New Delhi June 15. The Man river (a tributary of Narmada) dam issue in Madhya Pradesh is more complex than the Sardar Sarovar dam controversy. There is no Supreme Court order here on a rehabilitation package. Only, the voice of the displaced people that must be heard. That the media- savvy Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, Digvijay Singh, chose to ignore for 23 days the condition of the four fasting activists and responded to Justice Krishna Iyer and noted author, Arundhati Roy, is his prerogative.

In his response, the Chief Minister has enumerated the figures of a handful of people who accepted some compensation in 1991, to claim that the rehabilitation of those displaced by the Man dam was generous and would not be reviewed. It is possible that Mr. Singh is testing the patience of those on fast. What must be clarified here is that the cash compensation offered then was paltry, which some were quick in accepting, and some say intimidated into accepting.

The Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) is not in the picture here, struggling as it is elsewhere for the rights of 40,000 families to be displaced in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra by the Sardar Sarovar dam.

In a way, the rehabilitation and resettlement package carved out through the struggle of the NBA — in the absence of a National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy — has become the benchmark for all irrigation projects which take away people's land, livelihood and rights.

Mr. Singh has a real problem in that he has to measure up to the Sardar Sarovar dam package for people ousted by the 29 medium and minor dams to be built on the Narmada over the years. He has categorically stated in the Supreme Court that he has no land to rehabilitate so many thousands who will be displaced by these irrigation and power projects.

In the case of the Man dam, the State Government claims that it had offered the oustees land for land or cash for land and some people initially accepted cash for land. Cash can never be a compensation for land. Cash compensation usually deprives women and children.

It took an Arundhati Roy — who visited the Man site twice with filmmaker Jharna Zaveri — to attract the attention of Mr. Singh to the problems of the fasting members of the NBA. In her reply to Mr. Singh's letter to her, Ms. Roy quoted Man-affected people as having told her that many of them were made to feel that they could either take cash or get nothing at all. ``Many said they took cash because they were threatened with legal action and forced eviction.''

``The stark fact is that displaced people cannot buy land with the special rehabilitation grant given by the Government because land is too expensive. It is the Government's responsibility to make up the difference between the value of land to be purchased and the cash that was illegally (in violation of the State's rehabilitation policy) distributed,'' she has pointed out.

An independent inquiry into the Man dam issue has pointed out in its findings that the families of 17 villages to be submerged by the Man dam were under immediate threat of losing their livelihood unless alternative land for cultivation and housing plots were provided before submergence.

Surely a progressive Chief Minister like Mr. Singhcan direct his officials to take another look at the rehabilitation issue before the monsoon sets in.

Claims and counter-claims can be transparently reviewed through an independent committee set up by the State Government with participation from both sides. And, oustees/activists should call off their fast unto death on this assurance from the Chief Minister, rather than die an unsung death.