IND: Kerala Sustainable Urban Development

Resettlement Plan

This report has been submitted to ADB by the Project Management Unit, Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project (KSUDP) Thiruvananthapuram and is made publicly available in accordance with ADB’s public communications policy (2011). It does not necessarily reflect the views of ADB.

This short resettlement plan is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.

Project Number: 32300-013 June 2016

IND: Kerala Sustainable Urban Development

Short Resettlement Plan for Rehabilitation of Drains in Thiruvananthapuram Town

Submitted by

Project Management Unit, Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project (KSUDP) Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuarm

Revised Resettlement Planning Document

Short Resettlement Plan for Rehabilitation of Drains in Thiruvananthapuram Town

Document Stage: Updated for Disclosure

Project Number: Loan 2226:IND

June 2016 (v5)

India: Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project

Prepared by PIU, KSUDP, Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuarm

The resettlement plan is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature.

The Short Resettlement Plan prepared in November 2011 for Rehabilitation of Drain in Thiruvananthapuram has been updated because during implementation the impacts were minimised from 5AHs to 3AHs by adopting manual de-silting in certain reaches.

Short Resettlement Plan – Rehabilitation of Drains in Thiruvananthapuram Town Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project

1

Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 2

A. Scope of Land Acquisition and Resettlement ..................................................................................... 4

B. Policy Framework and Entitlements ................................................................................................... 6

C. Consultation, Information Dissemination and Disclosure ................................................................... 8

D. Compensation and Income Restoration ............................................................................................. 8

E. Resettlement Costs ............................................................................................................................ 9

F. Grievance Redressal ........................................................................................................................ 10

G. Institutional Framework .................................................................................................................... 10

I. Monitoring and Evaluation.................................................................................................................. 12

Appendices

I. Description of the Project .................................................................................................................. 13

II. Summary of Affected Households .................................................................................................... 15

III.Analysed Tables of Socio Economic Survey .................................................................................... 16

IV.Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan .......................................................................................... 18

V. Details of Assistance Paid and Payable ........................................................................................... 19


2

Executive Summary

a. Government of Kerala has availed financial assistance from Asian Development Bank to fund urban infrastructure projects in 5 project towns in the State. The objective of the Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project (KSUDP) is to improve urban environment, economy, and living conditions of the people. The project lays emphasis on rehabilitation, improvement, and expansion of: water supply; sewerage and sanitation; drainage; solid waste management; and roads and transportation. Recognising the social issues that can arise in infrastructure projects, KSUDP has prepared a Resettlement Framework and Indigenous People Development Framework in line with ADBs safeguard requirements. b. This sub-project identified during PPTA did not envisage any land acquisition, however during reconnaissance survey carried out prior to implementation, a few squatting and encroachments on the drain were noticed. The rehabilitation works proposed were within the available right-of-way and did not involve acquisition of private land. However, due to the proposed de-silting works, impact to squatters and encroachers who had occupied the road-side drains was envisaged that resulted in the preparation of an SRP. c. In line with ADB’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy, 1995 and KSUDPs principles of involuntary resettlement planning, contained in the Resettlement Framework, the project avoided involuntary resettlement by proposing all improvement works within the available RoW. The census and socio-economic survey that was carried out in February 2012 had identified impact to 5 structures comprising of 4 stalls/kiosks in the footpath that will face temporary disruption and 1 hotel (India Coffee House) that has extended its kitchen on to the drain right-of-way. d. The SRP prepared in January 2013 was implemented only in April 2014 as the Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram did not approve the SRP citing lack of funds and sought State funds for the same. In October 2013, the 42nd Empowered Committee (EC) accorded approval to use of State funds for RP implementation. During implementation, the impact to 2 stalls was avoided by adopting manual de-silting in those reaches. Further, the hotel that had encroached the drain right-of-way, shifted its temporary kitchen to the southern side of the hotel building. Due to the reduction in the impact during implementation, the Short Resettlement Plan (SRP) prepared in January 2013 has been updated. e. The census identified both the stalls/kiosks that were affected. A socio-economic survey was carried out amongst the affected households in February 2012. The average annual family income of the affected households is Rs.1,15,000/- with an average family size of 5. The average income from the affected these stalls was reported as Rs.63,000/- per annum. There were no vulnerable household in this subproject. f. The subproject caused temporary disruption of business to 2 stalls/kiosks for a period of 15-20 days. These stalls that had occupied the footpath portion of the road were affected during construction of sidewall and de-silting of the roadside drain. The project did not cause any impact to common property resources as all improvement works were proposed within the RoW without affecting any common property resources. Where ever required the PIU ensured that utilities were relocated prior to commencement of civil works in that stretch of the drain. Based on the socio-economic information obtained during the census surveys, there are no Indigenous People (IP) and no impacts on IP is envisaged. g. The Project Implementing Unit (PIU) of the Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram (MCT) ensured that the squatters (petty/tea stalls) on the road margins moved adjacent to the existing location along the same stretch before civil works (drain and pavement works) was undertaken in the encroached sections.


