrastructure for treatment of domestic and
industrial sewage before its release into the river, the quality of water at the point
where the river leaves Delhi has deteriorated drastically with large amounts of
untreated sewage still falling into the river.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
218 | P a g e
The water quality of the river at the point of its entry into Delhi at Palla is
adequate to sustain aquatic life and conforms to water quality of “bathing”
standards in terms of Dissolved Oxygen (DO) and Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD). However, at the point of its exit from Delhi at Okhla, the water quality of
the river is unfit for any purpose with the BOD being 40 mg per litre against the
norm of not more than 3 mg per litre while the DO deteriorates to almost nil
against the norm of not less than 5 mg per litre. The coli form pollution which is
already sub-standard at 217 times the norm when the river enters Delhi also
deteriorates further to 1.39 lakh times the norm at the time of its exit from the
NCT.
Against the estimated domestic sewage generation of 719 Million Gallons per
Day (MGD) in Delhi, the Government has created capacity for treatment of only
5122
MGD until March 2004. Even the created capacities of the STPs are not
utilised optimally on account of construction of STPs in areas without adequate
sewage load and non-synchronisation of construction of trunk sewer lines and
sewage pumping stations. The progress of rehabilitation of the 28 trunk sewers of
total length of 130 kms which is crucial for conveyance of the sewage has been
tardy.
Only 335 MGD out of the estimated domestic sewage of 719 MGD is being
treated before discharge into the river. The balance 384 MGD outfalls into the
river untreated. Even the figures for actual treatment of sewage are arrived at
through normative calculation on the basis of rated capacity of the STPs rather
than through a robust system of measurement of the inflows and outflows.
The quality of treated effluent did not meet the stipulated specifications implying
that even the treated effluent is contributing to the deterioration in water quality.
Of the 15 CETPs required for treatment of 42 MGD industrial sewage, only 10
are complete at an expenditure of Rs. 123 crore of which only four were
commissioned as of March 2004. The utilisation of even the commissioned plants
is questionable. The construction and maintenance of the CETPs are plagued by
various constraints; viz. under-estimation of the cost leading to shortage of funds,
cost escalation due to delay, delay in construction of conveyance systems, delay in
formation of CETP societies, etc. Consequently, almost the entire industrial
sewage was out falling into the river without treatment.
The untreated sewage from the unsewered areas continues to fall into the river
through open drains and nallahs in the absence of trapping of the sewage from
such areas for treatment. This further contributed to the pollution load in the
river.
While the physical progress of construction of sewage treatment and disposal
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
219 | P a g e
works indicated under-performance, the Delhi Jal Board, which is entrusted with
execution of such works, failed to utilise Rs. 159 crore out of Rs. 599 crore
provided for the purpose by the Government during 1999-2004.
List of recommendations
• Government of Delhi and the executing agency may put in place a system of efficient
project management and utilisation of funds with CPM/PERT chart of all measurable
activities which can be foreseen. The systems and procedures for formulation of plans and
processing of tenders need to be streamlined so as to ensure optimum utilisation of funds placed
at the disposal of DJB.
• Institutional mechanisms need to be established for timely coordination with other
concerned civic and land owning agencies so as to minimize delay and hindrances in execution
of works.
• Proposals for creation of treatment capacity must be based and prioritized with reference
to the estimated sewage generation in the relevant catchment areas which should be estimated
after taking all factors into account including population trends and availability/supply of
water.
• Government of Delhi and DJB should put in place a system to ensure simultaneous
execution and completion of all related infrastructure
and establish reporting and accountability systems for underperformance. They should
also monitor completion of all conveyance and other inter-dependent work and establish
accountability for failure to complete them within the prescribed time.
• DJB should ensure the optimum functioning of every component of a STP so as to
obviate the possibility of release of harmful gases into the atmosphere. It should also explore the
possibility of utilizing the gases generated by the STPs for generating electricity to meet their
own requirement of power which would significantly offset operating costs.
• Systems and procedures need to be strengthened to ensure accurate measurement of both
the quantity of treated sewage being discharged as well as its quality with reference to the
prescribed parameters.
• The Government of Delhi should resolve outstanding issues related to the payment of
share by the Government of India and the CETP societies.
. • Government and DSIDC should ensure completion of the remaining CETPs in
a time bound manner ensuring compliance with the stipulated environmental standards.
• Government of Delhi should pay prompt attention to trapping and treatment of all
sewage presently flowing through these drains/nallahs in line with its assurances given to the
Supreme Court in December 1993 and prepare a comprehensive plan to complete the works in a
time bound manner.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
220 | P a g e
Yamuna is one of the major rivers of India and has social, economic and religious
significance for vast sections of the population. The total length of the Yamuna from
its origin in the Yamunotri Glacier in the Himalayan ranges of Uttaranchal to its
confluence with the river Ganga at Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh is 1376 kms of which
22 kms pass through the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi. It enters Delhi
at Palla near Wazirabad Barrage and leaves Delhi at the Okhla Barrage.
Water quality of a river is assessed and categorised with reference to its use, viz: (a)
raw water fit for drinking purposes, (b) raw water fit for bathing purposes, and (c)
raw water fit for agricultural use. The categorisation of water for its different uses is
based primarily on parameters of Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Bio-Chemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD) and Total Coli form (TC).The water quality of river Yamuna at the
point of its entry into Delhi is adequate to sustain aquatic life and conforms to water
quality of bathing standards.
Figure-1: River Yamuna at Wazirabad Barrage (up stream)
The main source of pollution of water in Yamuna in Delhi is domestic sewage which
constitutes 94 percent of the total sewage generated in the NCT of Delhi while the
balance is contributed by industrial sewage. The Union Ministry of Environment and
Forests released a white paper in December 1997 along with a broad action plan on
“Pollution in Delhi” which aimed inter alia at achieving water quality of “bathing
standards” in Yamuna. The parameters prescribed to achieve this standard were as
follows:
Figure-2: Parameter of water quality for bathing standard
Parameter Prescribed standard
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Not less than 5 mg per
litre
Bio Chemical Oxygen
Demand
Not more than 3 mg per
litre
(BOD)
Total Coli form (TC) Not more than 500 per
100 ml
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
221 | P a g e
The action plan envisaged a strategy for conservation of water, full utilisation of
sewage treatment plants and regular maintenance of sewers and pumps by the Delhi
Government and its executing agencies.
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, provides for the
prevention and control of water pollution and the maintenance or restoration of the
wholesomeness of water. For this purpose, the Act provides for the establishment of
Boards and conferring them with suitable powers for prevention and control of water
pollution. Under the provisions of this Act, the Central Government constituted the
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) while each State Government was to
constitute similar State Pollution Control Boards to implement the provisions of the
Act. In so far as Union Territories are concerned, the CPCB delegated its functions
to the Governments of the Union Territory. In pursuance of the above provisions,
Government of Delhi constituted the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) to
monitor and control pollution in Delhi in terms of the provisions and objectives of
the Act.
The Delhi Jal Board (DJB) is the executing agency entrusted with the construction
and maintenance of sewage treatment plants, sewage pumping stations and trunk
sewers and for treatment of domestic sewage in the NCT of Delhi. The Board
functions under the administrative control of the Department of Urban Development
of the Government of Delhi. It also provides sewerage facilities in areas under the
jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). The New Delhi
Municipal Council (NDMC), the Delhi Cantonment Board (DCB) and the Delhi
Development Authority (DDA) are responsible for construction of branch sewers
and out fall into trunk sewers in the areas under their respective jurisdictions. The
Delhi State Industrial Development Corporation (DSIDC) is entrusted with the task
of constructing CETPs in identified industrial estates. Monitoring of pollution and
enforcement of pollution standards is the responsibility of the DPCC along with the
CPCB.
The DJB has 30 STPs at 17 locations in the NCT of Delhi along with SPSs. The
sewerage network comprises of 5600 kms of sewerage lines including trunk sewers
and branch sewers (peripheral/internal sewers). This includes 28 main trunk sewers
of a total length of 130 kms. For sewage management, Delhi is divided into five
drainage zones of Okhla, Keshopur, Rithala-Rohini, Coronation and Shahdara. In
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
222 | P a g e
addition, there are newly sewered areas of Pappan Kalan (Dwarka), Vasant Kunj,
Sarita Vihar and Narela.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
223 | P a g e
The performance audit of measures to control water pollution in Yamuna was
conducted with a view to assessing whether:
• the programmes and schemes for control of pollution were being holistically
conceived and systematically planned so as to effectively control water pollution;
• the funds available for control of water pollution were being optimally
utilised;
• the projects and structures involved in effective sewage disposal i.e. trapping,
conveying and treatment of waste water were properly matched and co-ordinated so
as to achieve the intended purpose;
• the facilities created were effectively functioning in accordance with the
stipulated performance standards;
• there was effective monitoring of the water quality of the river so as to enable
timely corrective action; and
• the measures undertaken had an impact in terms of improving the quality of
the river water to “bathing” standards as envisaged in the White paper issued by the
Union Ministry of Environment & Forests.
The fundamental criteria used for assessment was whether the pollution control
schemes and projects undertaken had resulted in reduction in the pollution levels and
improvement in the quality of the river water and whether the infrastructure created
was functioning optimally. This was sub-defined as follows:
• projects should be based on a proper assessment of the quantum of sewage
generation taking into account area-wise trends of population growth;
• optimal utilisation of allocated funds for pollution control measures;
• existence of systems and procedures for efficient implementation of pollution
control projects and for monitoring of pollution levels;
• coordinated construction and performance of projects for sewage treatment;
• performance of the system to the designed/stipulated capacity and specified
quality of output;
• adverse side effects in terms of air pollution, soil pollution, etc.; and
• the ultimate objective of release of treated sewage in the river so as to improve
the quality of river water in terms of the parameters of dissolved oxygen, bio-
chemical oxygen demand and total coli form content.
.The performance audit with reference to the progressive status of the measures taken
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
224 | P a g e
to control pollution of Yamuna as at the end of March 2004 was conducted by test
check of records of the DJB, DSIDC and DPCC. The audit team made field visits to
16 STPs located at five sites along with the connected sewage pumping stations and
to the CETPs in the Wazirpur and Mayapuri industrial estates. The methodology
adopted was:
• formulation and finalisation of the audit objectives taking into account the
views of the Chief Executive Officer of DJB and Managing Director of DSIDC and
their officers at a meeting held in December 2003.
• scrutiny and check of records of DJB, DSIDC and DPCC alongwith study of
their five year plans/annual plans;
• scrutiny and test check of the plant records maintained at the STPs/CETPs
and their physical inspection in association with the concerned officials of
DJB/DSIDC; and
• study of assessment reports of outside agencies like Indian Agricultural
Research Institute and CPCB to assess the overall impact of the measures undertaken
for treatment of domestic and industrial sewage/effluent.
The Department of Urban Development, Government of NCT of Delhi, provides
loans/grants to the DJB for implementation of the scheme for controlling pollution
in Yamuna. It was brought out in the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General
relating to the Government of Delhi for the year ended March 1999 that
Government had spent Rs. 284.98 crore during 1994-99 on creation of sewage
treatment facilities. During April 1999 to February 2004, the Government released
Rs. 598.84 crore of which DJB utilised only Rs. 439.60 crore as under:
Figure-4: Year-wise budget allocation and actual expenditure (Rupees in
crore)
Year Release by
Government to
DJB
Actual
expenditure by
DJB
Unspent
amount/excess (-
/+)
1999-
00 68.80 64.29 (-) 4.51
2000-
01 115.12 78.27 (-) 36.85
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
225 | P a g e
2001-
02 130.60 108.03 (-) 22.57
2002-
03 132.72 87.05 (-) 45.67
2003-
04 151.60* 101.96* (-) 49.64*
Total 598.84 439.60 (-) 159.24
While DJB did not utilise 27 percent of allotted funds during the five years under
review, there were also unspent balances in each of the five years ranging from 6.56
to 34.41 percent. There were also unspent balances under each of the separate
schemes ranging from eight percent to 43 percent as depicted in Annex-II.
DJB attributed the under-utilisation in July 2004 to delays due to nonfinalisation of
tenders for construction of pumping stations and treatment plants, change in
effluent standards prescribed by the DPCC in January 2001 and lack of technical
expertise for rehabilitation of trunk sewers. Government added in October 2004
that in addition to the above factors, under-utilisation of resources was also
attributable to the multiplicity of agencies from which permissions were required
for execution of works, unforeseen hindrances due to the service plans of other
underground utilities and introduction of new technologies.
The reasons advanced are not tenable as the requirement of permission from other
agencies, the time required for the tender processes and requisite technical expertise
are foreseeable factors common to all such works, which should have been planned
and catered for while change of standard was a one time matter. Further, trunk
sewers, under which Rs. 68 crore remained unspent out of the total provision of Rs.
157.88 crore, had been lying silted for periods ranging from one to 15 years and the
reasons advanced for nonutilisation of the funds are not applicable to rehabilitation
of trunk sewers.
At the beginning of the IX five year Plan (1997-2002), the DJB had existing total
sewage treatment capacity of 280 Million Gallons per day. DJB assessed the total
sewage generation as 7563
MGD by the end of the IX Plan. Of this, DJB planned to
tackle 601 MGD of sewage generated from the sewered areas. Against these
projections, DJB could create additional sewage treatment capacity of only 202
MGD during the IX Plan period taking the cumulative treatment capacity to 482
MGD.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
226 | P a g e
For the X five year Plan (2002-2007), DJB revised the estimated total domestic
sewage generation by March 2007 to 720 MGD and targeted creation of additional
treatment capacity of 263 MGD by the end of the X Plan period increasing the total
sewage treatment capacity to 745 MGD. In addition, to tackle sewage from the
unsewered areas, DJB planned to trap the drains which were carrying sewage of
these areas and convey it to the STPs.
Against these projections, DJB created additional sewage treatment capacity of only
30 MGD during the first two years (2002-04) of the X Plan resulting in total
treatment capacity of only 512 MGD of which an STP of 12 MGD capacity was
non-functional since 1999.
9.1 Analysis of achievements
Analysis of the projections made in the five year Plans and the achievements
revealed the following:
• DJB had not created treatment capacity to match the actual sewage
generation in the NCT of Delhi. The IX five year Plan did not incorporate any
provision to trap the sewage from the unsewered areas covering about 40 percent of
the population. Even during the first two years of the X Plan, no action had been
initiated in this regard.
• The total treatment capacity set up by the end of the IX Plan (March 2002)
was only 482 MGD which was 274 MGD short of the estimated sewage of 756
MGD.
• An STP of 12 MGD capacity at Keshopur remained non-functional for about
five years as of March 2004.
• The planning and actual construction of STPs during the first three years of
the X Plan fails to inspire confidence about achievement of the target at the end of
the plan period. While during the first two years additional capacity of only 30 MGD
was added, the work in hand is of 70 MGD capacity.
9.2 Under performance in execution of specific projects
There were also shortfalls in execution of specific projects. During 19992004, DJB
identified 51, 26 and one work of construction of pumping stations, construction of
new rising mains and rehabilitation of an existing rising main respectively for
execution. However, DJB could execute only 29 of these 78 works though there was
unspent allotment during each of these years. Similarly, DJB projected 65 works of
construction/rehabilitation/de-silting of trunk sewers during 1999-2004 of which
only five were completed.
Audit examination further disclosed that there was no evidence to suggest whether
any prioritisation was done in planning and construction of the systems linking with
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
227 | P a g e
the growth of the city. Moreover, proposals for construction of a particular STP did
not include details/status of the supporting pumping stations and trunk sewers etc.
Consequently, the works were not synchronised and the intended objective could not
be achieved as brought out in subsequent paragraphs. Further, DJB did not prepare
detailed project reports or pre-feasibility study reports except for the two STPs which
were executed under the Ganga Action Plan.
Government stated in October 2004 that DJB relied on the projections of population
and city development made by the Delhi Development Authority in the Master Plan
and the availability of water for its planning and strategy. Due to migration of large
population from other States, the actual population growth in the city exceeded the
projections made. It added that due to multiple agencies involved in the clearance
and the execution of the projects, the progress was slow.
The reply relating to population projections going wrong is not relevant in the
context of under performance with reference to the projects planned for execution.
Recommendations
• Government of Delhi and the executing agency may put in place a system of efficient
project management and utilisation of funds with CPM/PERT chart of all measurable
activities which can be foreseen. The systems and procedures for formulation of plans and
processing of tenders need to be streamlined so as to ensure optimum utilisation of funds placed
at the disposal of DJB.
• Institutional mechanisms need to be established for timely coordination with other
concerned civic and land owning agencies so as to minimize delay and hindrances in execution
of works.
One of the consequences of inadequate planning and prioritisation was mismatch
between the treatment capacity created and the actual sewage generated in the
relevant catchment areas resulting in untreated sewage continuing to outfall into the
Yamuna. DJB spent large amounts in creating treatment capacity in sparsely
populated areas while it failed to create necessary treatment facilities and conveyance
systems in areas where sewage was presently being generated.
10.1 Sewage treatment capacity significantly below sewage generation
In the following cases, the treatment capacity created was significantly less than the
sewage actually generated:
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
228 | P a g e
Figure-5: Sewage treatment capacity and actual generation
[Figures are in
MGD]
KeshopurZone Okhla
Zone
Shahdara
Zone
Total
Effective capacity 60* 140 65 265
Estimated sewage
generation
145 220 126 491
Sewage actually
treated
59 132 41 232
Sewage being
bypassed
86 88 85 259
Thus, the total sewage treatment capacity created in the three zones was 277
MGD against the estimated sewage generation of 491 MGD. Sewage of 259
MGD was out falling untreated into the river. Scrutiny revealed the following:
• Rehabilitation work of the trunk sewers in Okhla zone was in progress at a cost
of Rs. 88.76 crore and was expected to be completed by June 2005. Rs.33.46
crore had been spent as of March 2004. Once completed, these trunk sewers were
expected to convey the entire sewage of 220 MGD generated in the catchment
areas to the STPs. However, since the STPs had a treatment capacity of only 140
MGD, untreated sewage of 80 MGD would continue to outfall into the river.
• In Shahdara zone, DJB had created sewage treatment capacity of 65 MGD.
However, a High Powered Committee constituted by the Supreme Court and the
CPCB assessed the sewage generation in the relevant catchment areas as 110 and
126 MGD in 1998 and 1999 respectively. In pursuance of the recommendations
of the High Powered Committee, DJB prepared an action plan to enhance the
total treatment capacity to 110 MGD by March 2000. In September 2003, DJB
further revised its action plan for treatment of 135 MGD sewage by March 2005.
However, DJB stated in January 2004 that total treatment capacity of 65 MGD
was adequate for the targeted catchment area. The difference in the estimated
quantity of sewage between the DJB and CPCB has not yet been resolved.
10.2 Construction of treatment plants in low sewage load areas
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
229 | P a g e
DJB incurred an expenditure of Rs. 51.34 crore on creation of sewage treatment
facilities in areas where sewage generation was low as under:
Figure-7: STPs in low sewage load areas
Ghitorni Rohini Narela Pappankalan Total
Treatment
capacity created
5 15 10 20 50
[MGD]
Sewage actually Nil 0.5 –
0.7
0.5 12 13.10
generated/treated
[MGD]
Unutilised
treatment
capacity
5 14.03 9.5 8 36.53
[MGD]
Capital cost of
STPs
6.28 14.15 13.67 17.24 51.34
(Rupees in crore)
The treatment capacity of 36.53 MGD remained unutilised while the Board
continued to incur a recurring expenditure on maintenance, operation and watch and
ward of the treatment plants at places where hardly any sewage was generated.
Examination of documents further disclosed the following:
• The plant at Ghitorni was lying idle for over seven years from the time of its
completion in 1997 till July 2004. In addition to the expenditure on operation and
maintenance, DJB spent Rs. 38.54 lakh towards watch and ward up to March 2001
and upkeep of equipment. In addition, DJB was liable to pay an amount of Rs. 6.48
lakh as of March 2004 to the contractor for watch and ward @ Rs. 18,000 per month
from April 2001 to March 2004 as well as the actual expenditure which would be
incurred for making electrical and mechanical equipment operational at the time of
commissioning of the plant.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
230 | P a g e
• Though DJB reported sewage treatment of 0.5 to 0.7 MGD at the Rohini
STP commissioned in October 2002, a CPCB report of January 2004 indicated that
the plant was actually not in operation.
• The capacity utilisation of the plant at Narela commissioned in May
2001 was only five per cent. 14
• Sewage to the plant at Pappan Kalan commissioned in April 2002 was being
conveyed by trapping of a nearby nallah/drain and not through the conveyance
system.
Disposal of sewage involves its collection through branch sewers and trunk sewers by
gravity which is then pumped by the various pumping stations to the treatment
plants for treatment as depicted in Figure 8 below:
Figure-8: Flow of Sewage for Treatment
The objective of treatment of sewage generated is not achieved if any of the above
components or links is missing or not functioning to its intended capacity. DJB did
not ensure synchronisation and co-ordination in execution of the various works
which resulted in under-utilisation of the created treatment capacity. Out of total
treatment capacity of 512 MGD for domestic sewage, only 335 MGD of domestic
sewage was actually being treated.
