Describing the Setting l

Chapter - 2

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Enquiring the Gandhian Way

Today, Tarun Bharat Sangh (TBS) is said to be active in over 700 villages of

Alwar, Jaipur, Dausa, Sawai Madhopur, Karauli, Bharatpur, Tonk, Ajmer,

Bikaner, Jaisalmer, Udaipur and Jodhpur districts in Rajasthan. Having learnt

from the local people that water scarcity in this arid region could be overcome

with the revival of the traditional water harvesting systems i.e. the systems of

building Johads (An eathern dam and pond to store rainwater run-oft), Anicuts

(A stone dam on a river/rivulet) and Medhbandis (An earthen structure on a

fields edge to prevent water from flowing out) Tarun Bharat Sangh has for the

last 22 years been working towards enabling the constructions of these

structures and also mobilizing people and building institutions that would help

sustain the revival of the traditional water harvesting systems.

The work carried out by TBS, with active participation from the

villagers has, it is reported, greatly facilitated in transforming the ecological,

social, cultural and economic landscape of the region. The organization has

succeeded in mobilizing people from 700 villages for the conservation and

management of water resources, which it is claimed, has resulted in the

regeneration of 6,500 sq. kms of land and an increase in forest cover. There has

also been a significant increase in the ground water table. 250 villages along the

1 Based on documents, reports and publications.

Tarun Bharat Sangh

banks of the five seasonal nvers of the area, Bhagani-Teldehe, Arvari,

J ahajwali, Sarsa and Rupare1 now have surplus water and the duration of the

seasonal flow of the rivers is also said to have increased. There has also been a

significant increase in the agriculture output and milk production in the region.

Having established a rapport and partnership with the villagers, TBS has now

extended the scope of its activities to include the areas of education, health,

women's development etc. in rural Rajasthan.

The work ofTBS has been recognised in the form of Magsaysay Award

in 2001 to Rajendra Singh, who directs its activities.

History

In the year 1975, a devastating fire amidst the cluster of hutments within the

campus of Rajasthan University, brought to the forefront a handful of voluntary

workers who helped with the rehabilitation of the affected families. The

teachers and students of the University as well as local social workers all got

together to contribute towards the organization of medical treatment, food,

shelter and even basic education of the victims of the fire. Under the leadership

of Mr. S D Sharma and Mr. K V Dron, this group of dedicated people decided

to devote themselves to the welfare of society and act as a response group in the

event of natural calamities occurring from time to time, thereby giving birth to

Taruil Bharat Sangh, which was registered on May 30, 1975 at Jaipur.

The initial emphasis of TBS was on the organization of camps and

training programs in order to enroll, motivate and mobilize the youths towards

social commitment. Soon the scope of the activities was expanded to include

building of primary education centers (bal shalayen) to educate the children of

laborers involved in the carpet weaving and mining industries. The canvas of

operation also increased and camps were also organized in rural areas.

By 1983, TBS had come in contact with many rural youths and in order

to better understand the conditions that these rural people live in, TBS

conducted several studies. One of the most important studies in this regard was

a study on the socio-economic development of "Gadulia Lahars" (Blacksmiths

who moved from village to village in search of work), which brought to the fore

64

Tarun Bharat Sangh

the adverse affect of industrialization on this nomadic group. This and other

similar studies highlighted the problems faced by the villagers like the negation

of their rights over common property resources, lack of basic facilities like

drinking water, lack of irrigation and their inability to fight the system. These

studies enhanced the knowledge, skills and confidence of the group in coping

with the issues in rural areas and led them to think and evolve a strategy that

would be practical and useful at the grass root level for the common people in

villages.

The findings of these studies greatly influenced the members of TBS,

including Rajendra Singh. An employee of the Department of Youth Affairs of

Government of India at that time, Rajendra Singh felt strongly about the welfare

of the village people and the need for sustainable rural development through

appropriate utilization of local natural and social resources. He quit his job, and

on I st October 1985, along with friends N arendra, Satendra, Kedar and

Hanuman took the decision to go to the villages and plunge fully into

developmental work.

Initiation in Gandhian Methodology2

On the evening of 2nd October 1985, the five friends arrived at Kishori village in

Thanagazi Teshil of Alwar district. The next day an acquaintance, Mr. Sumer

Singh of Suratgarh arranged accommodation for them in Bhikampura village

and, using Bhikampura as a base, the group immediately started primary

education and health care centers in the nearby Gopalpura village. The

interaction with the villagers grew and many residents of Gopalpura regularly

visited the little band of workers. It was this feeling of brotherhood with the

villagers that enabled Rajendra and Satendra to keep up their morale when the

other three decided to go back to the city.

Thanagazi Tehsil is located in the semi-arid region of the Aravalis in

Rajasthan with the local population consisting mainly of Meena and Gurjar

communities. It has been reported that 1985-86 were years of particularly severe

drought and the decreased water availability and salinity had adversely affected

2 From reports and publications

65

Tarun Bharat Sangh

both the problem of drinking water and irrigation water for agriculture.

Consequent decrease in agricultural productivity and fodder availability had

completely eroded livelihood opportunities leading to migration from the areas

of up to 70 percent of the population. The search for solutions to overcome this

economic and ecological crisis in the region gave purpose and direction to the

efforts of the Tarun Bharat Sangh.