3

h. The Entitlement Framework (EF) of the Resettlement Framework and the SRP was translated in Malayalam and was made available to the public and in particular to the affected people by the implementing agency viz. Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram (MCT). Copies of the EF and SRP was also available at the office of the Mayor, Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation, office of the Project Manager, Project Implementing Unit (PIU), KSUDP, Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation and office of the Project Management Unit (PMU), KSUDP, Thiruvananthapuram. The MCT continued consultations, information dissemination, and disclosure during implementation. i. The PIU was responsible for the implementation of the SRP and KSUDP provided the required funds. The total cost of SRP was Rs.0.06 million and the SRP was implemented over 3 years. the 2 affected households were paid for loss of income for the duration of disruption that ranged from 15-20 days and an additional Rs.5000/- was paid towards shifting charges. The minimum wages of 245/- for the year 2014 was used for computing the assistance to be paid. However, upon review of the updated SRP for this subproject, the Senior Safeguard Specialist, INRM pointed out that the AHs are entitled for assistance at minimum wages for 3 months and that the RF makes no qualification as to the actual duration of impact. Hence, based on the advice, the difference of the 3-month minimum wages payable and the amount already paid for the actual loss will be paid. j. The MCT had constituted a eight-member Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) comprising of the Mayor, Corporation Secretary, Revenue Officer, Town Planning Officer, the Project Manager of the PIU, CDS Representative, SDO and Councillor. The existence of the GRC was disseminated to the affected persons through printed handouts providing details of the structure and process in redressing grievances. Any aggrieved person had the opportunity to approach the GRC, chaired by the Mayor, MCT to resolve his/her grievance and if the grievance of the person is not addressed, the aggrieved person would be directed to approach the District Collector. The aggrieved person will have the right to approach the court of law at anytime s/he wishes and not necessarily need to go through the GRC. j. SRP implementation was closely monitored by PIU that provided necessary inputs to PMU, KSUDP for assessing the resettlement progress and in identifying potential difficulties and problems. Internal monitoring was undertaken by the PM, PIU with the assistance of the SDO, PIU. The external monitoring and evaluation will be carried out by an external monitoring agency.


4

A. Scope of Land Acquisition and Resettlement

1. Government of Kerala has availed financial assistance from Asian Development Bank to fund urban infrastructure projects in 5 project towns in the State. The objective of the Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project (KSUDP) is to improve urban environment, economy, and living conditions of the people. The project lays emphasis on rehabilitation, improvement, and expansion of: water supply; sewerage and sanitation; drainage; solid waste management; and roads and transportation. Further, the project also directly supports poor communities in livelihood enhancement through Poverty Social Fund (PSF); and in improving facilities and amenities through Community Infrastructure Fund (CIF). 2. Recognising the social issues that can arise in infrastructure projects, KSUDP has prepared a Resettlement Framework and Indigenous People Development Framework in line with ADBs safeguard requirements. The frameworks address social issues arising out of acquisition of land and other assets, eviction of squatters and removal of encroachments resulting in social and / or economic impacts to households / individuals. These impacts could be direct or sometimes indirect and there could be impact to community assets and facilities. 3. The rehabilitation of drains under KSUDP package TVM-DR-01 had proposed to: (i) desilt 5.4km of storm water drain from Vellayambalam to Kannanmoola (pazhavangadi thodu); (ii) rehabilitation of the side wall; (iii) construction of silt traps; and (iv) fencing the thodu in identified vulnerable locations to prevent people dumping garbage into the drain. The improvements proposed as part of rehabilitation of some existing drains in Thiruvananthapuram will ensure free flow of storm water and reduce flooding during monsoon. Further, mosquito breeding will considerably reduce as the improvements proposed will put an end to water stagnation in the drains. The drains over the years have got clogged with silt and garbage resulting in reduced carrying capacity and flow. During monsoon and heavy rainfall, these drains overflow resulting in flooding of low lying areas, in particular the Thambanoor area where the ISBT and Railway Station are located. A brief description of the sub-project is given as Appendix-I.

