BWSSB Rainwater harvesting notice illegal-19Mar2010
19 Mar 2010,
The Chairman
BWSSB
Bangalore and All authorities.
Sir,
This is with reference to the notice issued to BWSSB consumers for compulsory rainwater harvesting along with the month's bill.
1) Section 72 A obligation to provide rainwater harvesting provides " ---- failing which the BOARD may CAUSE such rainwater harvesting structure AND recover the cost from the owner or occupier as the case may be as arrears of land revenue" sd/ G K Boregowda, Secy to govt, department of parliamentary and legal affairs.
that is and that is all.
2) The draconian extortionary arm twistinng, confrontational approach and language in the notice specifically stating that failing implementation of RWH water and sewerage supply will be stopped is totally illegal and without authority.
Water supply and sewerage is a basic right of a citizen. He is paying through his nose for these services. IT is grossly illegal on the part of the board to imply or state and convey that they have the power to disconnect water and sewerage supply for nonimplementation. The Board is in the position of a property owner and the consumer of a tenant. An owner has no right to disconnect water or power supply much less sewerage connection- even for pending bills as water and electricity are considered as the basic rights of a civilized society.The fact that the Board has resorted to such illegal threats or the fact that government employees association donates pension monies for flood relief or such purposes which promote the image of the government and it accepts it without qualms, just indicates that we in Karnataka under the present BJP rule have been deprived of legitimate governance.
3) The list of "authorized, trained plumbers" for this purpose is nothing but a carte blanc by the board for legal royal robbery.
4) In order to avoid corruption and misuse of power by plumbers or your officials should be instructed to accept RWH if it fulfills the "PURPOSE" in spirit.Are we living in a democracy or in Mayawati's Uttar pradesh?
Kindly issue immediate clarification with adequate publicity that as per the amendment quoted by you, you DONOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to disconnect water or sewerage connections.
Failing which the board and the government alone, will be answerable to courts, liable to the citizens, consumers and protection organisations, for all the costs and consequences thereof.
It will be a violation of basic rights of the citizens and hence unconstitutional and illegal. It will reflect very badly on the already beleaguered government.
Thanking you on behalf of thousands of affected consumers of Bangalore,
Sincerely yours
M B Nataraj
Microbiologist-Medical Technologist
MS(Georgetown Univ, Wash DC,) MT (American Medical Technologists,USA)
Bangalore-560086
The Chairman
BWSSB
Bangalore and All authorities.
Sir,
This is with reference to the notice issued to BWSSB consumers for compulsory rainwater harvesting along with the month's bill.
1) Section 72 A obligation to provide rainwater harvesting provides " ---- failing which the BOARD may CAUSE such rainwater harvesting structure AND recover the cost from the owner or occupier as the case may be as arrears of land revenue" sd/ G K Boregowda, Secy to govt, department of parliamentary and legal affairs.
that is and that is all.
2) The draconian extortionary arm twistinng, confrontational approach and language in the notice specifically stating that failing implementation of RWH water and sewerage supply will be stopped is totally illegal and without authority.
Water supply and sewerage is a basic right of a citizen. He is paying through his nose for these services. IT is grossly illegal on the part of the board to imply or state and convey that they have the power to disconnect water and sewerage supply for nonimplementation. The Board is in the position of a property owner and the consumer of a tenant. An owner has no right to disconnect water or power supply much less sewerage connection- even for pending bills as water and electricity are considered as the basic rights of a civilized society.The fact that the Board has resorted to such illegal threats or the fact that government employees association donates pension monies for flood relief or such purposes which promote the image of the government and it accepts it without qualms, just indicates that we in Karnataka under the present BJP rule have been deprived of legitimate governance.
3) The list of "authorized, trained plumbers" for this purpose is nothing but a carte blanc by the board for legal royal robbery.
4) In order to avoid corruption and misuse of power by plumbers or your officials should be instructed to accept RWH if it fulfills the "PURPOSE" in spirit.Are we living in a democracy or in Mayawati's Uttar pradesh?
Kindly issue immediate clarification with adequate publicity that as per the amendment quoted by you, you DONOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to disconnect water or sewerage connections.
Failing which the board and the government alone, will be answerable to courts, liable to the citizens, consumers and protection organisations, for all the costs and consequences thereof.
It will be a violation of basic rights of the citizens and hence unconstitutional and illegal. It will reflect very badly on the already beleaguered government.