During the drought period the people drew their attention to the

breakdown of the traditional water harvesting system in the region. At village

meetings, the elders of the village talked about their traditional johads that had

always been full of water and had ensured a full granary as well. The oldjohads

were in a dilapidated state and the villagers did not have the ability and

resources to build new ones on their own. Since the people believed that revival

of the johad would help them overcome the drought, TBS began the work of

constructing ajohad in Gopalpura village, through voluntary labour. The elders

of the village joined in as did people from the neighbouring village, Sillibaodi.

Soon the youth also pitched in, and so the firstjohad was built by the villagers

with the assistance of TBS in 1986. Following this, several johads were

constructed in neighbouring villages, consequently providing employment

during the period of drought.

The aim of building johads as visualized by TBS and the villagers'

included:

• To overcome the problem of dried up wells and regularize supply of

potable water

• To solve the problem ofland erosion and silting

• To bring barren land into cultivation

• To preserve fertility and soil moisture content

• To achieve afforestation in the bleak hills which were devoid of

cultivation

After working in other villages in Thanagazi Teshil like Hamirpura,

Bhaonta, Kolyala, Bachdi, Kishori, Mandalwas, Angari, Samara, Bhuriyavas,

Jhiri; TBS expanded its operations to the neighboring tehsils of Rajgarh and

Umrain. By the end of the nineties, Tarun Bharat Sangh had expanded its

operations to over 10 districts of Rajasthan.

66

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Organisational Structure

TBS, registered under the Societies Registration Act, has its headquarters at

Bhikampura. TBS has an executive committee of 9 members headed by a

President. Five of the committee members are located at Bhikampura.

According to the documentation made available to the researcher TBS

had a total paid staff of 150 of which 70 are women. This comprises 21

professional staff of which 2 are women, 7 administrative staff and a large

number of para-professionals. The para-professionals are appointed from among

the villagers. These para-professionals were identified for the UNDP project,

which focuses on women's self-help groups, being implemented in the villages,

and are paid honorariums from specific project funds. The para-professionals

meet once a month to report on the progress made in the project. The activities

of the organization are coordinated from the TBS headquarters based at

Bhikampura. Local coordinators are based in Lapodiya3 (Jaipur district),

Rambas (Dausa district), Amavara (Sawai Madhopur district), and Mandalwas

(Alwar district).

TBS functionaries motivate villagers to formulate what TBS calls Gram

Sabhas. These bodies, though carrying the same name as the statutory

Panchayati Raj institution called Gram Sabha, are different from them. They are

sort of 'user groups' formed during the construction phase of the project and,

among other things, are meant to function as a link between TBS and the

villagers with one member from each household of the village supposed to

participate in the Gram Sabha. Each TBS Gram Sabha is expected to appoint

the following committees: resource committee, construction committee, forest

committee, grazing committee, water committee, and women's association.

However this has not always been done.

TBS had also sponsored in 1999 the creation of Arvari Sansad

(Parliament) of people living on the banks of the Arvari River for establishing

their rights over the river, managing the resource and effecting coordination

amongst various villages.

3 Laxman Singh of Lapodiya has now become a popular name in the region of Dudu - Paner. His organization GVNML is working over more than 100 villages in the area. He has been a Ashoka Fellow - a prestigious fellowship for social workers, in recent times

67

Observations from the Field

The observations, findings and analysis from the field study are presented in

this section.

Water lIarvesting and Water Con!lervation Methods

Since the main foclls of the work of TBS is on water resources management, a

detailed study of the types of structures constructed, their impact and current

status was undertaken.

Four main types of structures are constructed for water harvesting:

• Anicuts: An ani cut is a stone dam, which is constructed on a river or

streambed, and has the largest water-holding capacity from among the

four types of structures.

• .'ohad: A !ohm] is an earthen concave shaped dam, which is built to

store rainwater run-off Johad are usually on common lands at the

foothills and are much smaller than anicuts. Unlike the anicuts they are

not built on the streambeds, and collect water from smaller catchments.

68

J (trIm Hhurat Sal/xh

• Paal: A paal is built on private farmlands, with the purpose of

conserving moisture for the Rabi season. The need f()f irrigation in the

Rabi season reduces drastically with paals. Paals are built on the main

streambed.

• Medhbandhi or field bund A medhhandi is constructed along the

boundries of fields, with the purpose of conserving soil moisture. They

are constructed on private land and involve raising the sides of the fields

to store rainwater in them.

Other structures made by them includes Tanka (Tank), Khet Tala; (Farm

Pond) and Bandha (Small Earthern Dam)

Methodology and Functioning

The entite process of TBS intervention can, in theory, be categorised into a few

steps. The steps include awareness creation, site selection and planning

including deciding the budget and cost sharing structures, actual construction

and long-term maintenance and exit policy of TBS. At each step TBS takes up a

series of activities. All these activities arc linked together by creation of the

institution of the TBS (;ram Sahha. Let us now look at some of the ground

realities of the TBS intervention process.

Awareness Building

The first step taken by TBS in new villages is to undertake an intensive

awareness campaign among people about its mission and activities. TBS uses

different tools to establish contacts in new villages. These are:

69

Tarun Bharat Sangh

• Padyatras

• Shivirs

• Banners and Posters

• Cultural Programme

• Social networks

• Word of mouth

Padyatra (or public march/procession) is the main communication tool

used by TBS to make contacts in new villages, build rapport and create

awareness regarding the natural resource and water conservation. During

padayatras TBS workers walk through new villages identified and convince and

mobilize villagers to join them with the support of contact persons.

After the padayatra is over, TBS workers hold shivirs to discuss needs

and methods of water conservation and the need to do away with social evils

such as dowry, alcoholism and gambling.