‘Pazhavangadi Thodu’ at Thambanoor A clogged secondary drain (ch 0/0 - 140/0)

4. This sub-project identified during PPTA did not envisage any land acquisition, however during reconnaissance survey carried out prior to implementation, a few squatting and encroachments on the drain were noticed. The rehabilitation works proposed were within the available right-of-way and did not involve acquisition of private land. However, due


5

to the proposed de-silting works, impact to squatters and encroachers who had occupied the road-side drains was envisaged that resulted in the preparation of an SRP. 5. In line with ADB’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy, 1995 and KSUDPs principles of involuntary resettlement planning, contained in the Resettlement Framework, the project avoided involuntary resettlement by proposing all improvement works within the available RoW. 6. The census and socio-economic survey that was carried out in February 2012 had identified impact to 5 stalls/kiosks comprising of 4 stalls/kiosks in the footpath that will face temporary disruption and 1 hotel (India Coffee House) that had extended its kitchen on to the drain right-of-way. The civil works was phased out to ensure that no affected person (squatter) is disrupted for a longer period than required. For any given stretch of the drain alignment, PIU ensured that the period of temporary disruption to livelihood is minimal. 7. The SRP prepared in January 2013 was implemented only in April 2014 as the Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram did not approve the SRP citing lack of funds and sought State funds for the same. In October 2013, the 42nd Empowered Committee (EC) accorded approval to use of State funds for RP implementation. During implementation, the impact to 2 stalls was avoided by adopting manual de-silting in those reaches. Further, the hotel that had encroached the drain right-of-way, shifted its temporary kitchen to the southern side of the hotel building. Due to the reduction in the impact during implementation, the Short Resettlement Plan (SRP) prepared in January 2013 has been updated. 8. The subproject caused temporary disruption of business to 2 stalls/kiosks for a period of 15-20 days. These stalls that had occupied the footpath portion of the road were affected during construction of sidewall and de-silting of the roadside drain. The summary of affected households is given vide Appendix-II along with details of the households identified in February 2012, but avoided during civil works. A summary of resettlement impacts is given in Table 1. The project is categorised as Category-B in line with the Resettlement Framework of KSUDP as the involuntary resettlement impacts is not significant. 9. The census identified both the stalls/kiosks that were affected. A socio-economic survey was carried out amongst the affected households in February 2012. The average annual family income of the affected households is Rs.1,15,000/- with an average family size of 5. The average income from the affected stall was reported as Rs.63,000/- per annum. None are below the poverty line1, though 1 household was in possession of BPL ration card (Antyodaya Card) and none qualified as vulnerable. Summary socio-economic information is presented in Appendix-III.

Table 1: Summary of Resettlement Impacts

Impact

Rehabilitation of Storm Water Drains in

Thiruvananthapuram Town

Permanent Land Acquisition (ha) Nil

Temporary Land Acquisition (ha) Nil

Affected Households (AHs) (temporary disruption to livelihood) 2

Affected Persons (APs) (temporary disruption to livelihood) 10

1 The State Specific Poverty Line for Kerala as per Planning Commission of India's Expert Committee (Dr. C.

Rangarajan Comittteee) for the year 2011-12 is Rs.1353.68 per capita per month for Urban. The same has been updated to April 2014 (the year of payment) based on CPIIW and is Rs.1807.23 per capita per month.


6

Impact

Rehabilitation of Storm Water Drains in

Thiruvananthapuram Town

Affected employee Nil

Titled APs Nil

Non-titled APs (Squatters) 10

Non-titled AHs (Squatters) 2

Female-headed AH Nil

IP/ST-headed AH Nil

BPL AH Nil

Temporary disruption to Stalls/Kiosks/ 2

Affected Trees/Crops Nil

Affected Common Property Resources Nil

Average Family Size 5.0

Average Household Income Rs.9,583/- p.m.

Petty shop near New Theatre Tea shop cum Eatery in Lenin Nagar

10. The project does not cause any impact to common property resources as all improvement works are proposed within the RoW without affecting any common property resources. Where ever required the PIU ensured that utilities are relocated prior to commencement of civil works in that stretch of the drain. 11. Based on the socio-economic information obtained during the census surveys, there were no Indigenous People (IP) and no impact on IP was envisaged. During implementation, the project did not cause any impact to any indigenous peoples.