11.1 Failure to rehabilitate sewage conveyance systems to match sewage
treatment capacities
There were a total of 28 trunk sewers of 130 kms length in the NCT of Delhi. DJB
identified 18 trunk sewers of 91 kms length in January 2000 that needed immediate
rehabilitation or de-silting. This work was to be completed by March 2002. Although
DJB revised the target date of completion of the work first to December 2003 and
again to June 2004, it could complete rehabilitation/de-silting work of only 20 kms
as of July 2004.
Twenty three trunk sewers of 106 kms length required rehabilitation/de-silting as of
March 2004. Analysis of sewage treatment for catchments of nine of these 23 these
trunk sewers disclosed that 165 MGD domestic sewage out of the estimated 258
MGD domestic sewage was falling into the river untreated due mainly to the blocked
and collapsed conveyance system.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
231 | P a g e
Audit scrutiny further disclosed that:
• six treatment plants of total capacity of 85 MGD at Coronation Pillar and
Kondli were actually treating sewage of only 60 MGD representing 71 percent
capacity utilisation. Due to partially operating conveyance system, two trunk sewers
of plants at Coronation Pillar and six trunk sewers of plants at Kondli were not
conveying adequate quantity of sewage for periods ranging from one and half year to
seven years as they had either collapsed or silted up and required rehabilitation/de-
silting.
• sewage of only 46.65 MGD was being treated at Rithala STP against a
treatment capacity of 80 MGD. A new 40 MGD plant was constructed at Rithala in
2001 at a cost of Rs. 42.21 crore in addition to the existing STP of equal capacity.
However, though DJB was aware of the status of the trunk sewers leading to under-
utilisation of the plants, it did not take action to rehabilitate the trunk sewers to
ensure capacity utilisation of the second plant. Consequently, both the plants were
under-utilised and untreated sewage of 39 MGD was being discharged into the river.
• four trunk sewers in Keshopur zone had settled or silted up and were not
carrying the entire sewage being generated in the relevant catchment areas. No
action had been taken for rehabilitation of these trunk sewers.
• four trunk sewers in Okhla zone, viz. at Ring Road, Pragati Vihar, Indian
Express and Sita Ram Bazar were not functioning optimally due to siltation and
settlement. As against an estimated sewage generation of 138 MGD from the
catchment area of these trunk sewers, only 50 MGD of sewage was actually being
conveyed to the STPs.
Government stated in October 2004 that the delay in re-furbishing of the entire trunk
system was due to lack of expertise and experience amongst the contractors who
could be entrusted with such work, congestion in the areas and heavy traffic
conditions.
11.2 Under-utilisation due to non-synchronisation of works
The quantum of actual sewage treated at five STPs was only 12 MGD against the
total treatment capacity of 70 MGD due to failure of DJB to synchronise the works
as under:
Figure-9: Details of under-utilisation of plants
Sl.
No.
Name of
the Plant
Capacity Year of
Commissionin
g
Actual
Treatment
Percent
Capacity
utilisation
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
232 | P a g e
1. Yamuna 10 MGD 1999
7.00
MGD 35
Vihar
10 MGD 2003
2. Najafgarh 5 MGD 2002 0.20
MGD 4
3. Nilothi 40 MGD 2002 4.94
MGD 12
4. Mehrauli 5 MGD 2003 Nil Nil
Total
70
MGD
12.14
MGD
• A 10 MGD plant commissioned in Yamuna Vihar in 1999 at a cost of Rs.
8.58 crore remained under utilised from the very beginning with only 2.45
MGD sewage being treated. However, without ensuring optimum utilisation
of the plant by providing an effective and matching conveyance system, DJB
constructed another plant of equal capacity in 2003 at a cost of Rs. 11.44
crore to cater to the same catchment area. The second STP required one main
pumping station with two intermediate pumping stations for its optimal
functioning. While the main SPS at Ghonda-II was commissioned in 2002 at
a cost of Rs. 6.02 crore, one of the intermediate SPS at Ghonda–I was not
completed even as of March 2004 despite an expenditure of Rs. 4.76 crore.
Due to non-commissioning of the SPS, its trunk sewer which was laid at a
cost of Rs. 65.64 lakh in June 1999 could not also be commissioned.
Consequently, sewage generated from the catchment area of SPS Ghonda-I
was still out falling in the river without treatment. DJB also failed to provide
internal sewers in many of the unauthorised-regularised colonies in the
catchment area of the STP. Thus, in spite of expenditure of Rs. 31.46 crore in
creating infrastructure (STP/SPS/ trunk sewers), the intended objective of
treatment of sewage generated in the area remained substantially unachieved.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
233 | P a g e
Figure-10: A view of sludge treatment at a sewage treatment plant
• A five MGD treatment plant and a 12.5 MGD pumping station were
commissioned in Najafgarh in June 2001 and July 2002 respectively at a total cost of
Rs. 11.51 crore. The work of its connected trunk sewers was subsequently completed
in April 2003 at a cost of Rs. 4.40 crore. However as of December 2003, the actual
sewage treatment was of only 0.2 MGD as the conveyance system had not been
commissioned. The Executive Engineer stated in May 2004 that notification
regarding connections to individual dwellers was under process. Thus, failure to
synchronise the commissioning of the conveyance system with the construction of
the STP resulted in untreated sewage from the catchment area being discharged into
Yamuna.
• A 40 MGD treatment plant was commissioned in 2002 at Nilothi at a cost of
Rs. 58.65 crore. However, sewage of only 5 MGD being trapped at Kirari drain by
temporary installation of a pump house was actually being treated at the plant. The
under-utilisation was attributable to the failure of the Board to implement/execute
the allied works of rising main and connected SPS.
• A five MGD STP along with a 12.5 MGD pumping station was
commissioned in May 2003 at Mehrauli at a total cost of Rs. 10.19 crore. To make it
functional, 1.5 MGD sewage was shown as treated by trapping a nallah. However,
no sewage was being treated at the plant as of December 2003 as sewage could not
be conveyed to the STP.
• Rampura SPS of three MGD capacity was constructed in July 2002 at a cost
of Rs. 1.85 crore but the DJB did not provide rising main through which sewage was
required to be pumped to Bharat Nagar SPS for onward pumping to the Rithala STP.
The work of rising main was yet to be approved by the competent authority as of
May 2004. Thus, an amount of Rs. 1.85 crore spent on the SPS was not only
unfruitful but untreated sewage from the catchment area continued to outfall into the
Yamuna.
Thus, despite an expenditure of Rs. 118.06 crore on creation of infrastructure for
treatment of sewage, the intended objective of treatment of sewage remained
unachieved due to non-synchronisation in execution and completion of various
works.
The process of treatment of sewage in a treatment plant is depicted in the flow chart
in Figure-11 below:
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
234 | P a g e
Figure-11: Treatment of sewage
Treated Effluent
The main function of a sludge digester is to digest the sludge in the absence of
oxygen. During this process, poisonous gases like methane, hydrogen sulphide and
carbon dioxide are produced which are collected in the dome of the sludge digester
and thereafter transferred to gas holders for onward disposal.
About 15,572 cubic meters of harmful gases produced at Kondli and Keshopur STPs
were escaping into the atmosphere every day due to malfunctioning of sludge
digesters and gas holders.
At Kondli, the functions of seven sludge digesters, a gas holder, two gas burners and
two filter pumps in two of the three STPs were impaired due to leakage in its dome.
Resultantly, gases produced during the process of sewage treatment escaped into the
atmosphere and the gas holders and gas burners could not be put to use. In addition,
40 drying beds for sludge had not been commissioned till now.
At Keshopur, none of the 14 sludge digesters were functioning properly since 1989.
Further, one gas holder out of the two was dismantled in 1987-88. Thus, the sludge
digesters instead of curing the sludge were merely working as tanks/store. As the gas
holders, burners etc. were not put to use, the gases were escaping into the
atmosphere.
In addition to release of harmful gases into the atmosphere, improper digestion of the
sludge produced poor quality of manure which might affect the porosity of soil.
Figure-12: A view of the gas chamber and sewage settling plant
Recommendation
• DJB should ensure the optimum functioning of each of its components so as to stop the
release of harmful gases into the atmosphere and establish a system of ensuring designed
utilisation of all facilities set up for sewage treatment. It should also explore the
possibility of utilizing the gases generated by the STPs for generating electricity to meet
their own requirement of power which would significantly offset operating costs.
The STPs lacked not only a reliable mechanism to measure the quantity of the
effluents being discharged into the river but they also failed to ensure adherence to
the stipulated quality parameters.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
235 | P a g e
13.1 Measurement of quantity of sewage
Just as the sewage generated was estimated on the basis of population in the
catchment area rather than on the basis of water supplied or used or any other
reliable method, the sewage shown as treated was not verifiable as the flow meters
meant to measure the incoming raw sewage and outgoing treated effluent were either
non-functional or non-existent at the plants test checked in audit except in the STP at
Rithala Phase-II. The quantum of sewage being depicted as treated at the STPs was
based on the design capacity of the pumps with reference to the number of hours it
actually ran. Thus, the quantum of sewage being depicted as treated was a normative
assessment rather than by actual measurement with proper calibration.
13.2 Quality of treated sewage
Most of the treatment plants were equipped with in-house laboratories to analyse the
samples of effluent collected from different units of the STP to ensure their
conformity with the standards prescribed by the DPCC under the provisions of the
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974:
Figure-13: Prescribed standards of treated sewage
Sl.
No. Parameters Prescribed limit
1. pH 5.5-9.00
2. Total suspended solids
(TSS)
Not to exceed 50
mg/litre
3. Oil and grease Not to exceed 10
mg/litre
4. BOD Not to exceed 30
mg/litre
5. COD* Not to exceed 250
mg/litre
*Chemical Oxygen Demand
CPCB also conducts analysis of dissolved oxygen, total coli form and faecal coli
form while monitoring the water quality of river Yamuna and the treated sewage
being discharged from the STPs.
DPCC revised the standards of BOD and TSS to 10 mg/l and 15 mg/l from 30 mg/l
and 50 mg/l respectively in January 2000 and asked DJB to address the problem of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
236 | P a g e
coli form pollution. DJB requested the Environment Pollution (Prevention and
Control) Authority in August 2003 to retain the earlier standards because of difficulty
in obtaining the technology required to meet the revised standards as well as its
prohibitive cost. DJB assured that its treatment plants would be fully utilised to
ensure adherence to the stipulated standards and that no untreated sewage would
find its way into the river through open drains/nallahs. However, DJB failed to live
up to its assurances. Test check of the records for the period from April 2003 to
December 2003 revealed as under:
• As per the tests conducted by DJB, treated effluent from three STPs of total
capacity 90 MGD did not meet even the earlier prescribed standards. Further, as per
the report of DPCC and CPCB during July to
December 2003, another four STPs with total treatment capacity of 61 MGD were
also not meeting the prescribed standards. The details of the STPs and quality of
treated effluent are depicted in Annex-III.
• DJB had no arrangement to analyse the standard of total coli form and faecal
coli form at any of its plants except at the Okhla STP where it was started in May
2003. DJB attributed this to lack of bacteriologists who are required to conduct the
analysis.
• While the STPs were functional round the clock, tests conducted by DJB
were limited to only eight hours. Moreover, the extant instructions stipulate that test
samples should be taken at regular intervals during the course of a day and the
average test results then arrived at so as to depict a true picture of the quality of the
treated sewage. However, DJB was basing its results on only one sample collected
once every day. Hence, the tests conducted by DJB do not provide a credible
assurance of the quality of the treated sewage throughout the day. DJB stated in
January 2004 that regular tests could not be conducted due to inadequate manpower.
Recommendation
• Systems and procedures need to be strengthened to ensure accurate measurement of both
the quantity of treated sewage being discharged as well as its quality with reference to
the prescribed parameters.
As per the Delhi Master Plan 2001, there are 28 approved industrial estates in Delhi.
The Supreme Court directed the Government of Delhi in February 1996 to construct
CETPs in these industrial estates to treat industrial sewage and reuse the noxious
effluents to reduce the toxic effect on the river. In pursuance of these directions,
DPCC appointed the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute
(NEERI) in March 1996 to prepare detailed project reports including design and
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
237 | P a g e
specification of the CETPs. Under the Delhi Common Effluent Treatment Plants Act
2000, CETP societies were to be formed which were to be entrusted with the
maintenance and operation of the plants after their construction. DSIDC was to
undertake construction of the CETPs as per technical know how provided by
NEERI. The project cost was to be apportioned between the Government of India,
the Government of Delhi and the CETP societies in the ratio of 25:25:50. NEERI
recommended construction of 15 CETPs in 21 industrial estates with a total
treatment capacity of 191.4 Million Litres Per day (MLD) i.e. 42 MGD at a total cost
of Rs. 90 crore. The remaining seven industrial estates had either non-polluting
industries or their own treatment arrangements.
All the 15 CETPs were to be completed by 1998. DSIDC could take up construction
of only 12 CETPs during October 1999 to July 2002. Only 10 CETPs were
completed as of March 2004 at a total expenditure of Rs. 123.12 crore. The work of
one CETP at Naraina industrial area was in progress while the local residents had
stopped the work of another CETP at Najafgarh Road. Construction of the
remaining three CEPTs was yet to be taken up due to paucity of funds, non-approval
by the Plant Level Committee, etc. Even out of the 10 CETPs which were
completed, only four were commissioned. The remaining six CETPs were yet to be
commissioned though they had been completed 11 to 15 months ago as reflected in
Annex – IV.
Against the total commissioned capacity of 12 MGD in the four operational CETPs,
the actual sewage being treated was only five MGD.
Audit scrutiny of the records relating to the construction of the CETPs by DSIDC
revealed mismanagement which delayed their construction as well as subsequent
operation as summarized below:
• The detailed project report failed to take into account essential aspects like
cost of land, development of site, construction of boundary wall, revamping of
conveyance system, electric sub-stations/HT cables, etc. Consequently, the total
project cost was grossly under-estimated and it had to be enhanced from Rs. 90 crore
in June 1996 to Rs. 256.40 crore (excluding cost escalation of Rs. 20.14 crore
attributable to delay) in March 2004. This resulted in shortage of funds which had
not been initially planned for. Government of India and the CETP societies released
only Rs. 22.5 crore and Rs. 28.77 crore respectively to the Government of Delhi
against their revised matching contribution of Rs. 59.47 crore and Rs. 101.99 crore
respectively. This hampered the progress of construction of the CETPs.
• Incorrect assessment of actual quantum of sewage generation resulted in
creation of excess treatment capacity by two and half times in Mayapuri industrial
estate. Against actual sewage generation of one MGD, a CETP of three MGD
capacity was constructed at a cost of Rs. 13.88 crore.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
238 | P a g e
• Deficiencies in the design parameters relating primarily to the use of
chemicals required for treatment of toxic sewage required installation of additional
units and improvement of designs involving both delays as well as additional costs.
• Delay in implementation/completion of the project resulted in cost escalation of
Rs. 20.14 crore. The delay was attributable to delay in handing over the land by the
DDA (26 months), delay in obtaining permission from the Railways (six months) for
laying rising mains and paucity of funds.
• Poor coordination between DJB and DSIDC resulted in non-commissioning
of a sewage conveyance system in the industrial estates at Wazirpur and Philomel.
Consequently, the CETPs constructed in these industrial estates remained under-
utilised.
• The CETP societies were to take over the operation and maintenance of the
plants after a trial run to ensure that the discharge met the standards prescribed by
law duly certified by the DPCC. Lack of certification of standards of the discharge
coupled with increase in the costs resulted in the CETP societies declining to take
over the operation of the completed plants.
The Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority for the NCT
of Delhi and the National Capital Region conducted a surprise visit of the including
the four commissioned plants in December 2003. It found.
that most of the plants
were non-functional. In case of the CETP at Mayapuri, the waste received by the
plants was being discharged into the drains without any treatment while the waste
was simply bypassed directly into the drains in Mangolpuri and Wazirpur CETPs.
The Authority observed that not only was there a complete and total waste of public
funds but the purpose for which
these plants had been ordered by the Supreme Court had also been negated.
• The Government of Delhi should resolve outstanding issues related to the
payment of share by the Government of India and the CETP societies.
• Government and DSIDC should ensure completion of the remaining CETPs in a time
bound manner ensuring compliance with the stipulated environmental standards.
• Government of Delhi should ensure the proper operation and maintenance of all the
completed CETPs and the monitoring of the quantity and quality of treated effluent.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
239 | P a g e
Due to ineffective conveyance system coupled with inadequate sewage treatment
capacity, untreated sewage from sewered areas was flowing into the 18
drains/nallahs along with sewage from the unsewered areas. These drains/nallahs
were meant to carry only storm water and outfall directly into Yamuna. A study
conducted by RITES had highlighted in January 2004 that 711 MGD of sewage on
an average was out falling in the river through these drains as detailed in Annex - V.
In terms of quantum of sewage, Najafgarh drain was carrying the maximum
discharge followed by Shahadara drain and Barapulla nallah.
Free ammonia and heavy metals like lead, copper, nickel, zinc, etc. were present in
the sewage flowing through the open drains much above the standards prescribed in
the Environment Protection Act as detailed in Annex-VI. The trend in pollution load
contribution of the sewage flowing through the open drains/nallahs from 1982 to
2003 in terms of BOD load is presented in Figure-15 below:
The BOD load contributed to the river by the sewage from open drains/nallahs
out falling into the river increased from 117.3 tonnes/day in 1982 to 207.98
tonnes/day in 2003. No steps had been initiated to effectively trap and treat the
pollutants being discharged through the drains.
Recommendation
• Government of Delhi should pay prompt attention to trapping and treatment of all
sewage presently flowing through these drains/nallahs in line with its assurances
given to the Supreme Court in December 1993 and prepare a comprehensive plan to
complete the works in a time bound manner.
16.1 Quantity of domestic sewage treated
Against an estimated sewage generation of 719 MGD by March 2004, Government
of Delhi provided sewage treatment capacity of only 512 MGD including the 12
MGD STP which was non-functional) while actual sewage being treated was only
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
240 | P a g e
335 MGD which represented only 47 per cent of the total estimated sewage
generation. The treatment capacity created and growth in waste water generation
during the last four decades is presented in Figure-16.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
241 | P a g e
Figure-16: Increased discharge of untreated sewage
1961 1971 1981 1991 1999 2003
The water quality of Yamuna instead of improving deteriorated over the
period 1999-04 despite expenditure of Rs. 871.67 crore since 1994
(Rs. 284.98 crore until 1998-99 and Rs. 586.69 crore during 1999-2004
Rs. 439.60 by DJB and Rs. 147.09 crore by DSIDC). The BOD and DO
parameters indicated a sharp deterioration in the position at the point of the
river leaving Delhi as is depicted in Figures 17 and 18. While BOD at Palla
when the river enters Delhi was within the norms, the load of untreated
sewage of Delhi polluted the river to the extent that bio-chemical oxygen
demand reached 13 times in excess of the norm at Okhla. The presence of
dissolved oxygen deteriorated from an acceptable one and a half times above the
stipulated minimum norm at Palla to almost nil at Okhla. Coli form count also
deteriorated exponentially from about 217 times at Palla to about 1.39 lakh times
above the stipulated norm at Okhla.
Figure-17 : BOD Trends Year wise at Palla and Okhla in River Yamuna (Delhi
Stretch)
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
242 | P a g e
Figure-18: DO Trends Year wise at Palla and Okhla in River Yamuna (Delhi
Stretch)
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
Note: Lower levels of DO suggest higher pollution/ poorer water quality.
The position of total coli form also indicated a sharp increase as depicted in table
below:
Figure-19: Trend of Total coli form at Palla and Okhla Barrage
Locatio
n
Bathing
Standar
ds
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
Palla Not
more
than-
500/ 100
ml
950.00 8,967.00 5,199.00 7,500.00 1,08,666.66
Okhla
Barrage
-do- 5,72,500.0
0
32,9,312.0
0
2,57,667.0
0
92,33,333.
00
693,33,333.
00
RITES in its report of January 2004 had reported that:
• Dissolved Oxygen (DO) which is the most important parameter for sustaining
a healthy riverine eco-system was not present in the Delhi stretch of the river during
any part of the year;
• free ammonia which is toxic to fish and micro-organisms was present far
above the acceptable levels; in the range of 1.47 mg/l to 6.73 mg/l as against the
acceptable level of 0.02 mg/l;
• there was concentration of heavy metals like copper, lead, nickel, zinc and
mercury far in excess of the limits prescribed by the Environment Pollution Act. Zinc
particularly was present in very high concentrations in the river;
Figure-20: Water quality of Yamuna at Wazirabad Barrage (down stream)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
243 | P a g e
The adverse impacts of untreated sewage were as under:
• While the water at Palla conforms to the bathing standards in terms of DO
and BOD, by the time Yammuna leaves Delhi at Okhla, the water deteriorates to far
below the `bathing standards` and is, in fact,unfit for any use.
• The capacity of the soil to retain oxygen required for biological
decomposition of partially decomposed or un-decomposed organic matter contained
in sewage is reduced hindering decomposition of organic matter resulting in
“sickness of soil.”
• Sewage is a potential carrier of various pathogenic fungi, bacteria and
parasites which pose serious community health hazards like cholera, typhoid,
jaundice, etc. The health hazards from water contaminated with sewage arise from
both consumption of sewage grown plant products without cooking or processing as
well as from direct contact with sewage. According to a study conducted by the
Environmental Sciences Division of the Indian Agriculture and Research Institute
New Delhi in 2002, vegetables grown in areas like Yamuna Pushta,
Okhla, Najafgarh, Alipur and Ballabgarh were found to have a significantly higher
level of contamination of zinc, lead and cadmium.