Shivirs are large public gatherings, where persons from different villages

participate. It is organized in a village where the TBS has already performed its

activities, where the villagers coming for the shivir can also see the results of

such activities

During padayatras and shivirs, TBS workers look out for promising

leaders who will come forward later to take responsibility for forming the gram

sabha and constructing water harvesting structures.

At times an initial village survey is also done at this stage to identify

potential sites for johads. In Bhaonta, the TBS worker Nanag Ram who had

relatives in Bhaonta first made contact with the village. Sundra Gurjar of

Bhaonta and Dhanna Gujjar of Kolyala were the first people who cooperated

with the TBS and took up the leadership of getting the work done in their

village through TBS assistance.

In other villages like Khajoora, Neemi, Kacherheda, Nayadera, the

villagers individually approached TBS. All those from these villages who had

approached TBS were relatively well off people of the village.

70

Tarun Bharat Sangh

usually influenced by the direct beneficiaries4 of the structure in consultation

with local masons and TBS technicians. Along with design, the villagers decide

the approximate budget for the structure.

Budget and Cost Sharing

After the villagers select the site, the households directly benefiting from each

Johad are identified and they accordingly contribute their share of labour, as

well as land, in case it covers some cultivable land, and cash. Attempts are

made to avoid using cultivable land and in some cases this has led to reducing

the size of the Johad or constructing two smaller Johads instead of one large

structure.

Community Structures

These are mostly old structures in the village and the new ones are made on the

Government revenue land. They may be Johads, Bandhs, Anicuts or Tankas.

The community contribution for common structures ranges between 25-33

percent of the total estimate. It is also observed that in the renovation of old

community structures most of the people from the village contribute. The

contribution amount may be fixed equally for each household or some may

contribute more depending on their economic status.

In Kacherheda in the making of Sheetla Mata ki talai the contribution

amount was 25 percent and almost all the households in the village contributed

mainly because the talai is beneficial for the whole village and it has religious

importance because of being Sheetla mata ka sthan. An amount of Rs 700 per

household was fixed and most of the households contributed except Harmukh

Gujjar who had occupied some sawai chak land near the talai and he feared

loosing it. But some settlement was reached with him at a later stage.

For community structures once the rate of contribution is decided,

villagers hold a meeting and based on the initial estimation of cost, they start

collecting money and work starts. TBS share of money is in proportion to the

4 This refers to persons contributing towards the cost of the structure. At times persons not benefiting directly might contribute in the form of donation for a public cause. For common structures the GS leaders who have taken responsibility to mobilise the contribution and for semi-private and private structures the family head interacts with the mason and TBS person to finalise design.

72

Tarun Bharat Sangh

amount raised by villagers. For example, if it has been decided that villagers

will contribute 25 percent of the cost and they are able to mobilise Rs.l 000 then

TBS will put in only Rs.3000 towards the structure. In the case of building a

johad where 100 cubic feet of earthwork has been estimated, for example, once

the villagers dig 25 cubic feet, TBS will then pay for the remaining 75 cubic

feet. In the Khajoora village for example, a total amount of 2.9 lakhs was

budgeted and villagers were expected to pay over Rs.70, 000. They were

however able to raise only Rs.60, 000 in cash. TBS then put in its share of 66

per cent for the structure.

Private Structures

In the making of the private structures the direct beneficiaries negotiate with the

TBS workers for the structures they want and the TBS contribution amount in

such structures ranges 50 to 33 percent (the amount has been reduced to 33

percent oflate). The kind of private structures are mostly medhbandi, bandh and

anicuts.

In most of the private structures the beneficiary is made to contribute at

least 50 percent of the total cost. Since most of the earthwork is done by tractor

both the parties do the transaction in cash. In some cases the beneficiaries have

themselves worked on their field and collected half the wages from the TBS.

The actual amount of contribution within the range given is negotiated

between TBS and villagers during the bargaining process. During field research

researcher observed that at times contribution has varied from person to person

in private structures and persons with more influence have sometimes been able

to negotiate a lower percentage contribution. At times TBS workers have also

agreed to a lower rate of contribution based on the economic status of a

beneficiary. In practice therefore contribution for private structures can vary

between 25 and 50 percent of total cost.

Budgeting for structures is based on approximate figures. The total of

villager's contribution plus TBS input can at times fall short of the total amount

finally required for construction. To complete the structure, villagers then

conduct another meeting and mobilise the remaining amount.

73

Tarun Bharat Sangh

In a few villages TBS has motivated villagers to maintain structures by

putting in part of the money. In Deori and Kraska TBS has put in 66 percent of

the money required for maintenance. The general process for maintenance is

that TBS workers, during their visits to the villages, monitor the structures and

take note of

Those structures that need maintenance. They then persuade the

concerned group to raise 33 percent so that TBS can put remaining 66 percent.

During the study, TBS workers mentioned that where the cost of repairing the

structure exceeded Rs 3000 TBS usually contributes 66 percent of the cost.

The general attitude for maintenance in villages however varies between

disinterest and the expectation that maintenance will be done with TBS support.

Most Gram Sabhas5 do not have a common fund that can be used for

maintenance - and this too is a disadvantage.

A similar observation regarding maintenance of structures has been

made by Kumar and Kandpal (1997) in the SIDA Evaluation report. The report

finds that vegetative stabilization had been done only in 5 percent of the cases

and only in 4-5 cases had waste-weirs been repaired.