B. Policy Framework and Entitlements

12. The Resettlement Framework of KSUDP is based on (i) The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (amended in 1984), (ii) the Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy Framework, PWD,


7

Government of Kerala, 2000, (iii) the National Policy on Resettlement and Rehabilitation, 20032, and (iv) ADB’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy, 1995. 13. Based on the above laws and policies, the key involuntary resettlement principles of KSUDP are: Avoiding or minimizing involuntary resettlement and impacts to indigenous peoples by

exploring project and design alternatives; In cases, where IR and impacts on IP are unavoidable, enhancing or, at least, restoring the

livelihoods of all affected persons in real terms relative to pre-project levels; Improving the standard of living of the displaced poor and other vulnerable groups including

those without legal title to land or other assets; All lost assets acquired or affected to be compensated based on the principle of

replacement cost; Affected people to be assisted to integrate economically and socially into host communities

so that adverse impacts on the host communities are minimised and social harmony is promoted;

The absence of a formal title to land is not a bar to policy entitlements; Ensuring that affected persons benefit from the projects funded to the extent possible and

they are consulted on the project at different stages of the project from its planning to implementation; and

Integrating the RP and IPP with the overall preparation and implementation of the project and payment of compensation and other assistances with time-bound actions before award of civil works.

14. The entitlement matrix for this sub-project, based on the above policy principles is given in Table 2. Only temporary disruption to livelihood is anticipated in this sub-project. The Project Implementing Unit (PIU) of the Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram (MCT) ensured that the squatters (petty/tea shops) on the road margins moved adjacent to the existing location along the same stretch before civil works (drain and pavement works) was undertaken in the encroached sections.

2 The Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India has notified the National Rehabilitation and

Resettlement Policy, 2007 (NRRP) that provides broad guidelines and executive instructions and will be applicable to all projects. The provisions of the NRRP-2007 provide for the basic minimum requirements, and all projects leading to involuntary displacement of people must address the rehabilitation and resettlement issues comprehensively. The State Governments, Public Sector Undertakings or agencies, and other requiring bodies are at liberty to put in place greater benefit levels than those prescribed in the NRRP-2007. The principles of this policy may also apply to the rehabilitation and resettlement of persons involuntarily displaced permanently due to any other reason.


8

Table 2: Entitlement Matrix

SNo Type of

loss Application

Definition of entitled person

Compensation policy

Implementation issues

1 Temporary disruption of livelihood.

Temporary commercial activity within the project area or Impact Zone.

Hawkers, vendors, squatters temporarily getting affected during construction activities.

1. All temporarily disrupted commercial activities will be provided with alternative temporary space to enable continuity in economic activities, especially in the case of road sector, without permanent displacement; and

2. Assistance at minimum wages for three months.

During construction activity ULB will provide an alternative temporary site for each vendor and hawker to continue his or her livelihoods.

2 Additional support to vulnerable groups

Vulnerable Groups

1. Economic rehabilitation grant calculated at one year’s poverty line as determined by the State BPL survey.

C. Consultation, Information Dissemination and Disclosure

15. The SRP was prepared based on discussions and individual interviews with the affected persons along the proposed drain alignment. The likely disruption to structures due to the improvements proposed to the storm eater drain was discussed. Further, the temporary arrangements that would be made during construction to avoid impact to the structures and the entitlements as per the KSUDP social safeguard framework were explained. 16. The Entitlement Framework (EF) of the Resettlement Framework and the SRP was translated in Malayalam and was made available to the public and in particular to the affected people by the implementing agency viz. Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram (MCT). Copies of the EF and SRP was also available at the office of the Mayor, Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation, office of the Project Manager, Project Implementing Unit (PIU), KSUDP, Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation and office of the Project Management Unit (PMU), KSUDP, Thiruvananthapuram. The MCT continued consultations, information dissemination, and disclosure during implementation. A Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan that was prepared for the project has been updated and is enclosed as Appendix-IV. 17. This updated SRP will also be disclosed in Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation’s website, KSUDP’s website and ADB’s website.