The audit findings as well as the recommendations were discussed with the Principal
Secretary (Urban Development) and the Chief Executive Officer of the DJB on 15
September 2004. Their views as expressed at the meeting as well as formally
communicated subsequently in October 2004 have been taken into account and
reflected in the review.
Performance Audit of sewerage and sanitation schemes including Yamuna Action
Plan in Haryana.
Objectives of Sewerage and Sanitation Schemes including Yamuna Action Plan (YAP),
implemented by Public Health Department, were to provide hygienic sanitation facilities to the
public and to reduce water pollution in rivers/canals, etc. While the department already had 25
ongoing sewerage and sanitation schemes in hand as of March 1999, 60 new schemes were also
taken up during 1999-2004, but none of these had been completed. Time schedule for
completion of works was not fixed and funds were not released by Government, which resulted
in non-completion of sewerage schemes. This led to spread of unhygienic conditions due to
discharge of untreated sewage in the open. Audit noticed non-functional and underutilised
sewerage schemes, which led to unfruitful expenditure while sewerage facilities were provided to
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
244 | P a g e
only ten per cent of the population of Ambala City. Scrutiny of records relating to YAP
revealed lack of planning for sewage treatment, partial completion/underutilisation of sewage
treatment plants (STP), non-maintenance of prescribed standards in treatment of effluent, non-
laying of internal sewer lines/drains to link interception and diversion sewers, construction of
oxidation ponds without ensuring disposal of treated effluent, underutilisation of structures,
construction of toilet units in unidentified areas, etc. All these factors led to non-achievement of
goals of reducing water pollution in rivers/canals and providing hygienic sanitary conditions.
(Paragraph 3.2.20)
(Paragraph 3.2.10) (Paragraph 3.2.24)
(Paragraph 3.2.27)
(Paragraph 3.2.25)
(Paragraph 3.2.11)
(Paragraph 3.2.15)
• Rs 13.74 crore were outstanding against Haryana Urban
Development Authority on account of proportionate maintenance
charges of STPs.
(Paragraph 3.2.9)
3.2.1 Safe water supply and hygienic sanitation facilities are basic essential
amenities required for a community for healthy living. About 80 per cent of water
used by the community comes out of houses in the form of waste water which,
unless properly collected, conveyed, treated and safely disposed off, may
eventually pollute the precious water resources and cause environmental
degradation. Out of 68 towns in Haryana, 22 towns did not have any sewerage
facility; and even in the remaining 46 towns, the percentage area covered with
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
245 | P a g e
sewerage systems ranged from 15 to 60. With the augmentation of drinking water
supply schemes in rural areas, the generation of waste water had increased manifold
which created insanitary conditions resulting thereby in growth of diseases. State
Government had approved rural drainage/sewerage programme in selected villages.
In order to reduce pollution load in river Yamuna, six towns in the State, which were
directly or indirectly discharging their effluents into river Yamuna, were covered
under Yamuna Action Plan (YAP) as a part of Phase-II (started from May 1994) of
Ganga Action Plan for sewage treatment facilities. Six more towns were included
from February 1996 in the scheme as per the direction of the Supreme Court.
To provide hygienic sanitation facilities, the State Government had sanctioned 60
new sewerage schemes during 1999-2004 at an estimated cost of Rs 107.69 crore in
addition to 25 ongoing schemes. None of these 85 schemes had been completed so
far (March 2004).
To reduce pollution load in Yamuna river, a project at an estimated cost of Rs 232.20
crore was under execution for providing 18 sewage treatment plants (STPs) in 12
towns identified under the scheme. As of March 2004 of the 749.15 mld1
sewage
generated in 83 towns of the State, 494.65 mld sewage was left untreated. Capacity
of 17 STPs for treating 322 mld sewage was not fully utilized as only 254.5 mld
sewage could be treated as indicated in the graph below:
Generation and treatment of sewage in the State
Mld: Million litres per day.
3.2.2 Objective of Sewerage and Sanitation Schemes was to provide hygienic
sanitation facilities to the public by providing sewerage system in various towns.
Yamuna Action Plan was a Centrally sponsored scheme, aimed at reducing pollution
load in Yamuna river, which is the main source of water supply in Delhi and some
parts of Haryana, by providing sewage treatment plants in twelve towns identified
under the scheme.
1. 3.2.3 For the formulation of policies/schemes relating to sewerage and
sanitation and for monitoring their implementation, the State Government
constituted (1967) Haryana State Sanitary Board (HSSB), which was comprised of
19 members with the Public Health Minister as its President. Financial
Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Haryana, Public Health Department
was administrative head at Government level and was responsible for
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
246 | P a g e
implementation of policy decisions, programmes and schemes, etc. The Engineer-in-
Chief (EIC), Public Works Department, Public Health Branch, Panchkula was over
all incharge of the schemes and was assisted by 12 Superintending Engineers (SEs)
and 43 Executive Engineers (EEs) in the field for execution of works. One SE and
four EEs were exclusively dealing with the works relating to YAP.
.3.2.4 Main objective of the audit review was to evaluate the performance in
providing hygienic sanitation facilities through the schemes implemented. Audit also
assessed the achievement in reduction of water pollution levels in river Yamuna, a
source of irrigation/drinking water for large population. For this purpose, following
parameters were adopted in audit:
. • Achievement of targets for completion of works relating to sewerage;
. • Execution of works within a time frame;
. • Proper functioning of sewerage system laid under various schemes;
. • Reduction in pollution level in Yamuna river caused through domestic
waste and industrial effluents; and
. • Functioning of sewage treatment plants under YAP.
3.2.5 Records relating to sewerage and sanitation schemes and YAP works for the
period from 1999-2004 in the offices of the HSSB, EIC, Public Works Department,
Public Health Branch and 132
Public Health Divisions (out of 43) were test checked
during October 2003 to May 2004..
3.2.10 For providing hygienic sanitation facilities and ensuring safe supply of
drinking water, the State Government and HSSB took up several sewerage and
sanitation schemes. During 1999-2004, 60 new schemes were taken up besides 25
ongoing schemes, which were already under implementation prior to April 1999.
None of these schemes had been completed till date (March 2004). Rupees 12.92
crore had been spent on 25 schemes, which were more than 5 years old.
A review in audit revealed absence of any time limit for completion of each scheme
in the administrative approvals and non-release of funds by the Government; this
resulted in non-completion of schemes. The review also brought out improper
planning, non-completion of sewerage schemes, avoidable/extra expenditure,
spread of unhygienic conditions due to discharge of untreated sewage water in
open, non-functioning/under utilization of sewerage schemes, non-providing of
sewage facilities in Ambala City and execution of works without obtaining
technical sanctions to cost estimates. Such irregularities were being repeated time
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
247 | P a g e
and again by the department. These points are discussed in the following
paragraphs:
Non-completion of sewerage schemes
3.2.11 The HSSB approved four schemes for providing sewerage facilities in
Narnaund, Bawani Khera, Loharu and Siwani towns during August 1997 to July
1999. The schemes provided laying of sewer line, construction of screening
chamber, collection tanks, pump chamber, etc. for disposal works. As provided in
GOI‟s Sewage and Sewerage Manual, the sewerage work should begin from the
final disposal points going backwards. Contrary to this, in several cases, the works
relating to sewer lines were being completed first and the works for disposal of
sewage were being either completed later or left incomplete. Almost all the
divisions were repeating this practice. Details of four such schemes where sewer
lines were laid but disposal works were not completed were as under:
Sr. Name of
scheme
Estimated Date
of
Date of Quantum Upto date Remarks
No. cost/date
of
start completion of
sewage
expenditure
on
sanction of sewer
lines
(MLD) completion
(Rs in
lakh)
(Rs in lakh)
1. Sewerage
scheme
65.00 May
2000
December 1.13 39.41 Due to
non-
at
Narnaund
July 1999 2002 availability
of
land.
2. Sewerage
scheme
85.00 June
1998
December 1.35 35.94 Due to
change in
at Bawani
Khera
January
1998
2002 the site of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
248 | P a g e
disposal
works.
3. Surface
drain with
intercepting
outfall
sewer at
Loharu
60.50
August
1997
July
1999
March
2001
1.36 32.57 Due to
non-
availability
of funds.
4. Surface
drain with 70.00 March December 1.31 58.97
Due to
non-
intercepting
outfall
January
1999
1999 2002 availability
of
sewer at
Siwani.
funds.
Total 280.50 5.15 166.89
Thus taking up of works of sewer lines without ensuring availability of land and
funds for disposal works, Rs 1.67 crore spent on laying of surface drains and sewer
lines were rendered unfruitful.
Avoidable expenditure due to injudicious planning
3.2.12 At Hisar, RCC sewer pipeline of 24” dia laid in Patel Nagar area along
Kaimri Road was damaged during 1989. For pumping of sewer water, the Public
Health Division set up a temporary pumping station in October 1989. In November
1998, another 16”dia RCC pipe was also damaged at different stretches and therefore
another temporary pumping station was set up for pumping the water. To replace
the existing damaged sewer of 16” dia with 24”dia, HSSB approved (May 2000) an
estimate for Rs 1.18 crore, which included Rs 72.45 lakh for laying new parallel
pipeline of 24” dia in the damaged portion. The work for replacing only damaged
sewer was awarded as late as in December 2002 to an agency at an estimated cost of
Rs 4.65 lakh
i.e after 2 years and 7 months of Board‟s approval. Balance work for laying new
parallel pipeline of 24” dia had not yet been awarded.
However, the division incurred an expenditure of Rs.65.60 lakh from October 1989
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
249 | P a g e
and November 1998 to October 2003 on running of temporary pump houses whereas
approximately Rs 6 lakh only were required to repair the damaged portion.
Thus due to injudicious planning in fixing priorities for execution of works, the
division had incurred an avoidable expenditure of Rs 65.60 lakh on running
temporary pump houses. The concerned EE stated (November 2003) that due to
tight position of funds it was not possible to take up the project. The reply was not
tenable, as Rupees six lakh approximately were required to replace the damaged
RCC pipeline.
Extra expenditure due to improper planning
3.2.13 To provide storm water sewer in Sirsa Town, State Government approved an
estimate for Rs 3 crore in February 1996. The work was started in 1996 and after
incurring an expenditure of Rs 1.34 crore upto 1998-99, it came to notice that the
newly designed sewer and the existing sewer crossed each other at two places
because of which, it was not possible to lay the sewer any further as the levels did not
permit. It was proposed to change the alignment of the new sewer by constructing
an additional 2050 ft. 54” dia brick circular storm water sewer, to make the already
laid/being laid sewer functional. The additional storm water sewer was got
constructed (May 2003) by spending Rs 51.21 lakh.
During audit it was noticed that position/location of existing sewer already laid was
on record of the department but the same was not taken into account while obtaining
approval of the storm water sewer scheme.
Thus, due to non-assessing the levels and position of existing sewer, an extra
expenditure of Rs 51.21 lakh had to be incurred.
Spread of unhygienic conditions due to discharge of untreated sewage in open
3.2.14 Design standards to be adopted for drainage/sewerage systems issued by
Chief Engineer, PWD, Public Health Branch provided inter-alia that method of
treatment or disposal of sewage should be decided at the stage of preparing the
project instead of after the completion of the scheme and the sullage carrier should be
so designed as to command sufficient area of land required for broad irrigation. In
Bhiwani, the untreated sewage of the town was discharged into Halluwas Minor
from where it flows into open fields of the village causing extensive damage to the
standing crops over 265 acre land besides contaminating the drinking water and
death of livestock. The EE, Bhiwani intimated (August 2004) that farmers had
submitted simple application for compensation (no amount indicated) to Deputy
Commissioner, Bhiwani. The Department, however, sent a case (May 2004) to the
State Government for a claim of Rs 1.07 lakh to which decision was awaited (August
2004).
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
250 | P a g e
Agricultural land at village Halluwas rendered uncultivable as a result of sewage
discharge in open fields
Polluted drinking water of a well unfit for human consumption due to mixing of
sewage water in village Halluwas
The EE further stated (August 2004) that a proposal for acquiring 101 acres land for
discharging sewage water was sent to the Government which was not approved due
to paucity of funds.
Thus failure of the department in making proper arrangements for disposal of
untreated sewage had resulted in damage of crops, pollution of drinking water and
death of livestock in the village.
3.2.15 Public Health Division-1, Hisar completed (March 1997 to March 1998)
schemes for providing sewerage facilities in 3 villages (Sadal Pur, Siswal and Arya
Nagar) in Hisar district at a cost of Rs 1.09 crore. The scheme envisaged that water
supply level in these villages would be raised to 110 LPCD4
for proper working of
sewerage system.
However, no villager had come forward to obtain sewerage connection till date
(October 2003) because of pre-condition of security deposit of Rs 1,000 and
thereafter recurring charges of Rs 5 per month per connection. The village Sarpanch,
Sadalpur also pointed out (July 2002) to the concerned division that sewerage lines
had got damaged or choked. Further, water supply level in these villages had not
been raised to 110 LPCD, as projected in the schemes.
Thus, sewerage schemes had been non-functional, as the sewerage lines had got
damaged. The failure of the department to carry out survey to identify the
prospective beneficiaries, motivating the villagers to derive the benefits of the scheme
and in raising water supply level had resulted in unfruitful expenditure of Rs 1.09
crore.
3.2.16 An underground sewerage system in Rania town (District Sirsa) was
completed in March 2003 at a cost of Rs 77.07 lakh. The scheme was designed for
population of 37,000, projected upto 2020. The population of the town was 20,938
as per 2001 census.
It was noticed that only 14 sewer connections were released up to December 2003
and target of releasing one more connection was fixed for the year 200304. Thus the
benefit of the scheme was derived by about 985
persons only, resulting in under
utilization of the facility for which the department had not intimated the reasons.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
251 | P a g e
3.2.17 To provide sewerage facilities to about 1.69 lakh population of Ambala City,
HSSB approved (June 1984) a scheme for laying of sewer lines, intercepting sewer,
construction of disposal works, rising main and pumping machinery with cost
estimate for Rs 3.43 crore, which was revised to Rs 5.26 crore in May 1987 due to
cost escalation.
However, Public Health Division, Ambala Cantt. after spending Rs 28.12 lakh
stopped the work in March 1998 because of considerable rise in water table in the
area causing slushy conditions. The sewer lines could not be laid so far (March
2004).
Though this situation came to the notice of the department in December 1989, no
alternate strategy was adopted to provide sewerage facilities. However, in September
2002, EE, PH Division, Ambala submitted a different detailed project report to EIC,
Public Health, for providing sewerage facilities, which included provision for
dewatering, plugging, pumping, etc. which had not yet been approved (April 2004).
The Department could provide sewerage facilities to only about ten per cent of
population of the city and for the remaining population, these facilities had not been
provided even after 20 years of approval of initial estimates.
3.2.18 Public Works Department Code lays down that no work shall commence
unless a properly detailed design and estimate is sanctioned by the competent
authority. The department undertook execution of 28 works in 10 (out of 13) test
checked divisions involving an expenditure of Rs 11.51 crore during 1999-2004 after
these were administratively approved by the State Sanitary Board. However,
technical sanctions to the detailed cost estimates for these works were not obtained
from EIC/SE.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
252 | P a g e
3.2.19 To reduce pollution load in Yamuna river, which is the main source of water
supply to Delhi and some parts in Haryana, Yamuna Action Plan (YAP) was started
as part of Phase II of Centrally sponsored Ganga Action Plan started from May
1994. The scheme covered 126
towns of the State as shown in the map below:
Location of 12 towns under YAP
A project at an estimated cost of Rs 232.20 crore was under execution for providing
18 Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) in 127
towns in Haryana, besides works of laying
internal and trunk sewer to enable disposal of sewage and waste water, interception
and diversion of sewage water, low cost sanitation, construction of electric
crematorium and river-front development.
Scrutiny of records revealed lack of planning for sewage treatment, partial
completion/under-utilisation of STPs, non-maintenance of prescribed standards in
treatment of effluent, non-laying of internal sewer lines/drains to link interception
and diversion sewers, construction of oxidation ponds without ensuring disposal of
treated effluent, under-utilisation of mechanical structures, construction of toilet
units in unidentified areas, etc. as brought out in the following paragraphs:
3.2.20 Sewage Treatment Plants of 322 MLD capacity were constructed under YAP
in 12 towns against which quantum of sewage received was 254.50 MLD, whereas
the level of sewage in these towns was 419 MLD as of 2002-03. Thus, 164.50 MLD
sewage was going untreated into the Yamuna river as shown below:
Sr.
No.
Name of town Present
level of
sewage
generated
Capacity
created
Sewage
received
in the
STPs
Quantum
of
untreated
sewage
(MLD)
1 Yamunanagar/
Jagadhari (2)
40 35 29 11
2 Karnal (2) 50 48 38 12
3 Faridabad (3) 205 115 76 129
4 Panipat (2) 45 45 45 -
5 Sonipat 30 30 30 -
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
253 | P a g e
6 Gurgaon 30 30 30 -
7 Chhachhrauli 1 1 - 1
8 Radaur 1 1 - 1
9 Indri 1.50 1.50 - 1.50
10 Gharaunda 3 3 3 -
11 Palwal 9 9 - 9
12 Gohana (2) 3.50 3.50 3.50 -
Total 419 322 254.50 164.50
Note:- Figures within bracket indicate the number of STPs in the town.
Besides this, 91.50 MLD sewage of 10 other towns (not covered under YAP) was
going untreated into Yamuna system for which no remedial measures were initiated
by the department except in two towns (where STPs were under construction) as
shown under:
Sr.No. Name of towns Sewage generated
(MLD)
Remarks
1 Samalkha 4.00
2 Shahbad 6.00
3 Hodel 4.50
4 Jhajjar 5.00 STP under
construction
5 Ganaur 3.50
6 Ladwa 4.00
7 Nilokheri 3.00
8 Taravari 3.00
9 Bahadurgarh 8.50 STP under
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
254 | P a g e
construction
10 Rohtak 50.00
Total 91.50
Besides, Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) at Panchkula was
maintaining a sewage treatment plant. Panchkula town generated 54 MLD sewage
but the details of treated sewage were not intimated by HUDA.
The department replied that pre-feasibility reports of these 10 towns were submitted
to NRCD for approval, which was awaited.
In the remaining 59 towns in the State, 184.65 MLD sewage was generated but no
sewage treatment system existed as no scheme had been approved for the purpose so
far. Untreated sewage of these towns was being disposed off into fields/open drains
causing environmental hazards.
Thus, in the State, of 749.15 MLD sewage generated as of March 2004, 494.65 MLD
of sewage had been going untreated in open areas/drains.
Underutilisation of Sewage Treatment Plants
3.2.21 In Haryana, Yamuna Action Plan covers various towns including Faridabad.
The waste water from Faridabad town was discharged into nalas, drains, (which
ultimately reach river Yamuna) becoming the main cause of water pollution in the
river. In order to prevent pollution of river in Faridabad area, GOI administratively
approved (November 1993) a scheme, estimating the quantum of total sewage as
108.5 MLD, for construction of three STPs of 20 MLD, 45 MLD and 50 MLD
capacity. The work of these STPs was completed between August 1998 and March
1999 at a cost of Rs 51.27 crore. However, 50 to 65 MLD sewage going untreated
into Yamuna River through Movai Drain, Buria Nala and storm drains escaped the
estimates and were not included while preparing detailed project reports.
Effluent treated in STPs was not within prescribed standards
Movai drain meeting points of Box and RCC Circular Sewer carrying raw
sewage which remained to be diverted to STP
It was noticed that all the three STPs never ran to their installed capacity due to
less flow of sewage. Zone wise position of inflow of sewage as on December 2003
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
255 | P a g e
was as under:
Sr. No. Installed
capacity
Sewage
received
Shortage Percentage
capacity
of
Zone 1 20 MLD 16 MLD 4 MLD 80
Zone II 45 MLD 25 MLD 20 MLD 56
Zone
III 50 MLD 35 MLD 15 MLD 70
Total 115 MLD 76 MLD 39 66
Thus, the STPs were running below their installed capacity. The reasons for receipt
of less sewage were large number of sewers getting chocked and outfall sewer of
many colonies and HUDA not being connected with the main system. Thus STPs
remained underutilized and defeated the very purpose of the scheme as the raw
sewage was still being discharged into drains, which ultimately polluted river
Yamuna. It was also noticed that no sewage from the initially planned area was
going to STP for Zone – I. To utilise the STP of Zone – I, the discharge from Buria
Nala and Movai Drain was temporarily diverted to STP – I and thus the STP – I was
receiving 16 MLD sewage.
The EE stated (March 2004) that Municipal Corporation, Faridabad had connected
the blocked sewers with these drains. The fact remained that the department failed
to get the choked sewers cleared/repaired for running the system successfully.
Discharge standards in Sewage Treatment Plants not maintained
3.2.22 The discharge standards for the treated effluent were biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD) 30 mg/l and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 50 mg/l as per YAP
standards. Test reports of Central Pollution Control Board revealed that the
working of 50 MLD, STP, Zone III at Faridabad and 30 MLD, STP at Gurgaon
was not upto the YAP standards as BOD and TSS levels exceeded the desirable limit
as depicted below:
Name of STP Levels of treated effluent
January
2003
June
2003
November
2003
December
2003
January
2004
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
256 | P a g e
(Mg/l)
50 MLD
Faridabad
BOD 128 28 58 88 87
TSS 168 80 71 222 51
30MLD
Gurgaon
BOD 114 48 62 73 114
TSS 53 140 59 62 62
The concerned division, however, had not devised any system to check the BOD and
TSS level by testing samples of treated effluents.