Village Institutions and their Functions

Formation and Purpose of Gram Sabha

At the village level, the main institution that is formed is the Gram Sabha, or

Village Council. These institutions, though carrying the same name. as the

statutory PanchayatiRaj institution called Gram Sabha, are different from them.

They are sort of user groups formed during the construction phase of the project

and, among other things, are meant to function as a link between TBS and the

villagers. One member from each household of the village is expected to

participate in the Gram Sabha. Each TBS Gram Sabha is expected to appoint

the following committees: resource committee, construction committee, forest

committee, grazing committee, water committee, gram kosh (village fund) and

5 The concept of Gram Sabha has been explained in the following section.

75

Tarun Bharat Sangh

women's association. However these committees were not found in all the study

villages.

The formation of Gram Sabhas (GS) in the villages underlies TBS's

concept of a village institution that will ensure participation, involve villagers in

the programmes and evolve consensus. The GS is meant to decide on water

related issues in the village, to serve as an interface between TBS and the

villagers and bring in local indigenous knowledge and skills into the

construction of Johads. Before a new structure is constructed, the complete plan,

implementation procedure, site, expenditure estimated, amount and mode of

contribution and accrual of benefits are meant to be discussed within the village

GS.

Box 4 In Hamirpur, GS was formed only when a big structure jabbar sagar had to be constructed in consultation with a large number of people. Prior to this small private and community works were carried out independently. Even now most work is undertaken without any role of the Gram Sabha. Recently persons from the 4 hamlets of the village got together separately and raised the contribution for Dakao vala bandh.

The process of forming GS is usually done in a spontaneous manner. It

IS however not necessary that GS formation is done before any physical

activities are taken up. In certain villages like Hamirpur and Kacharheda, small

private works were started even before the GS was formed. At times, it can

therefore take several years to form a Gram Sabha.

The form and structure of the GS can be quite varied. In Deori, though

GS was formed in the main village, people in the hamlets meet separately to

discuss issues relevant to their own hamlet. The 'gram sabha I does not even

therefore necessarily represent the entire revenue village. In some villages

hamlets take their own decisions separately with no interaction with the main

village GS. It is also observed that the Gram Sabha at many of the villages has

actually acted as construction committee in making of community structure and

have dissolved after the construction work has been over. Once the GS is

formed a 'minute register' is opened to record minutes of the proceedings of the

meetings and rules for conducting meeting and forest protection rules.

76

Tarun Bharat Sangh

During the field work it was observed that GSs in all villages are active

and meet regularly at the time of mobilising contribution and constructing

structures. In Samra, for example, physical construction was currently going on

and the GS was fully functional and active. In Bhaonta Kolyala and Hamirpur

village also the GS is active as some activities had been going on through the

Gram Kosh money in both the villages.

Once structures are completed and activities cease, GS meetings tend to

be held irregularly or even cease completely and the GS ceases to function as an

institution. Some GS have ceased to function because of conflicts emerging

between members. Most institutions have however stopped conducting

meetings after completing physical construction of structures as there is no

major activity going on.

Some of other factors observed for the decline III the level of GS

activities have been -

• Fewer visits by TBS staff

• Conflicts among villagers during elections of GSs

• Lack of construction activity or any new activities

• Inability or unwillingness of the villagers/individuals to mobilise

contribution

• Lack of interest among leaders

Rules and Records of Gram Sabha

TBS workers closely guide the entire process of writing rules for the GS

and basic rules for environment conservation and meetings are similar across

villages. At the time of GS formation, TBS workers help the newly appointed

committee members to put down rules for running the GS, holding monthly

meetings, conserve forests and impose fines and punishments for breaking those

rules. Rules recorded initially can however be modified later on. Records that

are to be maintained in villages are - attendance register, application file, minute

register and book of accounts. All these records were however seen only in

Samra village. In other villages visited only the minutes register were

maintained and in several other villages they were not available.

78

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Box 6 In December 1991 the Gram Sabha, Suratgarh, discussed deforestation as one of the main problems faced by the village and unanimously resolved that from that day no one would cut trees for fuel-wood. Anybody breaking the rule would be fined Rs.51 and anyone supporting him/her would be fined 101.

Sub-Committees of Gram Sabha

The general TBS policy is to form a GS only where other suitable village

institutions don't exist. (SIDA, 1997:7) In practice GSs were formed even in

villages with other institutions. The objective of forming the GS is to make the

village self-dependent and to facilitate the decision-making capacities of the

villagers. Ideally, as per TBS norms the Gram Sabha should constitute the

following sub committees: (TBS 2000)

• Resource committee for preparing a clay model of the village and for

assessing the problems in the village and the views of the community on

the size and location of the johad.

• Construction committee for overseeing the construction work and the

people's participation in the construction.

• Forest committee for enforcing the ban on tree felling and monitoring

the regeneration of the forest in the catchment areas.

• Gram Kosh to act as a buffer during lean years and to fund the

community work in the village.

• Grazing committee for prevention of grazing in the protected areas.

• Water committee for management of water resources and sharing of

water.

• Women's association for representing the VIews of women and to

enhance their participation.

Box 7 In Bhawnta Kolayala, and Samra persons who cut wood from trees are fined. Persons who do not attend meetings on scheduled days and do not give prior intimation or send a representative are also similarly fined - as per the minutes register.

79

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Sub-committees of the GS such as Forest Protection Committes (FPCs) and

Gram Kosh Committees (GKCs) are formed in some villages for monitoring

specific aspects of GS functioning such as protection of forests or managing the

gram kosh. However during the fields visits, only the Gram Sabha with Forest

Committee and gram kosh could be seen and that too also in few villages.