D. Compensation and Income Restoration

18. There was no land acquisition in this sub-project and two private stalls/kiosks that were constructed on the footpath were affected. One stall/kiosk getting affected is semi-permanent


9

(tin/asbestos sheet) in nature and the other is temporary in nature (kiosks/shacks). The de-silting, side wall protection and improvement works proposed under storm water drain sub-project was carried out in a phased manner to minimize the period of disruption. Further, MCT provided advance notice to the APs and allowed them to shift to an adjacent place that was very close to the present location and where the work had been completed. The assistances for temporary disruption for the business loss was paid a year later to the APs. This was primarily because of delays in making the required funds available for disbursement. 19. The improvements proposed did not impact most foot-bridges that serve as access to people to cross the drain. In places where it had to be demolished as part of the proposed drain works, the same was reconstructed under the subproject.

Foot-bride between chainage 6814-6900 Foot-bride between chainage 9020-9064

20. The project will caused temporary disruption to 2 stalls/kiosks that have been erected in the footpath impacting 2 AHs. In line with the provisions of the entitlement matrix of KSUDP’s Resettlement Framework, the 2 affected households were paid for loss of income for the duration of disruption that ranged from 15-20 days and an additional Rs.5000/- was paid towards shifting charges. The minimum wages of 245/- for the year 2014 was used for computing the assistance to be paid. However, upon review of the updated SRP for this subproject, the Senior Safeguard Specialist, INRM pointed out that the AHs are entitled for assistance at minimum wages for 3 months and that the RF makes no qualification as to the actual duration of impact. Hence, based on the advice, the difference of the 3-month minimum wages payable and the amount already paid for the actual loss will be paid.

E. Resettlement Costs

21 The resettlement costs are based on the entitlement framework of Resettlement Framework prepared by KSUDP for projects financed by KSUDP with ADB assistance. The unit costs in the entitlement framework are based on the Government Order3 of Labour and Rehabilitation (E) Department, GOK and updated for 2014 based on CPIIW. The funds required for the SRP implementation was made available from the State fund by KSUDP. The resettlement cost is presented in the following table and the detailed assistance for each AH along with the amount payable, already paid and the difference payable is given in Appendix-V.

3 G.O.(Ms.) No.100/2009/LBR dated 23

rd July 2009.


10

Table 3: Resettlement Costs

S.No. Items Unit Unit Rates (INR)

Quantity Amount

(INR)

1 Rehabilitation Assistance

a Assistance for Temporary Disruption to livelihood

3-Month Minimum Wages

22,0584 2 44,116

b Shifting assistance for Semi-permanent kiosks/bunks

Stalls/Kiosks 5,000 2 10,000

Sub total 54,116

2 Cost of Implementation of RP

a CDS- for implementation of RP for one month

Lump sum 6,000 1 6,000

Sub total

6,000

Grand Total 60,116

In INR Million 0.06

F. Grievance Redressal

22. The MCT had constituted a eight-member Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) comprising of the Mayor, Corporation Secretary, Revenue Officer, Town Planning Officer, the Project Manager of the PIU, CDS Representative, SDO and Councilor. The existence of the GRC was disseminated to the affected persons through printed handouts providing details of the structure and process in redressing grievances. Any aggrieved person had the opportunity to approach the GRC, chaired by the Mayor, MCT to resolve his/her grievance and if the grievance of the person is not addressed, the aggrieved person would be directed to approach the District Collector. The aggrieved person will have the right to approach the court of law at anytime s/he wishes and not necessarily need to go through the GRC. 23. The GRC was mandated to meet every month, to determine the merit of each grievance, and resolve grievances within a month of receiving the complaint. The GRC’s decision is to be communicated to the aggrieved person within 15 days from the date of the meeting. Records are to be kept of all grievances received including: contact details of complainant, date that the complaint was received, nature of grievance, agreed corrective actions taken/recommended, the date the recommendations were implemented and the final outcome. No compliant was received from any of the APs under this subproject. However, during civil works, a compound wall resting on the drain wall of a petrol bunk collapsed and the same was reconstructed by the contractor at his cost. During the pendency of reconstruction of the compound wall the owner of the petrol bunk filed a case in the court seeking compensation for damage sustained and the case is pending.

G. Institutional Framework

24. The Project Management Unit (PMU), Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project (KSUDP) is the executing agency (EA) of the Project. The Project Implementation Unit (PIU) constituted within the Municipal Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram (MCT) led by the Project Manager (PM) is responsible for overall project implementation, monitoring, and supervision and preparation of all documentation needed for decision making, contracting, supervising of work and providing progress monitoring information to PMU, KSUDP. The PIU was supported by a

4 The minimum wages prescribed by GO in July 2009 has been revised for May 2014 based on CPIIW.


11

Design and Supervision Consultant (DSC). The Social Development Officer (SDO), PIU, MCT, is responsible for the implementation of the SRP with the assistance of Community Development Societies (CDS), who were engaged through a Council resolution. 25. The institutional roles and responsibilities for SRP implementation is provided in the following table.