Mixing of treated and untreated effluent
3.2.23 The treated effluent from STPs was discharged into various drains, which also
carried untreated domestic and industrial waste at Yamunanagar and Panipat to
river Yamuna and Western Jamuna Canal (WJC). As the treated effluent got mixed
with the untreated one, the pollution level increased which ultimately polluted river
Yamuna/WJC as detailed below:
Sr.
No.
Name of
towns Capacity
(MLD)
Pollution level
after
treatment
Pollution level after
mixing with untreated
effluent
BOD TSS BOD TSS
1. Yamunanagar 25 28 45 94 61
10 29 55 74 76
2. Panipat 35 27 50 148 74
Treated effluent from 25 MLD, STP at Camp area Yamunanagar coming out
through effluent channel and falling into a Nallah running near the STP which
flows into WJC
Treated effluent from 35 MLD, STP at Panipat coming out through effluent
channel and falling into Panipat drain STP which flows into Yamuna River
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
257 | P a g e
Thus, appropriate planning was not done to save river Yamuna /WJC water from
pollution.
Unfruitful expenditure due to improper planning
3.2.24 To check pollution caused by sewage of some colonies in Gurgaon flowing
into drain number 8 and river Yamuna, GOI approved a scheme to provide
„Interception and Diversion (I&D)‟ sewer in Avadhpuri, Rajinder park and
adjoining colonies across railway line for Rs 2.65 crore after an assurance from the
EE, PH Division, Gurgaon that open drains would be constructed in the area to
carry the discharge of streets into the main I&D sewer. This work was to be
completed by December 2001. Though the work of main I&D sewer was
completed in February 2002 at a cost of Rs 2.64 crore, drains/internal sewer were
not constructed to link with I&D sewer. Thus, laying of I & D sewer without
constructing the internal sewer had rendered the huge expenditure of Rs 2.64 crore
as unfruitful as the I & D sewer was underutilized.
Executive Engineer stated (February 2004) that the work for laying branch sewer
was in progress and considerable discharge of the area was going into the I&D
sewer through branch line/open drains. The reply was not tenable as revised
technical approval for laying sewer in the town was sanctioned only in February
2004 and funds were not allotted as of March 2004.
Construction of oxidation ponds without ensuring disposal of treated effluent
3.2.25 To treat the sewage water of Karnal, 8 MLD oxidation pond was constructed
(completed in December 1999) under YAP at a cost of Rs 1.06 crore. As there was
no appropriate arrangement for discharge of effluent, the low lying area near the
plant was filled. The Forest Department as well as the farmers objected to the water
being released on their land. The proposal for construction of effluent channel from
sewage treatment plant to Barota Drain was not accepted by Engineer-in-Chief, as
the scope of work was not covered in the detailed project report of the scheme and
also in view of GOI‟s instructions that arrangements for conveying the treated
effluent from STPs to final disposal were to be made by State Government. Another
proposal for discharging the treated effluent into the irrigation channel was also not
accepted by the Irrigation Department.
Executive Engineer stated (April 2004) that permission to construct the effluent
channel had been received from Irrigation Department and the work had been
started. The reply was not tenable, as Irrigation Department had asked for a
certificate that there would be no death of any human and cattle by drinking effluent
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
258 | P a g e
discharged from the STP. Also, permission of Forest Department on whose land
effluent channel was to be constructed had not been obtained. Moreover, due to
absence of tackling the colliform load of sewage water in oxidation ponds, the
chances of contamination of potable water and occurrence of diseases could not be
ruled out.
Thus, the oxidation ponds were constructed without making arrangement for
disposal of treated effluent.
Non-completion of pollution abatement scheme
3.2.26 With the growing emphasis on abatement of pollution in river Yamuna, GOI
(August 1997) approved a scheme for I&D sewers at Palwal, to be completed by
August 1998. The work was partially completed in April 2001 at a cost of Rs 1.69
crore. Thereafter, no action to complete the sewer lines in the remaining areas and
also to link the already laid sewer lines was taken.
Government of India separately sanctioned (August, 2001) the construction of STP
and Main Pumping Station at Palwal at an estimated cost of Rs 3.64 crore with the
condition to complete the same by June 2003. The work was still (January 2004)
incomplete after spending Rs 1.67 crore. Thus delay in construction of I&D sewer
and STP had resulted in nugatory expenditure of Rs 1.69 crore incurred on laying of
partial sewer lines besides delay in controlling the pollution level in Yamuna. EE,
YAP, PH Division, Faridabad stated (March 2004) that revised proposal for laying
of I&D sewer in Palwal town was submitted to GOI in 1998, approval to which was
still awaited (May 2004).
Thus, the fact remained that the activities were taken up without any proper
synchronisation and planning, as I&D sewers were partially laid and revised
proposal for laying complete I&D sewer in Palwal town was not yet approved by
GOI despite its submission six years back.
Absence of disposal system for treated effluent
3.2.27 According to DPRs for construction of 25 MLD Upflow Anaerobic Sludge
Blanket (UASB) sewage treatment plant at Yamunanagar (Camp area), the treated
effluent from the STP was to fall into adjoining drain, which, ultimately was to join
WJC. However, PH Department did not obtain prior permission of the Irrigation
Department for discharging the treated effluent into WJC. PH Division 1,
Yamunanagar took up the work in May 1996 and completed the construction in
January 2003 at a cost of Rs 9.02 crore. The plant was, however, partially
commissioned in September 2000 as only one of the two reactors could be completed
by that time. Thus the work was completed without ensuring the method and
location of release of the treated effluent.
In 1996, the irrigation authorities did not allow the discharge of treated effluent into
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
259 | P a g e
WJC, because the canal water was utilized for drinking purposes also. The
Chairman, Delhi Jal Board also stressed upon the Irrigation Department time and
again to stop discharge of treated/untreated sewage in WJC as the water was utilised
for drinking purpose in Delhi also.
For discharge of treated effluent the department submitted (December 1997) a
proposal to GOI for construction of effluent channel at an estimated cost of Rs 3.83
crore. GOI refused to finance the project and asked the State Government to arrange
funds from their own resources. The matter remained undecided till May 2003
when, Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB) took a decision to construct
a ditch drain along WJC at a cost of Rs
7.94 crore of which Rs 3.08 crore and Rs 4.86 crore were to be borne by the Public
Health Department and by the industries (who were discharging their effluent into
WJC) respectively. No action in the matter had been taken so far (May 2004). Thus,
the plant was conceived ignoring the provisions of the Haryana Canal and Drainage
Act, 1974, (as amended in July 2001), which did not permit the discharge of
treated/untreated sewage into canals. No action had been taken so far though the
discharged effluent was being released in WJC against the codal provisions and
against the instruction of Irrigation Department.
Unutilised sewerage structures
3.2.28 Government of India approved (June 1996) a pollution abatement scheme
under YAPs phase II in Indri, Chhachhrauli and Radaur towns at a cost of Rs 4.30
crore. The works included laying of I&D sewer, construction of STPs and other
ancillary works. As no sewerage facilities existed in these towns, it was proposed to
complete sewerage works by 2001. Work on laying of I&D sewer was started in
1998 and completed during 2001 at a cost of Rs
1.47 crore. Work on construction of STPs was under progress and a total expenditure
of Rs 3.83 crore had been incurred upto March 2004.
No provision for internal sewer lines was made and thus no internal sewer had
been laid in any of these towns due to which I&D sewer laid at a cost of Rs 1.47
crore in these towns remained non-functional thereby defeating the very purpose
of the pollution abatement.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
Under utilization of structures resulting in recurring expenditure on running of
Sewage Treatment Plant
3.2.29 Under YAP, the department constructed, 10 upflow anaerobic sludge blanket
(UASB) plants in six8
towns. The domestic waste water treated in a UASB reactor
was suitable for discharging in river water; and the biogas generated through process
could also be utilized for generating electricity for running the plant. In order to
utilize the energy generated from biogas, various structures and equipments were
provided and electricity generating system installed at all the UASB Plants at a cost
of Rs.2.27 crore.
It was noticed that against capacity of generating electricity for 6-8 hours daily,
electricity was generated for 2 hours per day on an average in all the STPs (except
STP at Faridabad). This was much less than what was projected during the
preparation of detailed project report on the basis of the design of UASB technology.
For the remaining time electricity was arranged from external sources to run the
STPs and its auxiliary pumps. Had the electricity been fully produced from the
biogas as envisaged in the detailed project reports and design of UASB technology,
the department would have saved Rs 77,000 per month as energy charges (at the rate
of Rs 11,000 per month per STP).
Failure of the department in not generating enough energy sufficient to run the plant
had resulted in unfruitful expenditure of Rs 2.27 crore incurred on infrastructures
raised for generating electricity.
The EE, Panipat stated (November 2003) that cost of electricity produced from the
biogas was equal to the electricity used from external source. The fact remains that
since the equipments have been installed for generation of electricity, the same
should have been utilized to optimum capacity to save upon electricity that had to be
sourced externally particularly in view of electricity being a scarce resource.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
3.2.30 In several towns of the State, there were large number of dry latrines, which
were environmentally/aesthetically unsuitable and created unhygienic conditions. In
these towns, there were certain identified slum areas where people did not have latrines
in their houses or nearby. So in order to have better sanitation facilities, it was decided
to construct community toilets/complexes in six9
towns. However, instead of
constructing the community toilets in identified slum areas, the department constructed
33 units at a cost of Rs. 2.95 crore at places like bus stands, administrative complexes,
etc. where such facilities were already existing.
Executive Engineers, YAP Division, Yamunanagar and Panipat stated (November
2003) that as per allotment letter, the site was to be selected in consultation with the
Non-Government Organisations (NGOs) keeping in view the viability of these units.
The reply was not tenable as the purpose of construction of these toilets was to reduce
pollution level in slum areas where no such facilities existed. Besides, the reply was
silent about the diversion of funds for sites other than slum areas. Thus, the
expenditure was not justified under the scheme.
3.2.31 A large number of industries are located in the catchments of WJC at
Yamunanagar/Jagadhari and Yamuna river at Panipat, some of which were
generating heavy organic pollution. At Jagadhari/Yamunanagar, 96.13 MLD of
treated, untreated or partially treated industrial and domestic effluent was discharged
into the WJC. Central Pollution Control Board in a survey conducted during February
2003 measured high concentration of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) (158mg/l), Bio-
chemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) (190 mg/l) and Ammonia Nitrogen (30.5 mg/l).
Similarly, 92.81 MLD untreated or partially treated industrial and domestic effluent
including treated effluent from Panipat town was discharged into Yamuna river
through drain number 2. Details of major industries discharging heavy pollution load
in these towns were as under:
Sr.No. Name of
town
Name of industries BOD TSS
1
Yamunanagar Haryana Distillery 292 661
2 Sonipat Sterling Agro 68 59
3 Kundli Industrial area of Kundli
town 2407 1272
4 Sonipat Bharat leather 393 223
5 Sonipat Sugra leather Akbarpur 61 566
6 Samalkha Haryana organics 139 127
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
Haryana State Pollution Control Board had not initiated any action against these
polluting units to take remedial measures.
3.2.32 SPCB was required to inspect sewage/trade effluents works, plants for the
treatment of sewage and trade effluents and review plans, specifications or other data
relating to these activities. However, except in six towns, which were covered under
YAP, the Board did not monitor the quality of water and pollution load in the
towns/cities where 349.15 MLD untreated sewage was being discharged into open
fields/drains.
Besides, the execution/completion of works was required to be effectively monitored
by the EIC, with a view to ensure that for each work, targets relating to time, cost,
services, etc. were achieved. However, no monitoring cell was created to watch the
progress of works. The periodical progress reports (physical & financial) received by
the EIC from the field officers were neither scrutinized properly nor effective follow up
action taken. The reports did not indicate time frame fixed for completion of schemes.
As a result 60 sewerage schemes undertaken by the divisions during 1999-2004 and 25
schemes more than five year old remained incomplete. Funds were not earmarked for
completing the left out works resulting in non-commissioning of schemes.
The works under YAP were monitored in YAP wing functioning in the office of the
EIC, Public Health and the quality of water was monitored by the HSPCB. The State
Government was to constitute Citizen Monitoring Committee (CMC) for each town,
as per directive of the National River Conservation Directorate, Ministry of
Environment and forest, GOI issued in March 1995, to monitor the progress of
execution and timely completion of schemes, their operation and maintenance and to
facilitate public awareness / participation. The CMCs were to meet once in a month.
However, CMCs were constituted in only 6 out of 12 towns and in these towns also no
meeting was held. Thus, CMCs were not functional.
3.2.33 The department had not completed any of the 85 sewerage and sanitation
schemes (25 ongoing schemes prior to March 1999). Sewerage schemes were non-
functional because treated effluents disposal works were not completed as was required
according to the procedure laid by GOI. Due to non-consideration of already laid
sewer, Rs 51.21 lakh were spent on additional work at Sirsa town. Sewerage facilities
were provided to only 10 per cent of the population of Ambala City even after 20 years
of the approval of sewerage scheme. Under YAP, treated effluent was being
discharged in a drain carrying untreated effluent in Yamuna System. STPs constructed
at Faridabad at a cost of Rs 51.27 crore remained underutilised. STPs failed to
maintain prescribed level of pollutants in treated effluents in Faridabad and Gurgaon.
Main Interception and Diversion sewers in five towns could not be made functional
due to non-construction of internal sewer lines for carrying the sewage into main I&D
sewer. Pollution Control Board failed to take effective action against large number of
industrial units, which discharged untreated effluents into Yamuna system. All these
factors led to non-achievement of goals of reducing water pollution and improving
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
sanitary conditions.
3.2.34 Government should ensure that sewerage schemes are formulated in such a
way that sewerage works are started from the final disposal points going backwards
as laid down in the GOI‟s Sewage and Sewerage Manual;
Works should be completed within prescribed time frame to make the sewerage
system effective;
Sewerage system should be provided for towns where this facility does not exist to
achieve the objective of providing hygienic sanitary conditions;
Government should ensure that capacity of STPs is utilised to the optimum level in
order to treat the maximum sewage of concerned towns;
Effective controls should be put in place to ensure that industrial units treat the
effluents before releasing into drains; and
It should be ensured that pollutants in treated effluents are brought down to the
level of YAP standards.
These points were referred to the Government (June 2004); reply had not been received
(August 2004).
Performance Audit of Implementation of Neeru – Meeru
PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, Andhra Pradesh.
3.7.1 Introduction
State Government launched the Neeru-Meeru in May 2000. The objectives inter
alia are
. • to promote water conservation by recharging ground water,
. • to make concrete efforts on the conservation and utilisation of water,
. • to ensure promotion of suitable cost effective and sustainable measures
for water conservation,
. • to avoid contractors and to ensure participation of people, and
. • to create awareness amongst people for ensuring their participation.
The works61
were to be executed through Self Help Groups (SHGs), Water User’s
Associations and Vana Samrakshana Samithies. Neeru-Meeru is implemented through
District Water Management Agencies (DWMA), and several line departments: Forest,
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
Panchayat Raj (RWS62
), Municipal Administration, Irrigation and Command Area
Development, and Endowments Departments. The implementation is monitored by the
Project Directors (PDs), DPAP, under the control of District Collectors and overall
supervision is by the Commissioner of Rural Development (Commissioner). Eight phases63
of the programme were implemented64
during the period April 2000 - May 2004.
Implementation of Neeru-Meeru was reviewed in audit by test-check of the records for
the period 2000-04 in the offices of the Commissioner and the Project Directors, DPAP
of Adilabad, Kadapa, Mahboobnagar, Medak, Prakasam and Vizianagaram Districts.
Important findings are discussed below.
3.7.2 Financial performance
Budget allotment of Rs 50 crore was made for the programme for the first time in 2003-
04. In the earlier years namely 2000-03, line departments were asked to divert funds
from various ongoing schemes viz., Drought Funds, EAS65
, NABARD66
, and
MPLADS67
and Agricultural Market Committee funds. Between April 2000 and May
2004, expenditure of Rs 2533.89 crore were incurred on Neeru-Meeru. The
expenditure incurred by each department was as follows:
The expenditure incurred on various types of works is given in Appendix 3.4. In the six
sample districts, total expenditure was Rs 759.87 crore (30 per cent). The
Commissioner had no information about the funds received and expenditure incurred
from each of various sources.
Physical performance
3.7.3 Targets and achievements
The total target68
for the entire State in the eight phases was 52.51 lakh number of
works during the period April 2000 to May 2004; the achievement was 42.04 lakh
works leaving a shortfall of 10.47 lakh works (25 per cent).
The position in the sample districts was as follows:
The Commissioner attributed (June 2004) the shortfall to inadequacy of funds, taking
up of bigger structures depending on the site conditions, and to delay in formation of
DWMA offices.
Neeru-Meeru was loaded with 42.04 lakh works, the majority being low cost petty
works such as rock fill dams, rain water harvesting pits spread over a large number of
mandals. The Commissioner, Rural Development failed to evolve a suitable
mechanism to ensure proper monitoring of such a large number of works. In the
absence of monitoring, other works/services such as supply of water through tankers,
repairs to pipelines, lift irrigation works, raising of nurseries and their maintenance,
afforestation works, repairs to borewells, formation of roads and inspection paths,
construction of drainage lines and manholes, bunding works, jungle clearance works,
taken up at a cost of Rs 245.36 crore were debited to „Neeru-Meeru‟, though not related
to it.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
Audit observed during joint physical verification that check measurement of works was
not conducted by DFOs. Most of the structures (rockfill dams, water harvesting
structures and trenches) executed under „Neeru-Meeru‟ were either not in existence or
were in poor condition, mainly due to heavy silt formation, damage caused to
structures and pilferage of stones. This was attributable to poor maintenance of the
structures by the concerned departments. As a result, there was poor recharge of
ground water, defeating the primary objective of the programme. Amount involved in
deficient execution of works could not be quantified since there were a huge number of
petty works, some with cost as low as Rs 400.
3.7.4 Desilting of tanks at a cost of Rs 156.27 crore remained ineffective in
recharging ground water
Member69
, Water Conservation Mission (Neeru-Meeru), constituted to advise on the
technical aspects of watershed in the State observed (January 2003) that desilting of
tanks taken up on a large-scale would be less effective compared to other methods,
such as Continuous Contour Trenches and percolation tanks, in increasing recharge of
ground water. Despite this, the Commissioner did not initiate corrective steps to restrict
the desilting of tanks. It was noticed that 34696 tanks70
were desilted (from January
2003 to December 2003) in all the 23 districts at a total cost of Rs 156.27 crore, which
could not have helped in increasing the ground water level.
Deficiencies noticed in sample districts
Test-check of execution of works under Neeru-Meeru in the six sample districts
revealed selection of unsuitable sites, execution of works not effective to recharge
ground water, inflation of achievements, ineligible works, award of works to
contractors, absence of quality control checks, unauthorised retention of money for
long periods by the departmental officers and unfruitful expenditure as discussed
below.
3.7.5 Incorrect reporting of achievements
Municipality, Ongole took up (June-December 2003) construction of a summer
storage tank to cater to the drinking water needs of the residents. It was noticed
that an expenditure of Rs 5.50 crore towards the cost of earth excavation,
though not related to Neeru-Meeru, was incorrectly shown as achievements
under Neeru-Meeru as if the excavation was for a percolation tank
3.7.6 Execution of works not contemplated under Neeru-Meeru
The objective of the programme was to take up works which would
help recharge
ground water. The executing agencies, however, tookup (Phases I to III) the following
works valued Rs 88.42 lakh though
not related to Neeru-Meeru, which indicated
diversion of scheme funds.
Name and item of work
and Works Name of the executing Expenditure
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
phase No. sanctioned by agency (Rs in lakh)
Formation of Roads (Phase
II)
District
Collector PD; DPAP, Chittoor 51.03
Developing landscape
garden in Commissioner, Commissioner of 19.36
front of the choultry at
Srisailam
Endowments Endowments, Sri
Bramaramba
and conveyance of earth for Mallikarjuna swamy
temple,
landscape (Phase III) Srisailam
Formation of roads,
providing Municipal
Municipal
Commissioner, 18.03
street slabs and
construction of
Commissioner Anantapur
Meeting Hall (Phase I)
Total 88.42
3.7.7 No quality control of works
The quality control wing of Panchayat Raj Department were to conduct quality control
inspection during execution of Neeru-Meeru works. However, no such inspection was
conducted in respect of the works in Anantapur and Warangal Districts executed at a
cost of Rs 19.67 crore71
. The EEs PR, Warangal and Anantapur replied (September
2004) to Audit that the requirement could not be adhered to due to shortage of quality
control staff.
3.7.8 Works executed without people’s participation
With a view to eliminating contractors, Government ordered (February 2001) that the
works under „Neeru-Meeru‟ should be awarded on nomination to the Self Help
Groups, Water Users Associations and Vana Samrakshana Samithies. Contrary to
these orders, Forest Officers and Executive Engineers awarded (May to September
2001) works valued Rs 100.89 lakh72
to contractors.