In comparison with the concept of GS in which, ideally, seven sub­

committees are to be formed, three types of sub-committees were seen to exist

in some of the villages. Sub-committees handle specific functions of the GS. In

seven of the fourteen villages visited the main GS had formed subcommittees to

look at specific functions. Five of them had formed Forest Protection

Committees and two had created a village fund or gram kosh.

In summary, though TBS does form the GS in most villages, the extent

to which these bodies represent different sections of the village, women in

particular, is also questionable. GS executive committees are more

representative in some villages and less in others. Poor representation of women

appears to be a common feature of all GS. What is disconcerting is the short

time period over which most GS are active. The impact of weak institutions can

be seen directly on the state of water resources management activities in the

village - i.e. how structures are built and maintained.

Post-Construction Phase

Once construction of a structure is complete, TBS starts working on other sites

in the same village or in other villagers where contribution has been mobilized.

Once all proposed construction activities in a village are complete, TBS workers

would tend to visit the village less frequently - probably on account of more

urgent ongoing work in newer villages. They do not however conduct or attend

meetings of the Gram Sabha regularly except during the initial period. In theory

TBS philosophy is that villagers should continue to build water-harvesting

structures on their own once TBS has moved on to work in adjoining villages.

At what point TBS leaves one village to move on is however not clear.

In some villages more than thirty structures have been constructed before TBS

stops working there and in others only five or eight. It is possible that in some

80

Tarun Bharat Sangh

villages, proposals for water harvesting structures cease at some point or, that

farmers are unable or unwilling to put in their share of contribution, so

construction activities cease. There is however no comprehensive village level

planning of water resources management or integrated treatment of the

catchment.

Researcher observed that in few villages close to TBS headquarters

work has continued in phases over many years. In most villages, however, work

has been taken up only in one phase after which TBS has moved on. In old

villages like Hamirpur, Bhanwta Koliyala and Samra, TBS has a constant and

continued presence. These villages are very close to Bhikampura, where the

TBS headquarters is located. In others such as Nayadera and Kochar ki Dang,

work was finished in one phase and even TBS workers have not visited these

villages for a long time.

Tarun Bharat Sangh's Relationship with the Government, Panchayati Raj

Institutions other NGOs

With Donor Agencies and NGOs

The Government as well as major private donor agencies like Ford Foundation,

OXF AM (India) Trust, United Nations Development Programme, ICeO,

Netherlands, and Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) etc has

funded TBS activities.

TBS has also been provided patronage and moral support by various

NGOs including Center for Science and Environment (CSE) Delhi, Gandhi

Peace Foundation, New Delhi and Lok Zumbish Parishad, Jaipur etc.

In tum TBS has also served as a training center for various other NGOs

based in other states and teams from such NGOs visit TBS on regular basis.

TBS has teamed up with these NGOs to form a national level Pani Panchayat to

suggest an alternative 'people focused' water policy to the Government.

With Panchayats and the Government

The elected representatives of the area - panch, sarpanch, pradhan, zila pramukh, MLA, MP etc. have no role in the TBS gram sabha. In the villages

81

Tarun Bharat Sangh

mobilization is clearly one of the important tasks of TBS workers and the

organization has a clearly charted method of reaching out to people in villages.

TBS successfully uses locally familiar tools and methods to mobilize persons

towards its objective. The methods used by TBS - Padyatras, Shivirs, Folk

Song, use of social and kinship networks - are all rooted in traditional cultural

practices that the people of Rajasthan are familiar with. These methods have a

tremendous capacity to reach different sections. Thus participation in TBS

awareness building processes is good in that it involves a large number of

persons and does not restrict participation in any manner.

Mobilising Contribution

Mobilising contribution is the key step in TBS's processes and is supposed to

involve a large number of households in the village. Widespread participation

across different sections in the process of contribution is however questionable

because:

• By and large only those who benefit tangibly and directly put in their

contribution.

• Those persons with cash resources can contribute, therefore when

contribution has to be made in cash, participation is limited.

• Large proportion of structures is private - where pooling in contribution

is not required.

• Participation in the process by contributing in the form of labour is

limited because of the use of tractors in earthwork.

However, methods of mobilising contribution are agam flexible and

allow for locally suitable mechanisms to come forward. As indicated in the

examples above, most often only those households that benefit from a structure,

contribute. Given that TBS structures are largely stand-alone structures and

benefit a limited area around them indicates that not all villagers put in their

contribution. Only those who are able to mobilize the 25 percent contribution

required by TBS and can plan a common structure are moved to contribute.

Groups that are not able to do this are left out of the process.

83

Tarun Bharat Sangh

During the field visits it was noted that beneficiary's participation is

good in the initial stages of TBS intervention but it declines later. One reason

could be the nature of initial contact. People therefore see this as another

external subsidy scheme and not as their own process. On the other hand the

fact that people do come forward and participate in terms of money to an extent

could be because they understand that this is not a government scheme and

service delivery will be fast.

Institution Building

The process of constituting the gram sabha, its members and the way in which

it manages its responsibilities are key factors to TBS's success or failures and

the sustainability of its interventions. Key aspects of GS functioning reflected

earlier are:

• The GS does not represent all sections of the village - particularly the

weaker sections.

• Gram Sabhas do not meet regularly except when construction activities

are going on.

• GS meetings do not have good attendance - women particularly do not

attend meetings.