Table 4: Institutional Roles and Responsibilities

Activities Agency

Responsible Sub-project Initiation Stage Finalization of sites/alignments for sub-projects PIU & DSC Disclosure of sub-project details by issuing Public Notice PIU Consultations with Stakeholders PIU RP Preparation Stage Conducting Census of all affected household PIU Conducting discussions with APs during socio-economic survey PIU Categorization of AHs for finalizing entitlements PIU Formulating rehabilitation measures PIU Conducting discussions/ meetings with all AHs and other stakeholders PIU Finalizing entitlements and rehabilitation packages PIU Disclosure of final entitlements and rehabilitation packages PIU Approval of RP MCT RP Implementation Stage Implementation of proposed rehabilitation measures PIU Payment of compensation for land and structure Not applicable Payment of R&R assistance PIU Consultations with AHs during rehabilitation activities PIU Grievances Redressal MCT Internal Monitoring PIU Independent External Monitoring commissioned by KSUDP External Agency

H. Implementation Schedule 26. The implementation schedule that was proposed in the 2012 SRP had identified the council approval as the first step in SRP implementation and this was envisaged to happen in December 2012. However, the approval by the council did not take place till April 2014 as the MCT expressed its inability provide funds and sought State funds for SRP implementation. This delayed the entire implementation and the implementation schedule has now been updated.

Table 5: Implementation Schedule

Activities Implementation Schedule of RP Distributed over Months

2012 2013 2014 2016

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Resettlement Planning

Approval of SRP by MCT

Disclosure of SRP

Dissemination of SRP and EM of Resettlement Framework

Training for PIU, TVM

Finalisation of AHs list after verification

Issue of identity cards


12

Activities Implementation Schedule of RP Distributed over Months

2012 2013 2014 2016

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Disclosure of final SRP

Constitute Grievance Redress Committee

Grievance Redressing Activities

Civil Work Schedule

Announce start date of SRP implementation through public notification

Handing over of stretches, where there are no APs, to the contractor for construction

Start of civil works in stretches where APs are having stalls / kiosks

Rehabilitation assistance

Payment of assistance for temporary disruption to livelihood

Monitoring & Evaluation

Internal monitoring All through the SRP implementation period

External monitoring December 2015 - June 2016

I. Monitoring and Evaluation

27. SRP implementation was closely monitored by PIU that provided necessary inputs to PMU, KSUDP for assessing the resettlement progress and in identifying potential difficulties and problems. Internal monitoring was undertaken by the PM, PIU with the assistance of the SDO, PIU. Internal monitoring involved: (i) process monitoring to ensure that implementation is on schedule and problems are dealt with on a timely basis; (ii) monitoring of disbursement and utilization of the assistance provided; and (iii) overall monitoring to assess AHs status. Monthly progress report were prepared reporting actual achievements against the targets fixed and reasons for shortfalls, if any. The PIU was responsible for managing and maintaining AHs databases, documenting results of AHs census, and verifying asset and socio-economic survey data, which will be used as the baseline for assessing SRP implementation impacts. The external monitoring and evaluation will be carried out by an external monitoring agency. The monitoring will oversee if the SRP is being implemented in accordance with the approved SRP. The evaluation will document, if the intended objectives of the SRP have been achieved. Towards this the following indicators will form the basis for the assessment during the project implementation: (i) number of AHs provided rehabilitation assistance; (ii) income levels of the AHs; (iii) changes and shifts in occupation/trade; and (v) assets sold/bought. The external monitoring agency would monitor the SRP implementation and report deviations if any in the implementation. The external monitoring agency will undertake an evaluation 1-year after the SRP is implemented and the report will be submitted directly to PMU, KSUDP. The KSUDP will submit the monitoring reports and evaluation report of the external monitoring agency to ADB along with its review report of the same.