Thanking you on behalf of thousands of affected consumers of Bangalore,
Sincerely yours
M B Nataraj
Microbiologist-Medical Technologist
MS(Georgetown Univ, Wash DC,) MT (American Medical Technologists,USA)
Bangalore-560086
posted by m b nataraj | 12:37 PM
10 Comments:
Mr.Nataraj. draconian extortionary arm twistinng, confrontational approach were used in the medeival ages to instill common sense into mindless people.
Even today, I see people who get water supply from the government waste this precious resource without any qualms. The only way to remedy the impending doom is to start some recharging systems which is what the government is trying to implement.
They will not get voluntary response and are forced to try harsh methods.
Surprisingly, educated people like you are looking at this very appreciable effort from a very wrong angle
Dear Mr/Ms Annonymous,
Like BWSSB and the government you have missed the purpose and spirit of the letter. I am not against RWH. For your information it has already been implemented on my property long before the order is to be enforced.
What I am opposed is the mindless application of their authority.
1.As per the law passed they can only recover.
2. where is their authority to disconnect water and sewerage supply to customers who donot comply? How do they propose to disconnect sewerage?
3. How can they ignore the subsoil conditions and enforce RWH which any logical mind will tell you will endanger building strength and safety and consequently people and property.
4) The government has been party to the wide spread violation of all bye laws, environmental violations over the decades and therefore have to take a share of the responsibility instead of arm twisting the public.
5) I have very serious doubts about the qualifications of the list of "authorized" contractors who acquired their "qualifications" by attending a two day seminar. It as I said appears to be a blatant carte blanc for extorting exorbitant charges for this RWH compliance.
6) Are you willing to certiry that all the consumers who produce these compliance certificates have actually working RWH systems?
7) Does the board have the necessary Manpower to check if all the connections have or have not complied?
8) Since the government is not bearing any of the costs, the consumer should have the freedom to get the job done at the lowest possible cost. Just like the government gets all our projects done at the lowest cost.
The list of questions can be endless.
What needs to be checked is the autocratic and bureaucratic methods practised in this "democracy"
If you really are aware of the ground reality, the buzz is that ths is an eyewash to get International funds for complying with "their" standards.
Read UN if you wish.
Thanks for reading my comment.
Mr. Natraj - I completely agree with you. There are ways that these things need to be introduced. Forcing somebody to do this is not the way. I am defiantly against. Every individual would have his own commitments and you can not generalize such a rule.
Dear Mr Guruprasad,
It would be very helpful for the cause of the people if you can send your opinion and comment to the chairman BWSSB for his information. chairman@bwssb.org
Mahatma Gandhi got us freedom sixty plus years ago, by asking the British to quit India. Unfortunately, most youngsters are quitting India to find freedom from our own brethern babus of officialdom. They still rule us throwing the rule book at us!
The amendment to the Act, talks only of collecting cost of RWH, if ubndertaken by BWSSB, as land revenue.Nowhere it is stated that supply will be disconnected. Is this a mode of intimidation?
N.UDAYASIMHA
I am planning to implement the solution in my under-construction house, but doubtful about the amendment - what is the dimension for which the RWH is mandatory?
www.bwssb.org/wordfile/final_draft_Rain%20Water.doc says 2400 sq ft in section 3 and 1200 in section 6.
http://www.bwssb.org/pdf/RWH_Compulsory.pdf says 1200 sq ft?
Can someone help please?
ofcourse udayasimha, it is arm twisting. It actually amounts to criminal intimidation. Particularly because you do not owe BWSSB any money for any service they have provided, so they have no powers to disconnect water supply. How the Einsteins in BWSSB planned implementing cutting off sewerage is beyond my wildest comprehension. Can you even think for a moment the consequences? Long live Muhammad bin Tughalak darbar! Not too surprising it has survived when majority are unidentifiable annonymous supporters of Tughalakhism, like the commentator above in this list of comments
Hi Tarun, I guess it would depend on the date of license of the construction. The wording of the order is such that any construction after 27 Aug 2009 on a site of 1200 sft might be forced to implement RWH. But certainly after 27 May 2010 or if it is officially deferred till such date its deffered to. As per BWSSB press notes july 27th or later as the assembly is not in session. May be the newer licenses are being issued only if the RWH is shown in the plan itself? Logically that would be the way. But in Tughalakh Darbar anything goes.
BWSSB may consider community RWH ,
by providing RWH pits in the centre of road for every 100 feet , the house owners can drain the collected water to this pit and let BWSSB do the maintenance and as a agency they can do better job of filtering and hygiene and charge the expenses to these house owners .
with regards
sri
Very good idea Sri. RWH now is virtually meaningless because 40x60 and above sized plots do not significantly contribute to the land area to make any difference in water table level. Much larger area held by government agencies and offices are not under RWH.
Post a Comment
<< Home