• Meetings such as Arvari Parliament are usually held because of TBS

initiative and awareness about the GS and Arvari is severely limited.

• Gram Sabhas by and large do not have a regular or independent source

of income.

• GS records are maintained in some villages but are inadequate.

The GS therefore functions only in the short term and even in that time,

period does not include participation of all sections of the village. The focus on

building structures is so strong that the institution building is overlooked at

times. TBS processes therefore create temporary institutions focused on

construction of a few structures. Institutional structure is not defined and is

quite fluid. Planning is adhoc and limited to construction activities.

85

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Equity and Participation of Disadvantaged Groups

Distribution of benefits across groups in TBS villages shows that equity is not

one of the main objectives which follow on the course. The main points with

regard to equity issues are as follows:

• Water harvesting structures clearly benefit the landed - especially those

with private wells.

• Participation of poor landless labourers who own limited number of

livestock and do not have cash resources is limited in the TBS process.

• GS representatives often belong to better-off sections and are also the

ones who are biggest beneficiaries of the program.

• The functional institutional mechanism of the Gram Sabha is not capable

of taking care of equity considerations with respect to making of

structures, distribution of benefits and its maintenance.

TBS initiatives thus do not reflect a strong consideration for equity

concerns but are focused on physical treatment through as large a number of

structures as possible. Participation of disadvantaged groups is also very

limited.

S ustainability

It is clearly evident that the presence of TBS continues to be necessary even in

old villages for monitoring the status of structures, mobilizing contribution to

repair and maintain structures, to resolve conflicts and to use its larger influence

in favor of Gram Sabhas when they get into difficult situations, as happened in

the case of the Arvari Parliament building.

Village communities are therefore not as self-sufficient in terms of

resolving their own conflicts and taking decisions. The absence of regular

meetings, ongoing activities of their own and an independent source of funds,

leaves little scope for GSs to take up promotion of water harvesting structures

on their own. No instance was observed where people have constructed even

one structure entirely with their own funds.

86

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Issues and Emerging Questions

This section briefly discusses some of the Issues and questions that have

emerged out of the field work for the study.

Some Issues

About Gram Sabha

By and large the Gram Sabha of TBS appears to function more in the form of a

user group at the actual construction phase. Out of all the villages examined in

some details only three: Bhanwta-Koylala, Hamirpur and Samra were found to

have active TBS Gram Sabhas. Eleven villages were found not to have active

TBS gram sabhas. There are some examples where the TBS Gram Sabhas

having facilitated community work but these are not persistent efforts. Only the

gram kosh of Bhanwta-Koylala and Hamirpur had bank accounts, perhaps

because having one was mandatory to receive some grants. The Gram Sabha

does not normally appear to get contributions from the villagers.

Empowerment of the People

On the question of empowerment of the people, the TBS effort has yielded

considerable success. Awareness among the community has increased. TBS has

achieved considerable success in mobilizing and motivating the villagers,

especially when work is about. to be started in a new area or a new site. But once

the work is complete and it is time to reap the rewards, equity issues and

disputes do tend to crop up and the TBS model has no means of solving them in

a systematic and a non ad-hoc manner. In Hamirpur the powerful Badi Haveli 's

Meena family has tried to gain absolute control over the harvested water

resources and this has alienated other people living in the dhanis or hamlets of

the village. In Bhanwta-Kolyala, the two villages have now started to fight

among themselves over control of the water and gram kosh.

Expenditure Patterns

The analysis of expenditure by TBS as indicated from Annual Reports appears

to indicate that the amount spent on activities is less than half of the receipts of

87

Tarun Bharat Sangh

TBS. The implication is that project administration and generating people's

participation takes up a significant portion of TBS expenditure. In the course of

the study it was also discovered that people participate only when they foresee

direct personal gains.

Nature of Structures: Private vis Public

The problem of a majority of the works being private works and many of the

community works having a small number of beneficiaries is apparently common

to other villagers also. Data compiled from villages on this account is indicated

in the table below. This is also in line with the findings of the 1994 evaluation

study by Institute of Environmental Studies.

Table 2.1

No of Structures - Private V s Community

Village Total Community Private Structures owned

Hamirpur 48 15 33 Bhawnta -Koylala 35 13 24 Kacherheda 12 02 09 Khajoora 14 01 13 Jaisinghpura Several Private

Medhs

Duharmala 09 08 01 Kraska 05 05 00 Deori 13 08 05 Nayadera 04 03 01 Suratgarh 47 17 30 Neemi 04 04 00

Types of Structures

Further, despite the impression that one gets from journalistic reports that the

TBS programme is essentially one of johads, a large number of works are

medhbandi or field boundary bunding, or other small bunds, as is clear from the

table related to the villages for which data was compiled from the annual reports

ofTBS.

Even at the Lava ka Bas, a medium sized dam that was in news due to

the downstream villages and politicians protesting through the district

88

Village

Tarun Bharat Sangh

administration and government agencies that the dam has deprived them of their

riparian rights does not have a very large number of direct beneficiaries6.