13

Appendix – I

Description of the Project

The Thiruvananthapuram drainage improvement project (TVM-DR-01) involves: (i) de-silting the entire length of Pazhavangadi Thodu from KWA outlet in Vellayambalam to the confluence point with Pattom Thodu in Kannamoola; (ii) removal of debris and floating materials from Pazhavangadi Thodu; (iii) dismantling/reconstruction of dry rubble/random rubble masonry sidewalls in CM of Pazhavangadi Thodu at a few locations where the walls have caved in; (iv) constructions of silt pits in Pazhavangadi Thodu at five locations; (v) fencing of Pazhavangadi Thodu at three locations; (vi) providing and fixing of screens to prevent movements of floating materials at five locations; (vii) construction of concrete walkways with hand rails for cleaning the silt pits and screen; (viii) relaying of bed pitching; (ix) dismantling and reconstruction of concrete slabs including sidewalls which affects the vent way of the thodu; (x) providing cover slabs on Pazhavangadi Thodu near Indian Coffee House Thampanoor for a length of about 100 m as per the BOQ Provisions; (xi) construction of retaining wall for 100m (of maximum 3.5 m height) in Pazhavangadi Thodu, near KSRTC bus stand; (xii) construction of box culvert of size 7.5m X 3.0 m and 20 m long in Pazhavangadi Thodu at Putharikandan Maidan entrance at Pazhavangadi; and (xiii) operation and Maintenance of Pazhavangadi Thodu as per detailed specifications and BOQ provisions for a period of two years. In Thampanoor area, the major re-designed roadside drains start from near the fly over on the east, follows the alignment of the existing drain via the front of new theatre, crossing the roads to Visram Sanket to Ponnara Sreedhar Park area where the drain bifurcates and diverts part of the runoff(about ½) to the north side drain which traverses(to be improved by KRFB) via in front of KSRTC bus station, while balance(1/2)gets diverted to south side drain(to be improved by KRFB) via in front of Thiruvananthapuram Central Railway Station and both finally emptying in to Pazhavangadi Thodu


14

Fig 1: Location Map of Drains being rehabilitated in Thiruvananthapuram Town


15

Appendix – II Summary of Affected Households

(to be read with Appendix-V)

ID No Settlement

Name

Name of Stall owner /

Representative

Stall Type / Name

Type of Structure

Use of Structure

Tenure

Affected / Not affected with

Reasons thereof

Annual Family Income

Photo

Assistance Paid and Date of

Payment

TVM-DR-001

Thampanoor Branch Manager Indian Coffee House

Semi Permanent

Commercial Encroacher

Not affected. Temporary shelter of

Kitchen moved nearby.

Not Applicable

Not affected

TVM-DR-005

Thycadu Ms. K. Omana Tea Shop Temporary Commercial Squatter Not affected. Works carried out manually.

90,000

Not affected

TVM-DR-006

Thycadu Ms. Chellamma Petty Shop Semi Permanent

Residential cum Commercial

Squatter Not affected. Works carried out manually.

24,000

Not affected

TVM-DR-007

Thycadu Mr. Viswan Tea Shop & Eatery

Semi Permanent

Commercial Squatter Affected for 15

days. 1,40,000

Rs.8,675

23.04.2014

TVM-DR-008

Thycadu Mr. Chandran Petty Shop Semi Permanent

Commercial Squatter Affected for 20

days. 90,000

Rs.9,900

23.04.2014


16

Appendix - III

Analysed Tables of Socio Economic Survey

1. The socioeconomic survey was carried out in February 2012 amongst the 2 affected households. The salient findings of the socio-economic survey are presented below. The survey data has been entered in MS-Access format and the same is available with PIU. 2. Both the households are headed by men. Sixty percent of the APs are males and 40 percent are females (Thiruvananthapuram District average is: Male 47.9% and Females 52.1%)5. Malayalam is the mother tongue of both the households. One household reported of being in the project area for over 40 years and the other had been there for just 3-years. One household each belong to other Backward Caste (BC) and general category. The social characteristics of the surveyed households are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Social Characteristics of the Surveyed Population

Religion Mother Tongue Years in living in this

Town Social Group

Category % of HH Category % of HH Category % of HH Category % of HH

Hindu 100.0 Malayalam 100.0 Up to 10 years 50.0 General 50.0

Muslim - - - > 10 and ≤ 40 - OBC 50.0

Christian - - - > 40 and ≤75 50.0 SC -

Others - - - > 75 - ST -

Total 100.0 Total 100.0 Total 100.0 Total 100.0

Source: Survey Data, Feb 2012

3. The workforce constitutes 60 percent of the APs. Amongst the workforce, 50 percent have petty/tea shop, followed by 33 percent who are self employed and 17 percent who are casual labourers. The not in workforce (40%) comprise of children. One household reported an annual family income between Rs.24,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/-; and the other household earned between Rs.1,00,001/- and Rs.2,00,000/-. The average annual family income of the AHs is Rs.1,15,000/-. The economic characteristics of the surveyed households are given in Table 2.