The District Collector, Prakasam diverted Rs 1.26 crore from Calamity Relief Fund
(CRF) for Neeru-Meeru and got executed the works with machinery, contrary to the
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
guidelines for Neeru-Meeru. Similarly, PD, Desert Development Programme,
Anantapur incurred Rs 85.46 lakh on CCT works, without people‟s participation, using
machinery for the purposes.
3.7.9 Unfruitful expenditure on a lift irrigation scheme
District Collector, Medak accorded administrative sanction (July 2000) to a lift
irrigation scheme in Kudavalli river at Pothireddipeta village of Dubbak Mandal for Rs
40 lakh. The work was got executed by the APSCRIC73
(Rs 23.02 lakh) and by
Executive Engineer, Rural Water Supply, Siddipet (Rs 26.07 lakh), after calling for
tenders, through five different contractors74
. The purpose of the scheme was to lift
water from the river to the nearby village tank to augment irrigation potential. Though
such works were outside the scope of the Neeru-Meeru, expenditure Rs 49.09 lakh was
shown under Neeru-Meeru. It was observed that no benefit could be derived from the
completed work as there was no perennial water flow in the river. In case of good rains
both the river and the tank would receive water, and there was no necessity to lift water
into the tank. The department failed to assess the feasibility of the scheme and thus
outlay of Rs 49.09 lakh remained unfruitful (September 2004).
3.7.10 Joint inspection by Audit and departmental engineers
Joint inspection of selected works in the six sample districts, conducted by Audit and
the Departmental Engineers, revealed that proper care was not taken to select the sites
or to identify works suitable to the terrain, as shown below:
Name of the work Expenditure Name of the Deficiencies noticed
inspected involved executing
(Rupees in Agency
lakh)
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Construction of
Check Dam in
Mudigonda village of
Kothapatnam
Mandal (Prakasam
District)
16.00 PD; DPAP,
Ongole
As per the guidelines, Check Dams
were to be constructed only in the
recharge areas. It was however
observed that the Check Dam was
constructed (May 2001) in black
clayey soils not suitable for
recharge of ground water. The
structure was useful only for
storage purpose.
Construction of rain
water
7.49* Municipalities, Works were taken up without
consulting
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
harvesting structures
–
Tadipatri, Ground Water Department. The
structures
Municipality -
Tadipatri
Hindupur were constructed (Phase I) in soils
not
and Hindupur suitable for recharge of ground
water.
Expenditure proved to be wasteful.
Excavation of
Continuous
Peripheral Contour
3.43 DFO, Forest
Department,
The CPCTs were excavated (under
Phase II) in areas where the
gradient was less
Trenches (CPCTs) in
Chittoor District
Chittoor than 10 per cent ignoring the
concept of „Ridge to valley‟. As a
result, the purpose of arresting the
velocity of water and consequently
erosion of soil, was not
achieved.
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Excavation of
Continuous Contour
Trenches(CCTs)
Phase VII
2.03 DFO, Forest
Department,
Adilabad
No „septas75‟ were provided in the
trenches to retain water for
percolation. In the absence of septas
water will escape from the trenches
without the purpose being served.
This resulted in wasteful
expenditure.
Construction of
Check
1.10 EE (RWS), The structures were constructed in
Dams and Percolation Panchayat
Raj,
unsuitable soils i.e., black clayey
soils not
tanks in Adilabad
District
Adilabad suitable for percolation of water.
Expenditure proved to be wasteful.
* Municipality, Tadipatri (Rs 3.31 lakh) and Municipality, Hindupur (Rs 4.18 lakh)
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
3.7.11 Unauthorised retention of Government money by the departmental officers
Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Khammam advanced (July 2001 – July 2002)
Rs 1.65 crore to the Sub-Divisional Officers, Assistant Executive Engineers and
Assistant Engineers for execution of works under Neeru-Meeru. Of this Rs 1.08 crore
remained unutilised with them as of June 2004. Retention of Government money by
the officials for a period of over two years amounts to temporary misappropriation.
3.7.12 Fall in ground water levels
A comparative study of ground water levels as on 31 March 2003 and 31 March 2004
revealed that though there was some increase (ranging from 1.96 metres to 2.26 metres)
in ground water levels in Khammam, Medak, Visakhapatnam, a fall in ground water
table ranging from 0.13 metres to 3.04 metres was noticed in the following districts
(including the two sample districts) even after executing „Neeru-Meeru‟ works.
The fall in water table was attributable to poor recharge of ground water which was
mainly due to the failure of the line departments to select suitable structures and sites
that help recharge ground water.
3.7.13 House committee to enquire into irregularities in implementation of
Neeru-Meeru
Government have announced (July 2004) on the floor of Legislative Assembly
appointment of House Committee to enquire into the alleged irregularities in
implementation of Neeru-Meeru. The results of the enquiry were awaited (October
2004).
3.7.14 Conclusions
Implementation of Neeru-Meeru was marred by injudicious selection of sites,
unscientific selection of works, overloading with large number of petty works,
execution of works not effective for recharge of water, award of works to contractors,
inflated reporting of achievements, absence of quality control checks coupled with lack
of monitoring during execution of works and poor maintenance after completion.
Physical verification revealed that most of the structures executed under Neeru-Meeru
were either missing or were in poor condition, due to various reasons. The primary
objective to recharge ground water was not achieved; the ground water levels actually
fell during 2003-04 in eight districts.
3.7.15 Recommendations
Selection of works should be done scientifically, in consultation with the Ground
Water Department.
The ban on engagement of contractors for Neeru-Meeru works
should be effectively enforced, so as to enhance people‟s
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
participation.
Steps need to be taken to sensitise the people about the benefits of water
conservation.
Quality control checks should be conducted on all works.
The above points were referred to Government in July 2004; reply had not been
received (October 2004)
IMPLEMENTATION OF ENVIRONMENT ACTS RELATING TO WATER
POLLUTION
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act was enacted in 1974 to address
the issue of water pollution and to create and to create appropriate regulatory mechanism.
Audit reviewed the implementation of the Act in several States and found that the objective
of prevention and control of pollution of water bodies was not achieved mainly due to poor
compliance with various provisions of the Act and the Rules made there under. The State
Pollution Control Boards in several States did not complete the process of identification of
polluting industries and most industrial units were functioning without consent from State
Boards. A major such area was failure of State Pollution Control Boards to regulate and
control the discharge of industrial effluents and domestic sewage into water bodies. The
State Boards also failed to take effective action against defaulting industries.There
was significant shortfall in inspection of polluting industries even with reference to the
targets fixed for such inspection, which were already very low. Local bodies in the
States discharged untreated domestic waste into the water bodies due to inadequate
sewerage system and sewage treatment plants. Consequently, the water quality of the
rivers continued to deteriorate in terms of Bio-Chemical Oxygen Demand and total
coliforms. The drinking water supplied to big towns in various States did not
conform to the parameters fixed. In summary, due to poor implementation of the Act, the
objective of controlling water pollution was not achieved even to a modest degree.
Highlights
The State pollution Control Boards of Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh,
Jammu &n Kashmir, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab and Rajasthan did not
complete the process of identification of polluting units.
Most of the industrial units in the States functioned without obtaining consent from
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
State Boards in Absence of a proper control mechanism.
Failure of the State Boards to take effective action against the industries, which either
did not install the pollution control devices or did not operate these facilities, resulted
in discharge of untreated effluents into water bodies and onto land.
The State Boards did not regularly conduct inspection of the polluting units as
directed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests. There was considerable
shortfall in actual inspection against the targets fixed for inspection.
The drinking water being supplied to big towns in the States did not conform to the
parameters fixed for drinking water.
Inadequate sewerage system and sewage treatment plants with the local bodies in
the States led to discharge of untreated domestic waste into the water bodies and
onto land.
Inadequate resources with Municipal Corporation to tackle sewage, led to discharge
of domestic sewage and industrial effluents into rivers resulting in deterioration of
water quality in terms of Bio-Chemical Oxygen Demand and total coliforms.
1. Introduction
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, is the first specific and
comprehensive legislation to address the issue of water pollution. It also
simultaneously created the regulatory agencies for controlling water pollution.
The Pollution Control Board at the Center and State Pollution Control Boards in the
States, which are the regulatory authorities, came into being in terms of this Act.
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act 1977 was enacted in order
to conserve this vital natural resources and to augment the finances of these
regulatory agencies.
2. Main provisions of the Water Act
The act is intended to provide for the prevention and control of water pollution and
the maintaining or restoring of wholesomeness of water; for establishment of Boards
for preventing and control of water pollution; for conferring on and assigning to such
Boards Power and functions relating to prevention and control of water pollution and
for matters connected therewith.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
Under Section 3 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 the
Central Government consulting the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), which
functions under the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF).
Similarly, under Section 4 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974,
the State Governments constituted State Pollution Control Boards (SPCB‟s) in order
to perform the functions assigned to the Board under the Act.
Section 18 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, stipulates
that where the Central Government is of the opinion that the State Board has
defaulted in complying with the directions given by the Central Board, it may direct
the Central Board to perform any of the functions of the State Board.
3. Main functions of the Central/State Boards under the Water Act
The following are the main functions of the Central/State Boards under the Water
Act:
(i) Planning comprehensive programmes for prevention, control or
abatement of pollution of streams and wells in the State and the execution
thereof,
(ii) Collection and dissemination of information relating to water pollution
and the prevention, control or abatement thereof,
(iii) Inspection of sewage/trade effluents plants for the treatment of sewage
(iv) Laying down standards for treatment of sewage and trade effluents
and evolving efficient methods for their disposal.
4. Audit Coverage
The principal aim of audit was to assess the degree of compliance shown in the
enforcement of the law, rules and regulation governing pollution control. A test
check of records in 20 States relating to survey, water quality and schemes
undertaken for treating the water along with Central and State Schemes implemented
for prevention, control or abatement of water pollution covering the period from
1995-96 to 1999-2000 was conducted in audit during 2000-2001.
Audit also assessed the mechanism of funding and monitoring and the linkages
between the Center and the States in implementing the schemes for abatement and
control water pollution.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
5. Organizational Setup
MoEF headed by a Secretary is the nodal agency for the prevention and control of
pollution in the country. CPCB constituted by the Ministry has a full time Chairman,
a Member Secretary, five members each representing the Central Government and
nominated from among the members of the State Boards. Three non-official
members represent the fields of Agriculture, Fisheries, Industries and two members
represent Companies owned/controlled by Central Government.
In the States, Department of Environment, (in some states along with Forest, Science
and Technology) headed by a Secretary is responsible for control of environment
pollution. State Government have constituted SPCB‟s for the enforcement of
environment legislation.
6. Finance
A. Central Funding
MoEF has been funding CPCB for its Plan and Non-Plan activities. The Ministry
also provides funds to the State Government for implementation of Centrally
Sponsored River Action Plans for abatement of pollution and conservation of water
quality of the rivers. Funds are also released to SPCB, Research Institution,
Universities, NGOs and Industrial Units for specific projects/schemes.
i) Assistance to Pollution Control Boards in the States for Specific
projects/schemes.
Financial assistance is provided to State Pollution Control Boards and Union
Territory Pollution Control Committees (UTPCCs) for specific Projects/Studies.
The project/ studies proposed by SPCB‟s/UTPC‟s are examined in the Ministry in
consultation with CPCB. Financial assistance is then provided to
SPCBs/UTPCC‟s in installments. The subsequent installments are released only
after verification of utilization certificates and expenditure statements received from
them in respect of earlier installments. Against the provision of Rs. 12.75 crore in the
IX Five Year Plan towards assistance for abatement of pollution, only Rs. 3 crore
was utilized up to March 2001.
MoEF also provides assistances to the Pollution Control Boards in the States of
Gujarat, Maharashtra., Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu to cover the procurement of
equipment with the objective of strengthening the monitoring and enforcement
abilities of Pollution Control Boards in these States.
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
ii) Funding for River Action Plans
Prior to 1 April 1997, funds for the implementation of River Action Plans viz.
Ganga Action Plan Phase I and II and National River Conservation Plan were
shared equally between Central and State Government. However, Cabinet
Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) in 1998 approved 100 per cent
funding of these schemes from 1 April
1997. The Action Plan involves interception and diversion schemes,
construction of sewage treatment plants, construction of bathing ghats, electric
crematoria, community toilets and other miscellaneous schemes. The Detailed
Project Reports(DPRs) submitted by the implementing agencies through State
Government are examined by the experts at National River Conservation
Directorate (NRCD) and MoEF and
thereafter, administrative approval and expenditure sanction in accorded.
The total provision made, expenditure and unspent provisions for river action
plans was as under:-
Rs in Crore
Action Plan Year Total
Provision
Actual
Expenditure
Unspent
Provision Ganga Action
Plan, Phase-I
1997-98
1998-99
1999-2000
5.30
8.73
2.00
3.30
2.50
-
2.00
6.23
2.00 Ganga Action
Plan, Phase-II
1997-98
1998-99
1999-2000
86.00
165.00
120.00
82.30
87.43
90.38
3.70
77.57
29.62 National River
Action Plan
1997-98
1998-99
1999-2000
14.00
14.00
70.00
10.74
14.00
62.05
3.26
-
7.95
The progress of the schemes was slow and utilization of funds was not
satisfactory.
iii) Assistance for setting up Common Effluent Treatment Plant
a company or society constitute specifically to own, operate and maintain common
facilities for treatment and disposal of solid, liquid and gaseous waste generated by
small and medium scale units located in clusters is eligible for assistance under
the scheme. The Government of India finances 25 per cent of project cost 25 per
cent is to be financed by concerned State Government and 20 per cent is to be
contributed by the promoter, and remaining 30 per cent may be obtained as loan
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
from financial Institutions. The consent of SPCB is sufficient for a company to
approach financial institutions for obtaining the loan component. The Central
Government releases its matching share based on release by State Government.
As of March 2000, 89 Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPs) has been
approved for providing financial assistance. The details of CETPs sanctioned are
given below:-
Status of CETPs
S.No.
Name of the
State/UT
GOI subsidy disbursed
(Rs in lakhs)
No. of CETPs
1. Andhra Pradesh 132.00 3
2. Delhi 2300.00 15
3. Gujarat 735.42 7
4. Himachal Pradesh 12.60 4
5. Haryana 11.89 1
6. Karnataka 98.84 3
7. Madhya Pradesh 96.00 3
8. Maharashtra 267.43 9
9. Punjab 19.95 4
10. Rajasthan 100.00 2
11. Tamil Nadu 1934.08 36
12. Uttar Pradesh 95.75 2
Total 5803.96 89
B. State Funding
As per Section 35 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution 1974, the State
Government may, after due appropriate as decided by the State Legislature make in
each financial year such contribution to the State Boards as it may think necessary
to enable that Board to perform its functions.
C. StateBoard‟s own receipts
The other main sources of income of State Board is its own receipts from share of
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
Water consent fee, sample testing fee and sale proceeds of application forms,
financial assistance from CPCB. The total amount released as central share of
water cess was Rs. 43.32 crore during 2000-2001. It was observed in audit that
though more than two-thirds of the total expenditure of the State Boards was on Staff
& administration, most weak in proper discharge of their assigned duties.
Failure of various State Government in formulating the policies and programmes for
meeting the statutory requirement regarding prevention of pollution resulting in
non- utilization of funds from time to time.
Funds aggregating Rs 145.95 crore were lying unspent in 9 States as on 1 April
2000 as given below: -
Rs in Crore
Name of States Unspent
Amount Andhra Pradesh 34.32
Gujarat 19.95
Harayana 16.27
Jammu & Kashmir 0.71
Punjab 28.94
Rajasthan 10.50
Tripura 1.80
Uttar Pradesh 27.52
West Bengal 5.94
Total 145.95
7. Monitoring of the Schemes Projects
In the Ministry, the pollution abatement schemes are reviewed and monitored
through internal evaluation and also through the CPCB and SPCBs.
The implementation of various rivers action plans viz. Ganga Action Plan Phase-
I & Phase_II and National River Conservation Plan is monitored by an apex body,
and National River Conservation Authority (NRCA) headed by Prime Minister,
which was to meet at least once every year. NRCA, however met only twice during
the period 1994 to Marc 2000. The implementation of the various schemes is also
monitored by a Steering Committee headed by Secretary, MoEF with members from
[ENVIRONMENT AUIDT REORTS ON WATER ISSUES BY CAG]
all concerned States, CPCB and also research organization. The meeting of the
Steering Committee are held once every three months. In addition, NRCD,
MoEF also undertake field visits and review meetings with the implementation
agencies. NRCD has also developed a format in which the physical progress of the
various schemes is obtained from the implementing every month.
As per provision of Section 8 of Water Act, CPCB is required to meet at least once in
every three months to monitor and review its own activities regarding laying of
standards for streams and other water bodies, fixing emission standards for pollution
from various sources and plan schemes for prevention, control or abatement of water
pollution.
8. Surveys for Identification of Polluting Industries
Section 25 of the Water Act as amended in 1988, stipulates that no person shall,
without the previous consent of the SPCB:-
a) Establishing or take any step to establish any industry, operation or process,
or any treatment and disposal system or an extension or addition thereto,
which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into a stream or well or
sewer or on land; or
b) Bring in to use any new or altered outlets for the discharge of sewage.
Boards are to identify the polluting units and monitor them closely. Up-to-
date information regarding the industries operating in the State was required to
identify polluting units and to take remedial measures.
However, a large number of States were found wanting in carrying out adequate
surveys for identification of polluting units. In Tripura, the information
collected during the survey was at wide variance with the information available in
the records of the Director of Industries and Commerce reportedly due to incomplete
survey. It was, therefore, not possible for the Boards in these States to identify cases
where licenses were issued to new industries by industries Department without
obtaining clearance from the Boards.
9. Municipal Bodies/Industries functioning without statutory consent
According to Section 25(1) of the Water Act 1974, no municipal Body/industry shall,
without the previous consent of the SPCBs, discharge sewage or trade effluent into a
stream/well or on land. The consent so granted has to be renewed after a period of
two years on prescribed fees. The Pollution Control
Board (PCB) could refuse consent already granted if the unit has not applied for
renewal. The PCB could prosecute defaulting industrial units in
terms of Section 25(5) of the Water Act 1974. The Supreme Court had also directed
in 1997 that the CPCB and all SPCBs should ensure compliance with the provisions
of the Water Act 1974 by everyone including the municipal bodies and the
industries. Text check in various States revealed that there was no mechanism in
most States to ensure that the units were functioning only after obtaining valid
consent. Details of non-compliance of the said provisions in some of the States were
as under:-
Gujarat
In 1380 cases consent was not given by the Board. The Board had no mechanism
to check whether units were operating even after rejecting of applications/non-
renewal of consent and to initiate action for closure/penalty for such units
discharging effluent. 30 textile mills and dye-manufacturing units were in operation
without consent for six month to 16 years.
Haryana
Out of 2867 polluting units by the Board, 611 units were operating without applying
for grant of consent.
Himachal Pradesh
Of the 58 Municipal Committees/Notified Area Committees, consent had been
granted to only one Municipal Committee. In addition, there were 122 Government
hospitals and public health center but in none of the cases had the consent been
applied for or granted. Two industrial units in Kangra district were operating for the
last 10 and 16 years respectively without obtaining any consent from the Board.
Jammu & Kashmir
The Board granted consent to 357 out of 489 industrial units who had applied
for it during 1995-2000. The consents were granted arbitrarily without
conducting any analysis of trade effluents discharged by these units. Further test
check revealed that 6 highly polluting industrial units and 4 distilleries in Jammu
were operating without the consent of the Board.
Karnataka
Out of 9012 industries in the State, 6891 operating industries were identified as those
requiring consent. However, 2169 industries out of these were found to be
operating without the consent of the Board.
Maharashtra
Out of 15 Municipality Corporation and 219 Municipal Councils, 13 Municipal
Corporations and 218 Municipal Councils did not hold even applied for the consent.
Except for issuing notices to the Municipal Bodies, the Board had not initiated any
other action.
Meghalaya
77 industries had not applied as of March 2000 for renewal of consent although
validity of last annual consent had expired between September 1989 and February
1999.
The local bodies viz. 2 Municipalities at Shillong and Tura town committees in
other urban areas had not obtained the consent from the Board as of March 2000.
The Board had not ascertained the level of effluent discharge by these local bodies.
Orissa
As of March 1999 there were 102 urban local bodies in Orissa. But none of these
had been granted consent by the State Board under Water Act.
Punjab
Out of 5745 industries, the Board identified 3317 as polluting as of March 2000, of
which consent was granted to only 930 units during this period. Out of
4 Municipal Corporations, (Amritsar, Jalandhar, Ludhiana and Patiala)
discharging the highest quantity of sewage and 125 Municipal Committees, only
32 had applied for consent during 1994-99. Only six were granted conditional
consent.
The State Board did not take action the local bodies that failed to apply for consent.
Through renewal of consent was due in 773 cases, only 642 units applied for
renewal. No action was initiated by the State Board against 131 units who did nor
apply for renewal.
Rajas than
As against the identified 1670 highly polluting units, 1317 units are operating without
consent. In case of other polluting units, 1326 units were running without consent.
The Board had taken no action to bring these units under the consent mechanism.
Tamil Nadu
Out of 20532 units identified by the Board, 18229 units had applied for
renewal of consent and as of March 2000, the consent had been issued to 15425
units. Consents for
198 large-scale highly polluting industries had not been renewed, even much after it
was due for renewal. The industries continue to operate without consent.