Table 2.2

Types of Water Harvesting Structures

Johad Bandh Anieut Medh* Farm Tank Well Pond Nala

Pond Plug

Hamirpur 11 13 03 22 00 00 00 00 00

Bhawanta- 08 04 02 24 00 00 00 00 00

Koylala

Kacherheda 01 00 00 00 09 00 02 00 00

Khajoora 00 01 00 00 13 00 00 00 00

J aisinghpura Several

Doharma1a 07 00 01 00 00 01 00 00 00

Kraska 05 00 00 00 00 to 00 00 00

Deori 08 04 01 00 00 00 00 00 00

Nayadera 00 00 00 00 00 02 00 02 00

Suratgarh 09 11 03 18 00 00 00 00 06

Neemi 04 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

Arvari Panchayat

It is one thing to have written functions and rules for the TBS Gram Sabhas and

for the "Aravari Panchayat" but to be able to ensure that the villagers are aware

of them or understand them or intend to follow, or enforce them is much more

difficult. In fact the Hamirpur case study shows that no one protested when

local authorities demolished the "Arvari Parliament" building constructed with

the award money received by the TBS Gram Sabha on the grounds that the

building was an encroachment on government land. On the other hand the

government's stated intention of demolishing the Lava Ka Bas dam due to the

protests of the downstream farmers led to widespread mobilization by the local

villagers to protect their structure. This is an indication that actual physical

structures are more important for many villagers than the participatory

institutions devised by TBS.

6 As Sunny Sebastian has reported in "Rebuilding the lives of Banjara Gujjars" The Hindu 13 January 2003, Kanhaiya, a TBS activist, reported that the previous summer 250 bighas were under vegetative cultivation from the 225 metre long Lava ka Bas Dam.

89

Total

49

38

12

14

09

05

13

04

47

04

Tarun Bharat Sangh

This is despite the fact that, as was also indicated by the Dying Wisdom

report, distribution of water from the johads and intra-village disputes are both a

source of tension, for which the TBS Gram Sabha and Arvari Parliament are the

conflict resolution mechanisms advocated by TBS. Earlier as reported in Dying

Wisdom, representatives of eleven Gram Sabhas, local members of the

Legislative Assembly and Parliament met on December 24, 1992 and set up a

panel to resolve such disputes, but during the field visit it was discovered that

this panel has hardly started functioning and the local people had no idea about

it.

TBS: Outsider or Insider

At times it appears that villagers have started looking upon Tarun Bharat Sangh

as an outside body which like the government, comes in, interacts with a few of

them and implements its schemes and programmes. This is a problem of scaling

up by any NGO. If it expands its area of operations it may loose the intimate

contact and ability to inspire genuine and deep participation by the villagers. In

fact a study of documents related to other villages which were not included in.

this study show that many of the villages covered by TBS had only 1 or 2

medhbandhi or Johad works- thus raising the question whether TBS or similar

NGOs should concentrate on lesser number of villages but take up a larger

number of works in each village so as to achieve a cumulative water harvesting

impact in the village. This would also raise the chances of their participatory

efforts bearing greater fruit.

Is TBS a Social Movement?

Also on the question of social movements, some important points that need

introspection before one can call TBS activities a Peoples Movement

• The speed with which they have spread in a large area, the number of

structures made in each village needs to be seen. It could be seen from

the extracts of annual· reports and accounts that the speed of making

structures has been fueled with money which TBS received from various

90

Tarun Bharat Sangh

donors for the purpose. Seldom has the structure been made purely by

peoples initiative.

• TBS has successfully raised contributions from the villagers for making

each structure in the village, hence providing legitimacy to the structure

as people's structure, while in reality many of these structures are

private structures.

• Building of peoples institutions called Gram Sabhas that is supposed to

regulate all activities concerned with soil, water and forest conservation.

This gives a picture of formation of a village level cadre which will keep

alive the peoples movement for water conservation. However the Gram

Sabha only act as a user group, which comes together during the period

of physical activity and usually fizzles out after the TBS withdraws from

the village or the intensity of the activity in the village decreases. In 80

per cent of the study villages the Gram Sabha had become inactive after

the TBS activity in the village has decreased.

• The formation of Arvari Parliament (federation of Gram Sabhas in

Arvari basin) and the issue of the revival of rivers are presented as a

result of the people's movement. A scientific validation needs to be

conducted to define "revival" and what this signifies.

• Padyatra a most commonly used tool of communication by the TBS

through which it makes contact with the new villages and identifies

people who will come forward for the work. The padyatra is undertaken

when they have committed funds for undertaking works with them. This

also gives it a face of a people's movement.

Summing Up the Discussion

TBS has positioned its model as an alternative to the Government model of

drought proofing and drought mitigation. Using traditional knowledge and

peoples' participation to combat drought and water storage is a mantra that TBS

activists often talk about. The success that TBS has had in creating awareness

and mobilising participation among villagers has brought TBS to the attention

of a number of eminent persons, both within and outside the Government. Many

91

Tarun Bharat Sangh

feel that the TBS approach will lead to better results than the more rigid

Guidelines for Watershed Development lay down by the Government. The

authors, on the basis of their field experience, feel that while on a small scale

the TBS model is very successful, a number of problems arise when efforts are

made to scale up or replicate the process in another area.

The avoidance of integrative and comprehensive land-water

management of a complete catchment and unsustainable institutional

arrangements like the TBS Gram Sabha have meant that there is insufficient

direction and focus in the scaling up process. TBS practice is to expand to the

village where it is most feasible to construct structures instead of ones where the

structures will be most beneficial. It is true that the TBS philosophy opposes

result oriented iron-cast project plans formulated as part of a top-down blueprint

approach, but a perspective plan at least at the Tehsil or Taluk level along with a

list of desired results would certainly help in improving the TBS approach.

TBS's lack of coordination, even at the informal level, with the

Government leads to many problems. TBS Gram Sabhas are positioned as

substitutes to the official Panchayati Raj Institutions, but they tend to become

ineffective because they have no source of income or authority.