Table 2: Economic Characteristics of the Surveyed Population

Main Occupation Family Income

Category % of HH Category Percentage

of AH

Casual labourer 10.0 ≤ 24,000

Salaried - > 24,000 and ≤ 1,00,000 50.0

Petty / tea shop 30.0 > 1,00,000 and ≤ 2,00,000 50.0

Self-employed 20.0 > 2,00,000 and ≤ 6,00,000 -

Not in workforce 40.0 > 6,00,000 -

Total 100.0 Total 100.0

Average annual family income Rs.1,15,000/-

Source: Survey Data, Survey Data, Feb 2012

4. The key socio-economic indicators established based on the socio-economic survey carried out amongst the AHs by the PIU during February 2012 are presented below. These

5 Source: Census 2011 [Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India]


17

indicators would form the baseline indicators that would be compared with the evaluation carried out by the independent external evaluation agency.

Table 3: Key Socio-economic Indicators

S.No Indicator Unit Value/Figure

a) Income (N = 2)

1 Monthly family income Average Rs.9,583/-

2 Number of earners Average 3.0

3 Business establishment % 100.0

b) Housing (N = 2)

4 Permanent % 50.0

5 Semi-permanent % 50.0

6 Temporary houses % -

7 Owned % 50.0

8 Rented % 50.0

9 Having separate kitchen % 100.0

10 Having separate toilet % 100.0

11 Having separate bath % 100.0

12 Houses electrified % 100.0

13 House with piped water supply % Nil

14 LPG as fuel for cooking Nil

c) Demographic Details (N = 2)

15 Family size Average 5.0

16 Women headed household % Nil

d) Standard of Living (N = 2)

17 B&W Television % -

18 Colour Television % 100.0

19 Cycle % 50.0

20 Motorcycle % -

21 Car % -

22 Phone % -

23 Mobile phone % 100.0


18

Appendix – IV

Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan

Activity Task Timing (Date/

Period)

No of People

Agencies

Stakeholder Identification

Mapping of the project area Dec ‘10 - PIU

Consultation with AHs during SRP preparation

Discuss potential impacts of the project with AHs

Feb ‘12 56 PIU

Socio-Economic Survey Collect socio-economic information on AHs

Feb ‘12 4 PIU

Project information Dissemination

Distribution of information leaflets to the AHs

Mar ‘14 5 PIU

Notice to all AHs

Publicise project schedule and notice to squatters regarding period of temporary disruption to business

Apr ‘14 2 PIU

Consultation and schedule for civil works

Discuss assistance, dates of civil works in a particular stretch and grievance redress mechanisms

Apr ‘14 2 PIU

Publicize the final SRP Distribute Leaflets or booklets in local language

Apr ‘14 2 PIU

Full Disclosure of the SRP to AHs

SRP to be made available in Malayalam language to AHs

Apr ‘14 2 PIU

Web Disclosure of the SRP SRP posted on ADB, PMU PIU and MCT website

Mar ‘14 - PMU, KSUDP

6 Including M/s. India Coffee House


19

Appendix-V

Details of Assistance Paid and Payable

S.

No.ID No.

Name of the Affected

House Holds (AHH)

Vulnerable

Status

Shifting

Charges

Already

Paid

Three months minimum

wages to be paid as per

Entitlement Matrix

irrespective of period of

disruption, as advised

by ADB mission

Additional assistance

payble to Vulnerable

even if the impact is

only temporary

disruption as advised by

ADB mission (@

Rs.1807.23 per capita

per month)

Total assistance

(excluding shifting

charges) payable

to AHs (as advised

by ADB)

R&R Assistance

already paid to the

AHs based on number

of days of temporary

disruption to business

Difference amount to

be paid to the AHs as

agreed with ADB

during the wrapup

meeting

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 = (6+7) 9 10 = (8-9-5)

Drain Subproject

1 TVM-DR-007 Viswan 5,000 22,050 - 22,050 3,675 18,375

2 TVM-DR-008 Chandran 5,000 22,050 - 22,050 4,900 17,150

Total 44,100 8,575 35,525

IND: Kerala Sustainable Urban Development

Documents