Tripura
Out of 2422 industrial units identified by the Board, consent were given in
respect of
1137 units and renewal was permitted in respect of 547 units during 1988-
2000.
Consequent to issue of audit review to MoEF in July 2001, CPCB in August
2001 directed all SPCBs and Pollution Control Committees (PCCs) to identify
industries operating without valid consent and to take appropriate legal action
against all such industries including immediate closure of the units wherever
necessary.
10. Industries without Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs)
Under Section 24 of Water Act no person shall knowingly cause or permit any
poisonous or polluting matter to enter (whether directly or indirectly) into any stream
or well or sewer or on land.
In pursuance of the action plan formulated by MoEF, CPCB identified 1551 large
and medium major polluting industries, which came into operation on or
before 31st December 1991 in 17 categories. In term of a notification issued in
February 1992 by Government of India, highly polluting industries were to install
ETPs by June 1994. the progress was reviewed by SPCBs/PCCs and data was
complied by CPCB and sent to MoEF. As of 30 June 2001, 1348 units had
adequate pollution control facilities to comply with the standards, 176 units has
been closed and 27 units were defaulters. The inventorisation of large and medium
industries, which came into operation on and after 1
January 1992, has been initiated. In pursuance of a decision taken by NRCA,
CPCB at the instance of MoEF issued directed to all SPCB/PCCs in July 1997
requiring them to direct the defaulting industries (discharging their effluents into
rivers and lakes) to take necessary action for effluent treatment within three months
failing which closure notice shall be issued. As of 30 June 2001, 608 industries has
provided the requisite treatment facilities, 236 units had been closed and in 7 units
that had defaulted, action for closure was in progress.
In most of the states the Effluent Treatment Plants/Common Effluent Treatment
Plants (ETPs/CETPs) were either not installed or the number installed was
inadequate. The status of installation of ETPs in various states as revealed in test
check was as under:
Andhra Pradesh
Government of India/Board has identified (September 2000) 237 highly polluting
industries and 75 grossly polluting industries. However, no effective action had been
initiated by the Board against any of these industries so far.
Forty highly polluting industries in Katedan Industrial Estate (Hyderabad) had been
operating without ETPs. The effluents generated by these industries were
being discharged either into the land within their premises or in open areas
contaminating the surroundings. Apart from issuing slow cause notices for non-
compliance, no effective measures were taken by the state board to control the
pollution caused by these industries.
There are 240 industries granted conditional consent to industries which did not
comply with the statutory standards prescribed under the Act.
Thermal, Steel, Leather plants and various distilleries either had no ETPs or had
installed ETP were not capable of treating the effluents discharges, thereby polluting
the rivers and other bodies.
Gujarat
As against 170 developed and operational industrial estates, only 10 CETPs were in
operation in the state. The Board had prescribed norms for both inlet and outlet
effluent quality of CETP. Test-check of records revealed that the performance of
CETPs in term of treatment of industrial effluents was poor. The characteristics of
inlet effluents at all CETPs were more than those prescribed by the Board indicating
that individual members were not carrying out effective primary treatment before
discharging the effluents into CETPs. None of the CETPs discharged the treatment
effluents as per the norms of the Boards. However, no penal action, except issue of
show cause notices, was taken by the Board.
Haryana
Although 1535 polluting industrial units were operating in the State as on 31
March 2000, ETPs has been installed only in 996 units. The remaining 539 units had
either no treatment facility or had inadequate facilities. The Board launched
prosecution against 7 units, issued closure orders against 100 units and issued show
cause notices to remaining 432 units.
However to avoid industrial slow down and also unemployment in the State it was
decided(May 1998) by the Board that no industry, even if polluting and unresponsive
would be closed. Thus the powers of the Board to close down the non-complying
units were used sparingly.
Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation (HSIDC) responsible for setting
up of Industrial estates in the State constructed the CETP at Kundli with a
capacity to treat 11.08-lakh liter of effluent per day. This was inadequate as
additional 9-lakh liter of effluent per day was still being released untreated by
various units in the estate. The Environment Department released Rs 21.64 lakh
during 1997-98 to HSIDC as subsidy for construction of CETPs at Jind and
Murthal for treatment of 4.63 lakh liters trade effluent per day. However, only first
part of CETP at Jind was complete and no CETP at Murthal was constructed so far.
Himachal
Pradesh
The Board had not identified total number of polluting industries, which required
ETPs but had granted consent to 1401 industrial units as of March 1999.
Records in the regional offices at Baddi, Jassur, Parwanoo and Una revealed that
ETPs provided in four large-scale units in Solan districts were not working
satisfactorily thereby polluting the water bodies. No ETP had been provided by the
Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation in its seven workshops falling
under the jurisdiction of Jassur and Una Regional offices. No penal action had
been taken against the defaulting units so far.
Karnataka
As of March 1999, of the 6891 operating industries 6120 (89 per cent) had
installed ETPs. Out of 120 industries identified by the Board as highly polluting, 99
had installed ETPs as of March 1999. The Board had closely down 14 defaulting
units during 1994- 99. Work on ETPs in the remaining 7 industries had not been
completed even six years after expiry of the time limit prescribed by Government
of India. Subsequently, the Board had closed down three of these industries.
Kerala
Six industries, which were granted (1991-98) consent on condition of commissioning
the ETPs by specific dates between May 1991 and June 2000, did not install ETPs
till April 2000. All these units have been discharging untreated effluents into water
bodies.
In respect of 15 units ETPs installed were not working properly. The 11 units, where
ETPs were found inadequate, did not implement the directions of the Boards to
augment the ETPs as of March 2000.
Meghalaya
The data available with the Board revealed that 12 industries had not taken any
action for construction of ETP as of March 2000. The Board, however, had not
initiated any action against these 12 industries although a considerable period of 7 to
38 months from the date of serving notice on them had already elapsed as of March
2000.
Madhya Pradesh
77 industries had not installed the (ETPs) at the end of 1998-99. During 1994-
95 to 1999-2000, no proposal for establishing of CETPs was prepared. The Board
stated (May 2000) that due to slow pace of industrialization the industrialists were
not taken interest in setting up of CETPs.
Maharashtra
Out of 14 CETPs with an aggregate capacity of 78700 cubic meter per day in
Maharashtra, only 6 plants with capacity of 25500 cubic meter per day could be
commissioned as on March 1999. Even out of these 6 plants, the capacity of 3 plants
could not be utilized fully due to non-laying of pipeline for collection of effluents
from member industries.
Punjab
The Board had not maintained any data regarding installation of ETPs by the
industrial units during 1994-98. Water pollution persisted even after installation of
ETPs. Further, out of 3407 ETPs required to be installed during 1998-99, only 1951
(57 per cent) could be installed and only 1440 plants (42 per cent) inspected. The
purpose of monitoring the installation of ETPs to check water pollution was thus
largely defeated.
Tamil Nadu
Of the 6639 large and medium scale industrial units in the State as of March 2000,
1335 units had not installed ETPs so far.
The Board stated in November 2000 that it had ordered closure of 1199 units as per
the directives of High Court. The remaining 136 units, which were at various stages
of constructing the ETPs, had been addressed to expedite the construction.
Out of 939 tanneries, 132 had provided individual ETPs. Out of 26 CETPs required
to be provided for 772 tanneries, 12 CETPs for 620 tanneries had been provided and
were in operation. The remaining 14 CETPs at Tiruchirappali and Vellore were
under process of installation.
Similarly, out of 4173 textile bleaching and dyeing industries which were regarded as
major polluting industries which were regarded as major polluting industries, CETPs
has been provided in 537 units and the installation of CETP was under progress in
905 industries. Closure orders had been issued to 821 units, which had neither
applied for consent of the board nor had provided ETPs. Particulars for the
remaining 1910 units were not available.
Tripura
Through the Board accorded consent to establish/operate 1137 units as of 31 March
2000, setting up of ETPS was not ensured before granting consent. Resultantly only
4 units had installed ETPs. The Board had not identified the total number of
polluting industrial units that required installation of ETPs. The Board stated in
April 2000 that due to lack of technical manpower, it was not possible to identify the
actual number of polluting industrial units that required ETPs.
Uttar Pradesh
Government (Environment Department) had not identified the industrial units which
had not installed the required treatment plants. According to the Board
there were seven grossly polluting big industrial units, which had not installed
treatment plants. Test- check, however revealed that there were many other big
industrial units, which had not installed any treatment plants. At Mirzapur, there
were 14 grossly polluting industries, of which 4 units had not installed proper ETPs.
West Bengal
In West Bengal, none of 31 industrial estates/growth centers with 1203 Ssi units had
any CETP. The Board, however, did not initiate any action for construction of
CETP.
11. Inspection under Water Act
Section 23 of the Water Act lays down that any person empowered by State Board in
this behalf shall have a right at any time to enter, as he considers necessary, any
place:-
a) for the purpose of performing any of the function of the Board entrusted to
him
b) for the purpose of determining whether and if so in what manner, any such
functions are to be performed or whether any provisions of this Act of the
rules made there under of any notice, order, direction or authorization served,
made given or granted under this Act is being or has been complied with.
Officers of the Board are required to visit industries/factories regularly and ascertain
that the programmes for abatement of pollution are being implemented
satisfactorily. MoEF, in September 1998 stipulated that all the consented industries
should be categorized into red, (highly polluting) orange (moderately polluting)
and green (least polluting) depending on pollution potential and should be
inspected at monthly/six monthly/annual intervals. The Surveillance Squads of
SPCBs and CPCB are also conduct the surprise inspection of the polluting
industries. However, the number of such visits
by SPCBs/PCCs was inadequate. The visits of CPCB squads revealed that the
industries either did not have requisite facilities to comply the standards or did not
operate the facilities.
The inspection carried out by State Boards was far from satisfactory. There were
wide variation between the inspections targeted and the inspections actually
conducted. The position as revealed in various States is as under:-
Andhra Pradesh
No norms and targets of inspection were fixed by the State Board. The Board did
not maintained any record of inspections conducted by the field staff. Therefore, it
had no reliable information, based on physical check, whether the pollution
abatement programmes were being followed by the industries.
Gujarat
Test-check of inspections carried out revealed that out of 1985 red category units,
1321 were planned for inspection and only 880 (67 per cent) were actually
inspected. Similarly inadequate inspection was also noticed in greed and orange
category industries. Reasons for shortfall in inspection were not furnished.
Himachal Pradesh
Audit scrutiny revealed that based on the units presently identified and frequency for
inspections fixed, 5450 inspections were required to be conducted against which
only 3735 inspections were carried out by the Board during 1994-1999.
Kerala
The schedule fixed by the Board in 1994 provided for inspection for large, medium
and small units at monthly, quarterly and annual intervals respectively. A test
check of records relating to 418 industries units for the period 1997-2000 in four
regional offices and three district offices however, revealed that only 239 units were
inspected by the Board. 79 to 82 per cent of the remaining 179 industries were not
inspected at all.
Orissa
An evaluation report by NORCONSULT International A.S. regarding the progress
of the project on “Strengthening of Orissa State
Pollution Control Board” in 1994
recommended that the frequency of inspections be increased in respect of
highly polluting industries to at least 12 times a year. As of March 1999, there
were 92 large and highly polluting industries and 106 highly polluting mines in the
State. As per these recommendations, Board should have conducted at least 2376
inspections against which only 1370 inspections were conducted during 1998-
1999 resulting in shortfall in frequency of inspections to the extent of 1006 (45 per
cent) during the year.
Pondicherry
The Pondicherry Pollution Control Committee categorized (December 1998) 623
industries units (red-213, orange-172 and green-238) to be monitored every year, once
in two years and once in three years respectively. However, only 99 units were
monitored during 1999.
Punjab
The Punjab Pollution Control Board decided to inspect the large and medium highly
polluting industries once in 6 months and small highly polluting industries once in a
year. As against the required visits of 2500 in case of large and medium industries the
actual visits were 815. As against the required visits of 17079 in case of small
industries, the actual visits were 4224 during the year 1997-99. It indicates a shortfall
of 67 per cent and 75 per cent respectively.
Tamil Nadu
There was a significant shortfall in inspection of large polluting industries in
the 7 District Offices checked by the Audit. The shortfall ranged from 6 to 92
per cent in respect of red category and from 28 to 100 per cent in respect of orange
category industries during 1995-1999.
West Bengal
The Board identified 2300 red, 4200 orange and 2500 green category industries.
While the red category industries were inspected once a year, the Board fixed no
periodicity for inspection of orange and green category industries. As against the
required 10215 inspections in respect of red categories, the Board conducted only
8637 inspections.
12. Drinking Water
Potable water should be clear, odorless, neither very hard nor too soft and free from
bacteria.
The drinking water being supplied in the various small and big town of the states was
in most cases polluted as detailed below:
Andhra Pradesh
Results of analysis reports of drinking water samples of Hyderabad and
Secunderabad collected analyses by Institute of Preventive Medicine during the
period 1994-2000 revealed that the water supplied was chemically unsatisfactory due
to hardness and high fluoride content. The underground pipes laid long ago had
developed fissures and the drain water had been entering the water supply pipes.
Due to deficiencies in the quality if water supplied by Hyderabad Metropolitan Water
Supply and Sewerage Board, the residents of the twin cities were exposed to
unwholesome water with consequential health hazards. Analysis of
bacteriological quality of water supplied in hotels revealed an alarming high
incidence of 65-75 per cent contamination in the quality of water.
Bihar
State Government or the Bihar SPCB did not fix any desirable
range/parameter of drinking water. Status of potable water in Ranchi, Patna and
Purnea towns revealed that chemical and bacteriological parametric values of
drinking water exceeded the desirable range and also the uppermost limits in many
cases.Over 50 per cent of total urban population in Patna was being supplied
bacteriologically polluted water through water supply system since 1998.
Gujarat
Gujarat Water Supply and Sewerage Board (GWSSB) was to develop reliable source
for drinking water and provide potable water to the communities in rural areas
where drinking water was a problem. Records of GWSSB revealed that number of
identified problem villages for total Dissolved Solids increased from 567 to 960, for
high nitrates from 171 to 386 and for high increased fluoride content from 803 to
1304 from 1997-98 to 1999-2000. Further, in the same water sources salinity, nitrates
and fluorides showed increasing trend.
GWSSB did not furnish information regarding remedial action taken by it to address
the issue.
Punjab
The survey of underground water conducted by SPCB in 1993-94 at Ludhiana,
Jalandhar, Amritsar, Ropar and Nangal revealed that ground water of these cities
was contaminated in nearly all the areas and abandonment of these sources was
recommended.As no effective action to supply potable water in these towns was
taken by the Sewerage Board/MCs, the people of these towns were compelled to use
and drink contaminated underground water.
Sikkim
The PH value of drinking water of certain area of Gangtok like Lalmarket, Old
market and Baluwakhani localities showed variation from the prescribed standard
because of contamination taking place through leakages. The water at Deorali
was found to be acidic. Ammonia was found in the drinking water in Gangtok,
which indicated lack of proper and sealed pipeline network.
Tamil Nadu
Out of the water sources in the state about 9 per cent were not potable due to
excessive fluoride, about 10 per cent due to excessive nitrate, about 7 per cent due to
excessive iron and about 28 per cent to excessive total dissolved solids.
As per the details furnished (February 2000) by the Director of Public health and
Preventive Medicine, there were 1903 reported deaths from Cholera and acute
Diarrhoea and other disease during the period 1994-1999 due to major infection
caused by leakage of pipeline, bore well, improper maintenance of overhead thanks
and contamination of water sources like wells, streams and rivers.
Tripura
Dissolved iron ranged between 1.21 and 8.12 in the ground water of the state as
against the permissible limit of 0.3 mg. Per liter. The high concentration of iron
in water not only contributes to incidence of amoebiasis but also is directly
responsible for the high incidence of gall stone disease in the State. But no initiative
was taken by the SPCB to reduce the dissolved iron in ground water to maintain the
mandatory standard of drinking water quality.
West Bengal
School of Environmental Studies, Jadavpur University conducted studies on the
bacteriological and physio-chemical quality of drinking water of 100 municipal wards
supplied by Calcutta Municipal Corporation during 1993 to 1998. Test result of
water samples indicated that calcium and Sodium contents in water were much
higher than the permissible limit of 24.04 per cent and 13.06 per cent cases
respectively. Besides 27.37 per cent of samples indicated presence of residual
chlorine, which is highly toxin being beyond the permissible limit. Further, water
in 32 wards was found bacteriologically contaminated due to leakages in pipelines.
13. Pollution due to domestic sewage from urban areas
Domestic sewage is a major source of urban water pollution. In order to maintain
the wholesomeness of water and to control and prevent natural water from being
polluted, the Boards are required under the Water Act (i) to inspect sewage or trade
effluents, works and plants for their treatment and disposal, (ii) to lay down effluent
standards for the sewage and trade effluents and (iii) to evolve efficient methods of
disposal of sewage and trade effluents on land or into any stream taking into account
the minimum fair weather dilution available in that stream. Local bodies in towns
were required to install STPs for controlling pollution caused by domestic sewage.
Most urban local bodies did not have adequate sewerage system and STPs and were
discharging untreated domestic waste either into water bodies or onto land. Test
check of records in various states revealed the following shortcoming.
Andhra Pradesh
Out of 109 municipalities and 7 municipal corporations, only the municipal
corporations of Hyderabad and Vijayawada had established STPs for treating
domestic sewage. The other local bodies were discharging untreated domestic waste
into water bodies.
Bihar
Five STPs were established between December 1993 and December 1999 under
Ganga Action Plan to treat 115 million liters of sewage per day. However, only
50 mld of sewage was treated in these STPs due to shortage of electricity and lack of
maintenance. Thus, 79 mld sewage was being discharge into the Ganga untreated
along with several other direct discharges through other sources.
Gujarat
(a) While the State has 6 municipal corporations and 110 other local bodies,
only 27 local bodies had a drainage system.
(b) While five corporation and six local bodies had STPs, only three
were operational.
(c) None of the effluent samples from any STP were as per the norms.
(d) Further, both Pirana and Vasna STPs of Ahmedabad Municipality
Corporation had an unauthorized bypass, which was used for discharging
effluent treatment.
Haryana
82 local bodies in various towns of State were causing 65 per cent of pollution. Of
these, 12 towns identifies under Ganga action Plan were being covered for
construction of STPs whereas there was no plan to construct STPs in the remaining
70 local bodies.
Himachal Pradesh
Municipal waste of 227 tones per day gets accumulated in the 8 principal towns of
Himachal Pradesh and is dumped in various streams, rivers and hill slopes etc.
thereby polluting water.
The existing sewerage system in Shimla laid down in1880 consists of simple
detention tanks where only sedimentation process takes place. It is incapable
of handling the present load of sewage, the excess effluent of which is being
discharged into natural watercourses without any treatment.
Jammu & Kashmir
The city of Jammu had no proper for disposal of solid wastes, municipal garbage and
hospital wastes, which were generally dumped, along riverbeds.
Kerala
In Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala Water Authority has been maintaining a sewage
system covering only 30-40 per cent of the present population. About 50 per cent of
the sewage of the town overflow and was directly discharged into the river Killy,
Parvathy and Puthana. The water on the riverbanks used by public for drinking
purpose disclosed high concentration of fecal coliforms.
Madhya Pradesh
No municipal committee/corporation had set up any full-fledged sewerage system
and STPs.
Maharashtra
The domestic effluents generated in Mumbai were 2562 mld, of which 929 mld. (36
per cent) was adequately treated and 1633 mld. (64 per cent) remained untreated as
of March 2000. The untreated municipal wastes along with industrial effluents
were being discharged into the Arabian Sea.
Most Untreated effluents in 14 Municipal Corporations as of March 2000 including
Pune, Thane, Nashik and Kolhapur was discharged into the river bodies/creeks
without treatment.
The Board did not maintain data on the effluents discharged by the 231
Municipal Council in the State.
Meghalaya
There was no STP set up for treatment of domestic sewage even in Shillong. Orissa
There was practically no complete sewage system in any of the urban settlement in
the State barring a few industrial townships as of March 1999. As a result, raw
sewage from these local bodies was being discharged into the valleys of Daya
River, which in turn joins Chilka Lake. The untreated sewage discharged from
Bhubaneshwar city and other urban bodies significantly contributed to the pollution
load of Chilka Lake.
In Rourkela and Cuttack the untreated sewage flows in open drains leading to
contamination of ground water. In Cuttack the drainage system installed long
back to cover smaller population was not functioning well and the untreated sewage
was being discharged into the Mahanadi River.
Pondicherry
Out of 50 mld. Of wastewater produced in urban areas, only 8 mld. Was treated and
the balance was discharged into sea by means of open channel.
Punjab
Except the municipal committee of Naya Nangal, none of the 131 municipal
corporations/committees had installed the STP as of June 2000.
Rajasthan
Out of 183 Municipal bodies, none except Jaipur had installed a STP as of May
2000.
Sikkim
The waste and garbage of Gangtok town till December 1998 was being disposed of
through „disperse and dilute‟ method in nearby streams. In January 1999 the
Board permitted the garbage of Gangtok town to be thrown at Marchak, a riverbed,
on an experimental basis for one month by using the abatement (chemical)
techniques. However, the waste and garbage continued to be dumped at Marchak
since then notwithstanding the complaints of the local people. The garbage
of other towns in Sikkim was being disposed of in the hill slopes. In rainy seasons
it entered the streams, which joins the Teesta River resulting in water pollution.
Tamil Nadu
Only 7 of the 6 Municipal 10X Corporations and 102 Municipalities in the State
had STPs to treat the effluents.
Tripur-1Xa
At Agartala, the average quantity of garbage generated was 80 tones per day. Of this,
60 tones was disposed of daily by the Agartala Municipal Council (Amc) at the site
for Municipal solid waste processing and disposal, resulting in accumulation of
undisposed garbage of 20 tones daily at various road-side garbage collection
centers. The contaminated the ground water of these localities through the process
of leaching. In spite of directions issued by the Board in November 1997 to the
AMC to take any measures. No action had been taken by the Board against AMC.
Uttar Pradesh
Out of 58 towns situated by the side of rivers, Ganga, Yamuna and Gomti, treatment
of sewage of only 17 towns was taken up by UP Jai Nigam by June 2000.
West Bengal
Domestic and public sewage of different towns including Calcutta and Howrah on
both banks of the Ganga are major sources of pollution of the river. The estimated
sewage generation in 37 towns on both banks of the river covered under Ganga
Action Plan (GAP) was 733.68 mld. The 15 towns under phase-I of the GAP were
generating 527.50 mld of sewage and capacity created for interception and diversion
was only 371.60 mld (70.5 per cent). However, sewage actually diverted was only
215.98 mld (58 per cent) while that actually treated was only 181.98 mld allowing 75
per cent of estimated sewage to flow back into the Ganga. None of 125 local bodies
in the State obtained consent from Board for discharging sewage into the rivers.
The position of dissolving oxygen, bio-chemical oxygen demand and total
coliforms count in water samples taken during March every year from 1996 to 2000
showed that water quality did not improve even after execution of the Ganga Action
Plan Schemes.
The Sewerage systems in most pf the towns were designed more than half a century
back for a limited population and were unable to cope with the growth in the towns
in terms of area and the population.
14. Water Quality Management
According to Section 16 (g) of the Water Act, CPCB lays down, modifies or annuls,
in consultation with the State Government concerned, the standard for a stream or
well. Zoning and classification of water bodies was to be done through regular
monitoring of water quality under the centrally sponsored projects of Global
Environmental Monitoring system (GEMS) and Monitoring of India National
Aquatic Resources (MINAR).
The CPCB has been monitoring water quality in collaboration with SPCBs in
order to plan pollution control strategies to assess the nature and extent of
pollution control needed in different water bodies and to evaluate the water quality
trend over a period of time. The water quality monitoring is conducted at 507
stations. The monitoring is done for 22 physico chemical and bacteriological
parameters. The data collected by SPCBs is sent for analysis bacteriological
parameters. The data collected by SPCBs is sent for analysis to CPCB. Analysis
of data for Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and pathogenic bacteria (total
and fecal coliforms) indicated that organic and bacterial contamination continued to
be critical pollutants in India aquatic resources.
Studies carried out by CPCB revealed that the municipal corporation at large had
inadequate resources for ever-increasing load of municipal sewage. A large part of the
municipal sewage was still flowing into the aquatic environment without treatment,
thereby increasing the oxygen demand in shrinking water bodies and increasing the
bacterial load of water, the main cause of water borne diseases.
The Ministry, on the basis of the studies carried out by COCB, identified the polluted
stretches for taking up pollution abatement programmes under National River
Conservation Plan. The study on grossly polluted stretches in all major national
rivers revealed that the critical parameters – BOD, DO and total coliforms have been
violated and hence those stretches had not reached the desired class level. The
Yamuna River was the most polluted river in the country having high BOD and
coliforms in the stretch of about 500 km, between Delhi and Etawah. Other several
polluted rivers were Sabarmati at Ahmedabad, Gomti at Lucknow, Kali, Adyar,
Cooum (either stretches), Vegal at Madhurai, Musi down stream of Hyderabad.
Similarly river stretches of Ganga, down stream of Kanauj, Kanpur, Allahabad,
Varanasi and Trighat; downstream of Srirangapatna KRS Dam,
Satyamangalam Bridge; Krishna between Mahabaleshwar and sangli; Tapti between
Nepanager and baranpur; Mahanadi downstream of Cuttack, Mahi between
Badanvar and Vasad, Brahamani downstream of Rourkels, Talcher and
Dharamshala, also showed high BOD and coliforms for a considerable time during
1998- 99.
A mention was made in the Report of the Comptroller and Audit of General of India
for the year ended March 2000- Ganga Action Plan (Report No.5A of 2000) that
Ganga Action Plan was launched in 1985 with the objective of bringing water quality
of river Ganga and its tributaries to bathing levels by treating domestic sewage. 110
towns were selected for pollution abatement along the banks of river Ganga and its
tributaries. Phase
I of the Plan (in 25 cities) was not completed even after delay of over 10 years. Phase
ii (in 85 towns) was also far behind its schedule. There were big shortfalls in
the achievement of targets of creation of assets and facilities under the Plan. Only
13.7 per cent of the targeted sewage treatment capacity has been created till March
2000.
Assets created in the scheme suffered impairment and closure because of technical
design flaws, mismatch of the schemes and their components and lack of adequate
maintenance. Sewage Treatment Plants could not adequately address the problem of
reducing bacterial load in the river to the desired level. During the problem 1999,
in river Ganga BOD exceeded the permissible limit at 10 out of 27 sampling station
as against only at one sampling station in 1993. The water quality of river Yamuna
also did improve over the period 1996-99. The coliforms level exceeded in 17 out
of 60 stations sampled during
1999.
The significant observation about the Water Quality profiles in major rivers of the
States are given below:
A. River Water Pollution
Andhra Pradesh
In River Godhavari levels of DO & Total Coliforms were almost meeting the
desired class in the entire stretch between up stream of Gangapur Dam and down
stream of Rajahmundry.
Gujarat
Test-check of sample analysis done by the Board revealed that, five rivers
(Damanganga, Khari, Kolak, Par and Sabarmati) were polluted mainly due to
discharge of effluent from industrial estates.
The Board had not been able to reverse the trend for these highly polluted water
bodies. The Board stated that monitoring of pollution in water bodies was done by
CPCB and it was only responsible for collection and analysis of samples from
specified stations. This was not tenable as control and abatement of pollution is the
prime responsibility of the State Board.
Haryana
During 1996-99 average BOD at Agra canal at Madanpur Khandar ranged
between 4.9mg/litre to 20 mg/liter, which was higher than the acceptable BOD level
of 3mg/litre. The objective of cleaning the polluted water of River Yamuna was not
achieved as of March 1999 as the river was continuously fed
by untreated sewage and domestic/industrial waste.
Quarterly sampling of water of River Ghaggar revealed that BOD value of
water increased from 4.5mg/litre to 28 mg/liter during September 1998 to December
1999.
Himachal Pradesh
Three stretches on the bank of River Beas at Mandi, Kullu and Manali had
been identified as polluted.The quality of the water of the river at these
stretches had deteriorated in respect of all the parameters i.e. total coliforms, faecal
and BOD. Direct flow of sewage, trade effluents and garbage etc. in the
river were responsible for deterioration in the water quality.
Jammu & Kashmir
The drains of Jammu city had their outfall in River Tawi. The river water had
shown increase of BOD from 2 mg./liter to 74 mg/litter making it unsuitable for
drinking and bathing purposes.
Kerala
The Board conducted water quality studies in respect of 12 out of the 44 rivers in
the State that revealed high concentration of faecal and total coliforms bacteria in
different stretches of all the rivers. In respect of remaining 32 rivers, even a
water quality assessment was not undertaken as of April 2000.
Madhya Pradesh
Scrutiny of test of water samples collected during 1994-1999 showed that the water of
rivers and major water bodies fell below the normal standards. Water of Rivers
Tapti, Narmada, Chambal, Khan and Kshipra at 6 points were highly
polluted. In river Narmada total coliforms were higher at the
bathing places throughout the river viz. Sethanighat up steam, Hoshangabad up
stream, Hoshangabad down stram and Garudeshwar during the year. The
Board stated in May 2000 that pollution was increasing due to non-availability
of suitable arrangement for sewage treatment with the local bodies.
Orissa
There were about 15 urban settlements on the basin of River Brahmani discharging
approximately 74460.4 KL per day of untreated wastewater. Beside, the Talcher
Power Plant, NALCO and chromite mines of Sukinda Valley discharged effluents
and water waste beyond tolerance limits. Further, they‟re being practically no
sewerage system except at Rourkela steel city, domestic wastewater were drained
into the river basin.
River Mahanadi basin had 10 coalmines which discharge about 33065 Kilolitre per
day (KLD) of waste water during monsoon and pose a serious environmental
threat due to eavy metal and sulphur compounds. Besides there were about 34
urban settlements in the Mahanadi bain discharging 266332 KLD of wastewater
without any treatment.
Rajasthan
The average value of BOD in Chambal river increased during the years 1996 and
1997.
151 industries involved in dying and printing established at Pali during 1971 to 1994
and operating without the consent of the Board, were also discharging their untreated
wastewater into Bandi River.
The Sujan Ganga canal that flows through Bharatpur city was gradually converted
into a large septic tank after 1970 due to choking of underground drains in the
town and the flow of dirty water and sullage into it.
Uttar Pradesh
In River Ganga, BOD exceeded the desired water quality criteria limits at down
stram Kanpur, down stream Varanasi and Trighat. Total Coliforms were
higher than the criteria limit in the river stretch up to Rajmahal and thereafter it was
well within the criteria limit of the desired class. However, DO level meets the
desired level at all the locations except at Varanasi down steam.
B. Lake Water Pollution
Lakes are natural homes for a large variety of flora and fauna besides providing food
and habitant to migrating birds. Besides adding to the scenic beauty, they
constitute an important element of ecological balance. They are also sources of
water for drinking, bathing and other purposes.
Andhra Pradesh
Kolleru Lake is one of the largest fresh water and wetlands in India located on the
east coast with a total catchments area of 4763 km stretching over the Krishna and
West Godhavari districts. The quality of water in this lake had deteriorated due to
the inflows of untreated urban sewage, industrial effluents from sugar factories,
distilleries and pesticides plants and residues from fertilizers and pesticides used in
aquaculture and agriculture. Apart from these, the Vijayawada Municipal
Corporation and municipalities of Gudivada and Eluru were also discharging
untreated domestic sewage into the lake.
The quality of water had deteriorated significantly as its dissolved oxygen content
was as low as 2.6 mg/liter in February 1999 and September, 1999 as against the
prescribed standard of 4 mg/liter etc. Total coliforms too exceeded the normal limit
by 5 times.
Kerala
The Board monitored, during June 1993 to March 1995, the water quality of the fresh
water lake at Sasthamcotta, which is the source of drinking water in Kollam
town. It found the presence of coliforms bacteria in the range of 130 to 16000/100 ml
of water as against the acceptable level of 50 Maximum Permissible
Number/100ml. Though the Committee on Environment of the Kerala Legislature
made several recommendations regarding prohibition of discharge of pollutants into
the lake and also identified polluting agencies such as local bodies, Kerala Water
Authority, hospitals etc., no action was initiated by the Board as of September 2000.
Orissa
Chilka Lake is one of the largest wetlands in India spread over and area of 1080 sq.
kms. It is administratively controlled by the Chilka Development Authority, an
autonomous body registered under the Socities Act. The water quality of Chilka is
brackish. The principal activities that pollute the waters of Chilka are (i) silt from
degraded catchments and (ii) waste water generated from domestic and agriculture
sources in the catchments area. State Board had not so far prepared any action plan
to protect this unique wetland from pollution.
Rajasthan
Kewaldeo Ghana and Sambhar lakes in Rajasthan had been designated as wetlands
under the Ramsar Convention on Wetland of International Important. The possible
threats to these lakes were from extraction of clay from the bed of main lake,
construction of check dams in the catchments areas of the lake affecting inflow of
water into the lakes and drawal of excessive water for salt production and for other
purposes in the summer. The Government had not formulated any programme for
protection and conservation of these lakes.
The pollution of water in the lakes of Udaipur city had been increasing due to
discharge of untreated sewage by municipal council, hotels and guest houses, Public
Health & Engineering Department filter plants and also residential colonies situated
around the lakes.
Uttar Pradesh
A 700-meter by 350-metre pond called Chanderi pond is situated at
Kanpur.The household waste of neighboring areas flows into it without any
treatment. Water of this pond is contaminated with DO being reduced to
zero. The water of this pond subsequently flows into River Ganga contributing
towards its pollution.
C. Ground Water
Andhra Pradesh
In its action plan for 1998-1999, the State Board proposed to monitor ground
water quality at the inlet, flanks and downstream side of three tanks in and around
Hyderabad and 500 meters on either side of the Musi River for a distance of about 20
Kms.
As per the preliminary report of a study conducted by the State Board and Ground
Water Department during 1998-2000, the ground water in the areas contained 24 to
3352 mg/liter. Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) much higher than the permissible
limit of 1000 mg/liter. The State Government stated in July 2000 that final report
from the Ground Water department was yet to be received.
Thus, the work of ground water quality monitoring taken up in 1998-99 was yet to be
completed (July 2000).
Kerala
Ground Water Monitoring studies conducted (1994) in seven stations in Greater
Cochin area disclosed that PH, and concentration of coliforms bacteria, BOD,
chloride etc, were beyond tolerance limits in six stations. In two stations (Eloor
and Mattanchery) well water was unfit for drinking and irrigation. In respect of
the remaining four stations water could be used for drinking and irrigation only after
disinfections and addition of lime. However the Board had not forwarded this
significant information to the State Government of concerned local bodies.
Resultantly the population continued to be exposed to the hazards of drinking
unpotable water.
Orissa
Survey of quality of ground water of dug wells and tube wells used as a source
of drinking conducted (1997-98) by SPCB in Cuttack and Rourkela revealed that
there was lower value of potential hydrogen and heavy iron content in the water
obtained from tube wells of Bhubneswar. In Rourkela, presence of lead and
copper was found to be in excess of the permissible limit. This rendered the
potability of the water obtained from the tube wells of the above cities questionable.
Pondicherry
The quality of ground water in the industrial estate at Mettupalayam had turn unfit
for human consumption fur to depositing of acids and waste material by chemical
factories in the open yard.
D. Sea Water
Maharashtra
In a coastal segment marine water is subjected to several types of uses and activities.
Depending on the types of uses and activities, saline water is classified into
various classes according to the quality of the water. The seawater in Mumbai at all
the 11 monitoring stations falls under SW-II class (designated use-bathing, water
sports and commercial fishing). During the period 1994-99 analysis reports of
all the samples drawn from all the monitoring stations showed BOD to be in excess
of the prescribed limit. The DO level was also less than the prescribed standards in
45 per cent samples at 8 monitoring stations. This makes the water unfit for its
designated use and dangerous to aquatic life. It was due to the flow of sullage and
sewage from the slums and neighboring hutment into the sea.
15. CONCLUSION
The main objective of the SPCBs was to prevent and control pollution of water
bodies in accordance with the provisions of the Water Act. The objective was not
achieved in any of the states mainly due to failure of the Boards to regulate and
control the discharge of industrial effluents and domestic sewage into the water
bodies and to ensure the installation of pollution control devices by the industrial
units and local bodies. The role of various states Government in implementing the
provisions of the Water Act and the rules was not adequately visible as there was no
proper monitoring at the government level.
The matter was referred to the Ministry in July 2001, who has not replied as of
October 2001. .
3.1 Sewage treatment schemes in Calcutta Metropolitan area(under Ganga Action
Plan)
Urban development department
Kolkatta Metropolitan Development Authority
Highlights:
Implementation of the Ganga Action Plan to control the pollution of Ganga
suffered from faulty planning and delay in execution. Towns were selected on
the basis of unrealistic assessment of sewage and as a result pollution load
draining into the Ganga was not adequately covered in the scheme. Progress
of work was hampered due to absence of monitoring, delay in finalization of
tenders and in arranging land. Before execution of work soil investigation was
not done and encroachment were not removed which resulted in wasteful and
unfruitful expenditure.
Sewage treatment schemes were prepared and executed on the basis on
population of the area instead of actual quantity of sewage polluting
the river. Estimation of sewage was accordingly defective and unrealistic.
(Paragraph 3.1.3 (i) )
Priority of towns for STP works were based on “ water quality “ in place
of “pollution concentration”. Thus least priority was given to towns
polluting the most and implementation of GAP on that basis had little
impact on cleaning the Ganga River.
(Paragraph 3.1.3 (ii))
The Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) of the river Ganga exceeded the
tolerable limit of 3 mg per litre as of March 2000 at all six sampling
stations in the Calcutta metropolitan Area proving that the water
quality had deteriorated drastically compared to March 1996.
(Paragraph.3.1.4(ii))
(Paragraph 3.1.4 (i))
ID work in Tolly’s Nullah were executed without clearing encroachment
on both banks polluting the Canal resulting in unfruitful expenditure of
Rs.3.74 crore. Though the lifted silt was the contractor’s property he was
paid for carriage and dumping of the same. This led to undue financial
aid of Rs 61.01 lakh to him.
(Paragraph 3.1.5 (ii) A (i))
Estimate for ID work of Tolly’s Nullah was based on higher rates and
higher premiums were allowed to contractor lending to extra
expenditure of Rs.31.83 lakh.
(Paragraph 3.1.5(ii)
A(ii)) Delay in handing over land, and defective design in construction of a
lifting station at Howrah by CMWSA resulted in infructuous
expenditure of Rs. 38.50 lakh on rectification work besides extra
expenditure of Rs. 21.27 lakh on price escalation.
(Paragraph 3.1.5 (ii) A (iii))
Sewage Treatment Plant (STPs) were constructed at a cost of Rs. 26.46
crore out of GAP funds for Cossipore-Chitpur and Baranagar-
Kamarhati areas for discharge of the treated effluents from the STPs into
Bagjola canal not connected with the Ganga.
(Paragraph 3.1.5 (ii) B (i))
Due to delay in construction of the STP at south suburban east
the interception and diversion schemes costing Rs. 15.51 crore was
rendered unfruitful.
(Paragraph 3.1.5 (ii) B (ii))
Out of Rs. 112.69 acres land procured for GAP project, 61.69 acres
costing Rs. 24.64 lakh became surplus and was encroached by local people.
(Paragraph 3.1.5 (ii) C (i))
A testing laboratory attached to the STP constructed at a cost of Rs. 11.16
lakh in December 1995 remained unutilized while all testing works
were done through outside agencies.
(Paragraph 3.1.5 (ii) C (iii))
Interest of Rs. 66.40 lakh earned from investment made out of GAP fund
was not accounted for. Diversion of GAP fund for Rs. 1.52 crore by
CMWSA led to loss of interest of Rs. 69.61 lakh
(Paragraph 3.1.6)
Late formation of monitoring committees rendered the monitoring
mechanism ineffective. (Paragraph 3.1.7)
3.1.1 Introduction :
The main source of pollution of the river Ganga is inflow of raw and
untreated domestic sewage and effluents from industries in different towns
and urban areas on its banks. The extent of pollution is much higher in
Calcutta metropolitan area (CMA) compared to other areas in the State.
Ganga Action Plan (GAP) was launched by the Government of India (GOI)
during 1985-86 and was to be completed in two phases by December 2001.
Its main aim was to abate pollution of the river to bring the quality of water
to bathing level (Bio-chemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) contents not to
exceed 3 mg per/litre). Though an important source of pollution in the
Ganga are industrial wastes, GAP envisaged to tackle domestic sewage only.
This was to be achieved by construction of interceptors with diversion
sewer lines (ID), Sewage Treatment Plants (STP) as well as
renovation of existing sewage system, low cost sanitation, electric crematoria
and river front development. This review deals with two major components of
GAP viz., ID and STP schemes in view of their significance and cost
implications.
GAP is a Central programme and is implemented and monitored by
National River Conservation Directorate (NRCD). In west Bengal, CMDA is
the nodal agency and the Urban Development Department (UD Deptt.) is
accountable for proper co-ordination monitoring and overall implementation
of the programme. Other agencies such as CMWSA, CMC, PHED and I
&WD implement
GA
P schemes along with CMDA. Projects reports of various schemes prepared
by the implementing agencies were approved by the NRCD.
During the period 1985-86 and 1999-2000,Rs. 157.69 crore was spent on
sewage treatment schemes. Test Reports of river water, however, indicated
that as of March 2000 the quality of water has not improved and reached even
the targeted bathing level. On the other hand, it deteriorated below the
pollution level, which prevailed when the schemes were started.
3.1.2 Audit coverage
Records of the implementing agencies for the period April 1994 to March
2000 were test checked between March 1998 and April 2000 to assess the
status of implementation of the GAP schemes. Against total available fund of
Rs. 52.52 crore from the GOI (Rs. 32.49 crore) and State Government
(Rs.20.03 crore)during April 1994 and March 2000,Rs 26.26 crore was spent
as of March 2000 in phases-I and II.
3.1.3 Planning deficiencies
(i) Selection of towns on unrealistic
basis
NRCD did not fixed any norm of pollution load for identification of towns to
be taken up for pollution abatement works. Out of 49 towns in the state
draining sewage into the ganga, 15 towns were selected under Phase I by
NRCD on the basis of population and per capita consumption of water
without considering and measuring the sewage flowing into the Ganga from
these towns. This yard stick was unrealistic and faulty since a substantial
quantity of sewage are not flowing into the Ganga but diverted to the east
Calcutta wetlands for natural treatment.
Under Phase II State Government selected 26 towns including 14 towns
(selected under orders of Supreme Court) by adopting the norm of pollution
concentration in the sewage. As a result, 8 towns, generating 34.33-mld5
sewage were left out For example, Uluberia town generating 10.85 mld
sewage with BOD level of 43.07 mg per litre was not included while towns
like Jangipur, Raniganj; Andal generating 0.37 to 2.18 mld sewage with
BOD level of 34 to 37.1 mg per litre were covered
Generation of sewage was also not correctly estimated for each town. In
Calcutta, against actual generation of 1362 mld (as per CMC), sewage
generation was estimated to be Rs. 316.24 mld (23 per cent) of which
183.24 mld was targeted for interception and diversion. Out of the
remaining 1178.76 mld (77 per cent), 752 mld flows to the Bidyadhari River
not connected with the Ganga and 426.76 mld into the Ganga and Bagjola
canal
Due to such unrealistic assessment of load of sewage generation, GAP did
not have any appreciable impact on control of pollution of the Ganga.
(ii) Lopsided priority of towns under Phase II
Towns under Phase II were classified in four groups of priority, which
was decided on the basis of water quality data of the river downstream of the
towns in disregard of pollution concentration in sewage. As a result, smaller
towns with lesser pollution were given priority over large towns contributing
maximum pollution. For example, Tolly‟s Nullah in Calcutta draining the
largest quantity of BOD (9272 kg/day) into Ganga was included in the
priority-IV while Maheshtala and Gayeshpur draining negligible quantities of
BOD (667 kg/day and 18 kg/day respectively) were given priority III and
priority I for execution respectively.
GOI approved GAP Phase II in October 1996 for completion by December
2001
.Before execution of schemes, State Government was to prepare and submit
Detailed project Reports (DPRs) of individual schemes to NRCD for
approval. NRCD did not prescribe any time frame for submission of DPRs. In
August 1996 however, the steering committee constitutal by the Government
of India fixed 3 months for submission of DRSs by the State Government.
NRCD also made commitment before the supreme court (in response to
public interest litigation) that the State Government would submit complete
DPRs by April 1997 and execute all the schemes by July 2000.But till March
2000, State Government submitted only 31 DPRs (63 percent) out of the
target of 49 DPRs for ID and STP schemes for the 16 towns in CMA under
Phase II.State Government submitted composite DPRs though separate DPR
for each scheme was required.
The DPRs were deficient in technical and cast estimate aspects. As a result,
even after revision at the instance of NRCD, the DRPs were not found fit for
approval by NRCD. As the State Government/nodal agency delay
in responding to NRCD‟s comments, NRCD approved only 10 DRPs (16
per cent) as of March
2000 and work for one scheme only commenced (January 1999). Thus, due
to failure of the Government and nodal agency to prepare complete Project
Reports in time, commencement of Phase II works was delayed by more than
2 years.
3.1.4 Target and achievements
(i) Shortfall in achievement
The unrealistic estimate and targets based on such estimates covered only 73
percent of the estimated quantity of sewage falling in Ganga. The West Bengal
Pollution Control Board (WSPCB) surveyed major outfalls discharging into
the river in the greater Calcutta area between the stretch from Dakshineswar
to Pujali during 1997-98 which revealed that raw sewage from the area had
still been flowing into the Ganga through 32 outfall drains GAP has no
scheme to tackle this raw sewage in future. As a result, even after treatment of
42 per cent of targeted sewage during 13 years, quality of Ganga water did not
improve.
WBPCB monitors water quality of the Ganga by taking water samples from
different locations for testing in its laboratory, test result as of March 1999
revealed that the BOD content of the river water exceeded the tolerable limit
of 3 mg per litre at all six stations in the Calcutta metropolitan area
indicating that water quality had drastically deteriorated as compared to 1996.
As against the permissible limit of 3 mg per litre, water samples taken during
March each year from 1996 to 2000 indicated (Appendix 16) that BOD levels
of the Ganga river water in Calcutta Metropolitan Area in March 2000
ranged between 2.7 and 6.0 mg per litre, compared to 1.6 to 2.4 mg per litre
in march 1996. The TCC count at Palta and garden reach was also 5 to 10
times higher than the permissible limit (10000 per 100 ml). This indicated high
sewage contamination at Calcutta‟s drinking water source of the Ganga and
10 times beyond the limit at Dakshineshwar, a pilgrim-bathing site. Thus,
domestic and industrial pollution control measures in the Calcutta
Metropolitan Area (Palta to Uluberia) were ineffective and infact pollution
levels increased despite investment of Rs.157.69 crore (up to March 2000) in
CMA under GAP.
Targets for interception, diversion and treatment of sewage and achievements
are indicated below:
Sewage target for
the
year 1998 to 2000/ Sewage
actually
Name of
city/town
Sewage
estimated
Interception
&
Diversio
n
Treatment Intercepted
&
Diverte
d
Treated % Of
shortfall
in
relation
to target
Calcutta 316.24 183.24 183.24 78.49 48.49 74
Other than
Calcutta (12
towns in
metropolita
n area)
264.5 241.60 241.60 129.61 129.61 46
Total 580.74 424.84 424.84 208.10 178.10 58
Figures obtained from CMDA‟s records
(ii) Poor progress of work:
Pollution abatement schemes under Phase I commenced during 1985-86
were to be completed by March 1990.However, one scheme (STP at
South Suburban East) of Phase I still remains incomplete though there was no
fund constraint. Schemes under Phase II were targeted to be completed by
December 2001 but till March 2000 only one scheme (ID at Tolly‟s Nullah,
out of a total of 144 targeted) was taken up for execution as indicated in paras
3.1.3(ii) and 3.1.5(ii) A (i).
3.1.5 Deficient execution:
(i) Delayed execution of work
Till March 2000,against 91 schemes (Phase I:
42,Phase II: 49) to be prepared for ID (53 schemes) and STP (38
schemes) under GAP in CMA, 46 Schemes (Phase I: 42, Phase II: 4)
were sanctioned of which 41 schemes were completed by CMDA (20
schemes), CMWSA (20 schemes) and PHED (1 schemes) under
Phase I by march 1999 (Appendix 17). Two schemes taken up during
January 1994 and January 1999 remained incomplete as of march
2000. The delay in execution ranged from 21 to 108 months and
CMDA attributed it to the land acquisition problem, court cases,
shifting of different public utility lines, etc. The delay in completion
of the schemes resulted in cost overrun of 56 to 70 per cent for 41
schemes as indicated below:
Name of
Scheme
No. Of
Scheme
Original
sanctione
d cost
Revised
sanctioned
Cost (Rs. In)
Expenditure
Incurred
(Crore)
Cost
increase
ID 29 48.76 80.31 82.70 33.94(70
percent) STP 12 42.72 68.09 66.60 23.88 (56
Percent) Total 41 91.48 148.40 149.30 57.82 (63
Percent)
Test check of 16 ID and 9 STP schemes revealed that completion of
most of the schemes were delayed mainly due to deficient
monitoring and slow progress by the contractors besides
(a) Delay in land acquisition : 3 ID schemes 1
STP scheme
(b) Technical deficiency: 1 ID scheme-- (c)
Adverse soil condition not : 6 ID schemes
--
Detection earlier (d) Delay in awarding the : 3 ID schemes 3 STP
schemes
Work
(e) Increase in scope of : -- 3 STP
schemes work
(f) Delay in payment of : -- 2 STP
schemes land compensation
(g) Slow progress by the : 9 ID schemes 5 STP schemes
Contractors
(i) A few cases of major irregularities in the execution of schemes
are discussed below:
A. Construction of ID schemes
(i) Work of ID of 27 outfalls
Tolly‟s nullah (canal) having direct link with the river Ganga and flowing on
the southern fringe of Calcutta is a dumping ground of garbage by the
encroachers with massive siltation since decades. To prevent pollution of the
Nullah in the stretch between boat canal at Chetla to Ganga at Hastings (5
km), the scheme for ID of 27 outfalls carrying 61.24 mld sewage was approved
(November 1998) by the GOI for Rs. 27.63 crore. GOI while releasing Rs.4
crore (November 1998) for this work stipulated that works should be taken up
only after the State Government removed the encroachment.CMDA entrusted
the work to CMC and CMWSA but encroachment was not removed and the
inhabitants of encroached area continued to deposit garbage. Pollution
remains unabated and the Nullah continues to pollute the Ganga as before
even though work-valuing Rs.3.74 crore was executed as of March 2000.
I & WD took up (January 1999) remodeling and desiltation of the Nullah
from Garia Rail Bridge to Hastings-15.5 Km) by mechanical dredging (5
Km) and manual excavation (10.5 Km) at an estimated cost of Rs.
6.01 crore for completion be July 2000. Scrutiny revealed that 5 per
cent of mechanical dredging work and 7 percent of manual excavation work
were completed as of January 2000.the poor progress was attributable to non-
removal of encroachment. The contract provided for carriage and dumping of
the lifted silt at land to be arranged by the contractor at a lead of 210 meter
outside Government land along the Nullah at a cost of Rs. 61.01 lakh (at the
rate of Rs. 20.80 per cum for an estimated quantity of 3.31 lakh cum silt). As
the contractor was to pay royalty (at the rate of Rs. 7.06 per cum) for the
excavated silt, he was to arrange its disposal after lifting from the Nullah.The
contractual provision was, therefore unjustified and led to undue financial aid
to the contractor.
(ii) Extra expenditure due to adoption of higher rates:
CMC and CMWSA took up (January 1999) Id works at tolly‟s Nullah. There
was no co-ordination between CMC and CMWSA in preparation of estimates
.CMC prepared estimates based on its own Schedule of Rates (SOR) of 1994-
95 while CMWSA prepared estimates as per SOR of CMDA-1994-95 and that
of Public Works (Roads) Department for the year 1995-96.Total cost of works
awarded by CMC was Rs. 2.32 crore (estimated cost: Rs.1.64 crore) at rates
varying between 39.50 per cent and 45.30 per cent above the estimated cost
while CMWSA awarded the works at a total cost of Rs. 90.39 lakh
(estimated cost : Rs. 82.05 lakh) at rates ranging between 9.50 percent and
9.99 percent above the estimated cost. The rates in CMC‟s SOR were also
higher than those of CMDA for identical items. The works had almost been
completed and the contractors had been paid Rs. 2.13 crore as of December
1999
Thus due to lack of co-ordination and pursuance of economy, ID works were
executed at higher rates by CMC involving an extra expenditure of Rs.31.83
lakh
(iii) Extra expenditure due to defective design
CMWSA awarded the work of construction of a lifting station at Howrah to a
contractor in July 1990 on turnkey basis at the tender cost of Rs. 51.93 lakh for
completion by July 1991.Kolkatta PORT Trust, however made the site
available only in September 1992.without conducting soil test, the
contractor prepared design and adopted well sinking method with bottom
plugging of the well. CMWSA approved the design. After completion of the
bottom plugging work (October 1994), huge leakages were found with
underground water coming through bottom plugging. CMWSA attributed the
leakage to sand boiling character of the soil, which was not detected by the
contractor. As the contractor declined to rectify the defect on the ground of
delay in handing over land to him, CMWSA terminated the contract (October
1995) after paying Rs. 25.85 lakh for value of work done. The balance work
along with rectification of defects were completed through another contractor
(March 1997) at a cost of Rs. 85.04 lakh (rectification: Rs 38.50 lakh and price
escalation: Rs. 21.27 lakh) thus by approving defective design, CMWSA
incurred infructous expenditure of Rs. 38.50 lakh and extra expenditure of Rs.
21.27 lakh. Government furnished no specific reply for the extra
expenditure.
(iv) Loss due to inadequate custody and installation of pumping equipment without
test of sumps
The contractor engaged (December 1988) for construction
of three pumping stations (PS) including supply and installation of pumping
equipment at Cossipore-Chitpur area completed the work of PS-II and left
the work site (December 1992) due to non-availability of land for PS-I and III.
He supplied pumping equipment worth Rs 68.32 lakh for all the three PSs
and kept the equipment of other two PSs at the site of PS-II under lock and
key. Inspite of contractor‟s request, CMDA did not take over the equipment.
The contractor moved (September 1993) the high court for settlement of
disputed claims. On an application (April; 1996) to the high court, CMDA
received back (February 1997) the equipment and found some of them
missing. It procured the same at a cost of Rs. 12.75 lakh
CMDA had permitted the contractor to install (November 1990) the
equipment in PS-II without test of water tightness and leakage of the walls of
sumps. As a result of continued percolation of water through the leakages
of walls, the installed pump motors were damaged. CMDA spent Rs.6.15
lakh towards dismantling, repair and reinstallation before commissioning of
PS-II
Thus, advance procurement of equipment, subsequent failure of CMDA to
take possession of the same before the contractor left the site and installation
of equipment of PS-II without water tightness test involved and extra
expenditure of Rs.18.90 lakh.
Government stated (January 2000) that left over equipment were not taken
back due to non-finalisation of balance work and then legal action would be
taken against the contractor to realize the repairing cost. The reply is not
acceptable as CMDA could have shifted the leftover equipment to one of its
stores and no legal action was taken against the contractor till March 2000.
Construction of STP
(i) Expenditure on STPs unconnected with GAP:
GAP envisaged interception and diversion of raw sewage falling
directly into the Ganga, their treatment in STPs and discharging back into the
Ganga.In Cossipore-Chitpur and Baranagar-Kamarhati areas, the inflow of
the sewage through outfall drains was prevented by usual interception
and diversion. However, though the diverted sewage is flowing into the
bagjola khal (canal), which is not connected to the Ganga, CMDA
constructed two STPs at a cost of Rs. 26.46 crore (one at Bangur for
Cossipore-Chitpur valuing Rs.12.31 crore in December 1998 and the other
at Matkal for Baranagar-Kamarhati valuing Rs. 14.15 crore in March
1994).As seen from the map the Bagjola Khal is not connected to the Ganga.
Moreover, only a small quantity of sewage (45 mld and 40 mld respectively)
was diverted for treatment in the STPs and the treated sewage allowed to mix
with the raw sewage in the Bagjola Khal . The Bagjola Khal which carries the
bulk of raw sewage and spoils of Calcutta and the adjoining municipalities
flows eastwards into the Bidyadhari river which empties into the Bay of
Bengal. Since the treated effluents from both the STPs are being discharged
into a canal carrying raw sewage which flows away from the Ganga,
construction of the two STPs did not help control the pollution of the
Ganga and was thus beyond the scope of the GAP. Rupees 26.46 crore
spent on the STPs was thus infructuous.
Scrutiny revealed that NRCD had approved the construction of the STPs
based on CMDA‟s statement that Bagjola Khal is connected to the Ganga.
The matter calls for investigation.
(ii) Unfruitful expenditure on ID works as STP was not completed
A 30 mld low cost STP (stabilization pond) for treatment of sewage
of Tollygunge-Jadavpur area (16 mld) and south suburban (East) area (14
mld) on 64.637 acres of land was to be constructed at a tendered cost of Rs.
48.12 lakh by July 1994. The STP was to be fed through two ID schemes.
After award of work it was seen that full quantity of land was not available
and the owners opposed works due to non-payment of compensation.
CMDA terminated the contract in August 1996. Works valuing Rs. 31.74
lakh was by then executed and the balance work of Rs. 21.31 lakh was
entrusted to the concerned Gram Panchayat and other contractors at a total
cost of Rs. 39.99 lakh in February 1997. This resulted in delay of 3 years
at award stage and total extra liability of Rs 23.62 lakh. The work was not
completed as of March 2000.
To feed the STP, ID schemes for the two areas were completed by March
1997 at a total cost of Rs. 15.51 crore and commissioned during May 1992
and March 1997.As the STP was not completed, the sewage (30 mld) diverted
through the ID schemes was not treated and flowed back into the Ganga.thus
the ID schemes costing Rs. 15.51 crore did not serve intended purpose even
after 3 to 7 years of commissioning
(iii) Extra expenditure due to delay in acceptance of tender
For construction of the 40 mld STP at Baranagar-Kamarhati on turnkey
basis, CMDA received price bids in September 1989 with validity of 4 months.
The deputy director (North), GAP sector of CMDA awarded the work in
November 1990, 10 months after the expiry of validity period the work was to
be completed at a cost of Rs. 4.80 crore.price escalation was payable to
the contractor from the second year of submission of the tender. On
completion of the work (December 1995) CMDA paid escalation of Rs.
38.10 lakh of which Rs. 8.47 lakh accrued for the period of delay of 10
months in award of the work.
Government stated (August 1999) that after receipt of price bids in
September 1989, CMDA issued clearance in February 1990 and approached
(March 1990) NRCD, which accorded approval in October 1990. Thus
CMDA was mainly responsible for the delay by taking 6 months just to
approach NRCD for approval.
3.1.7 Monitoring:
(i) Blocking of funds due to retention of surplus land
Out of 200 acres of land at Mouza
Paharpur acquired for a water supply scheme at Garden Reach, CMDA
transferred (June 1990) 112.69 acres of land to the GAP Project (under
implementation by CMDA) at Rs. 45 lakh for construction of STP and
MPS.Of this, only 50.997 acres were utilized in construction of GAP work.
Under phase II no scheme under GAP works was envisaged to be
implemented in the surplus land (61.693 acres). CMDA thus, blocked
GAP fund of Rs. 24.64 lakh. Again, for lack of proper vigilance on the part of
CMDA, the entire unutilized land had been encroached. Government stated
(January 2000) that the surplus land might be utilized in some other work.
The reply is not specific, and thus, use of the land is uncertain.
(ii) Staff quarters lying vacant
GAP envisaged maintenance of STPs by departmental staff and
accordingly GAP Sector, CMDA constructed 31 staff quarters within STP
premises at Baranagar-Kamarhati, Garden Reach and Chandannagar at a cost
of Rs. 38.66 lakhs between March 1987 and September 1994. However, the
O & M of the STPs was entrusted to private agencies. As a result, the staff
quarters remained vacant for 6 years till March 1999. Till March 1999, Rs.
2.41 lakh was also spent on maintaining the vacant buildings.
3.1.7 Monitoring:
(iii) Idle investment on construction of STP laboratory
A laboratory together with the administrative building constructed in
December
1995 at a cost of Rs. 17.93 lakh for evaluation of performance of the STP was
not put to any use as the Deputy Director (South), GAP entrusted the testing
work to All India Institute of Hygiene &Public Health (AIIHPH). The
laboratory costing Rs 11.16 lakh including test equipment valued Rs. 8.28 lakh
remained unutilized since inspection.
Government stated (January 2000) that since chemist and qualified assistants
were posted the testing of samples is done by the outside agencies who use the
installed equipment of the plant laboratory. The reply is not tenable as
AIIHPH is testing the samples in its own laboratory at a fixed cost.
3.1.6 Diversion and mismanagement of fund:
In the utilization of funds following irregularities were noticed:
3.1.7 Monitoring:
(a) CMWSA diverted an amount of Rs. 1.52 crore meant for Gap works
during1991-95 to meet its own expenses and refunded Rs. 1.37 crore during
1992-99.it did not pay back the balance amount to GAP fund till March
1999. Had the fund not been diverted, it could have earned interest of
Rs.69.61 lakh at the rate of 10 per cent per annum from investment in short-
term deposit.
(b) CMDA did not report to NRCD interest of Rs. 66.40 lakh earned by them
during 1991 and 1997 from investment of GAP fund in short-term deposit
schemes.
(c) GAP envisaged to keep GAP funds in interest bearing Personal Ledger
Account with bank. But CMDA kept the funds in non-interest bearing
current accounts. As a result, it did not earn any interest on the balance lying
in the current accounts.
The State Government did not monitor the implementation of GAP since its
start (1985-86). At the instance of NRCD, State Government constituted
(March 1996) 3 Citizens Monitoring Committees (CMC) for Calcutta
Municipal Corporation area and towns on the East bank as well as West bank
of the river Ganga. Though each CMC was to meet monthly, onc met five
times and the other two three times each as of August 1999. In May
1998,State Government formed a High ower committee (HPC) in pursuance
of NRCD‟s advice (September 1997) for periodical review of progress of
implementation. Till October 1999, the HPC met only once in January 1999.
Action proposed in the meeting were reviewed since then.
Absence of monitoring for a decade affected the progress of GAP works. Till
the scheduled completion date (March 1990), physical progress of ID and STP
schemes of Phase-I was 26 per cent and nil. During the next 5 years, progress
was 55 percent and 80 percent (12 STPs) respectively. Things did not improve
even after formation of CMCs and HPC.Remaining six ID schemes and 2
STPs out of 3 of Phase-I were completed during April 1995 and March
1999. The land problem for the incomplete STP at South Suburban (east)
was not solved as of March 2000. The electric crematoria at baidyabati,
lying non-functional since 1997 was not revived as of December 1999.
3.1.7 Monitoring:
3.1.8 Recommendation:
Based on audit observations the following suggestions are made for consideration
of Government:
(i) STP should be constructed in such cases where the treated sewage
is discharged back into the Ganga.
(ii) Work of ID and STP should be taken up after acquisition of required
land.
(iii) Accountability for lapses, delay and failure of any scheme
should be enforced by close follow up action.
(iv) Various aspects of implementation of the schemes and co-
ordination among the agencies should be ensured.
The Matter was referred to government in June 2000; reply had not been
received (March 2001).