Despite some shortcomings, the TBS approach does have many

positives that can be incorporated into Government projects. TBS awareness

creation methods are much more effective than the entry point activities of the

Government schemes. Also by giving private incentives for individual private

works, TBS is able to generate greater contributions and participation from the

community.

TBS approach provides attention to leadership formulation, institution

building and capacity building, but another issue for sustainable watershed

development identified by Hanumantha Rao (2000) - that of convergence of

agriculture development programmes with watershed development needs more

attention on the part of Tarun Bharat Sangh.

92

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Thick Description

Village- Kacherheda

Tehsil- Bamanwas, Distrct- Sawai Madhopur

The village lies in the Bamanwas tehsil of Sawai Madhopur district. The Gram

Panchayat is at Peeplai which is 3-4 Km away from the village. This is one of

the newer villages where Tarun Bharat Sangh has become active. The work of

making rainwater-harvesting structures in the village started in the year 1997

and has continued till 2001. Presently no work is being done in the village. The

TBS has now withdrawn from the village. Laxman Singh, a TBS worker, is the

person incharge of this area and most of the work in the village was done under

his supervision.

The village has 15 households - all belonging to the Gurjar community.

It is linked with a kuccha road with Peeplai. The primary occupation is

Agriculture and Animal Husbandry. Rabi season is the main cropping season as

during the Kharif season most of the land is water logged. The village also faces

a drinking water problem as only 5 wells have potable water.

Goklendra Gurjar was the person who first made contact with TBS. He

learnt about TBS from his relatives in Amawara village when TBS started work

in the area. He was previously working with Central Industrial Security Force

and now works as a Physical Trainer in the Govt School at Peeplai; he is quite

well off and owns substantial land in his village. Seeing the opportunity, he

went to the TBS Rewali centre and met Chaman Singh the head of the center.

Chaman Singh visited the village and saw the area. The details of the work on

Rain Water Harvesting undertaken in the village are given below in the table.

Through Goklendra's contact TBS first entered the village and the first work

taken up in the village was Goklendra's own Khet Talai in 1997. The next work

taken up in the village was desilting of Sheetla Mata ka Johad, which was a

community work taken up in 1998-99. In 2001 several private and semi private

field ponds were made in the village. Besides making of rainwater harvesting

structure the other activities taken up in the last 2-3 years by TBS are in the

field of Education and formation of Self Help Groups in the last 2-3 years. At

93

S

No.

1

2.

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Tarun Bharat Sangh

present all the TBS activities have stopped in the village. The Self Help Group

has dissolved and the school is also closed. TBS has withdrawn from the

village.

Table 2.3 Water Harvesting Structure made by TBS in Kacherheda

Name Type New/Repaire Pvt!Com Total VilllIndv TBS

PuccaiKachh d m Cost Contributio Contrib

Aprx n uti on

a

Sheetla Mata ki Johad Kuccha Repaired Comm 35000 25% 75%

(99-2000)

Ramesh, Kalyan ki Kuccha New Pvt 50% 50% Khet Talai

(2001)

Bachu ki Khet Talai Kuccha New Pvt 50% 50%

(2001)

Gokul Ki Khet talai Kuccha New Pvt 40000 50% 50%

(2001 )

Pratap ki Khet Talai Kuccha New Pvt 12000 50% 50%

(2001)

Devji ki Khet Talai Kuccha New Pvt 12000 50% 50%

(2001)

Goklendra ki Khet Kuccha New Pvt 52000 50% 50% Talai

(1997)

Kajod ki Khet talai Kuccha New Pvt 12000 33% 66%

(2001)

Bhim Singh ki Khet Kuccha New Pvt 28000 66% 33% Talai

(2001)

Shivcharan ki Khet Kuccha New Pvt 50% 50% Talai

(2001 )

Goklendra well Pucca New Pvt 75000 80% 20%

(2001)

Sarvajanic Well Pucca New Comm 28400 25% 75%

(2001)

From the table it could be seen that 2 structures are community

structure. The Sheetla mata ka Johad and a sarvajanic well. The TBS Gram

Sabha was constituted in the village in the year 1998-99 when the Sheetla Mata

Johad was being desilted. The community contributed 25 per cent of the total

94

Dimensi on

(Ft)

300x80x 8

175x70x 6

200xl00 x6

100x50x 5

100x50x 5

225x60x 8

100x50x 6

150x110 x8

Tarun Bharat Sangh

desilting cost. The Gram Sabha held two meetings and then Rs. 700 per

household contribution was fixed. Almost all the villagers contributed as the

johad is useful for all the villagers. The livestock get water from the johad and

the johad water is not used for agriculture. It also has religious importance, as

there is a kuchha small temple of Sheetla Mata next to the johad where pujas are

performed on Sheetlashthmi (8 days after holi). Sheetla Mata is also considered

as Chechak (Small Pox) ki Devi. Some marriage rituals are also performed at

the Sheetla Mata Sthan near the johad. Another community work done was of

making the sarvajanic well in which some of the families contributed.

In the year 2000-2001 several farm ponds were made, all these work are

private in nature. All those who had ready cash with them got one made for

them by contributing 50 per cent of the total cost. Around 5 poor families were

left behind. However one poor farmer Kajod got one farm pond in which TBS

agreed to take 33 per cent contribution because the villagers pleaded his case.

Goklendra informed that he sold his goat to buy diesel for the work. Bhim

Singh the richest person in the village had to contribute 66 per cent of the total

cost. However he was unwilling to pay in the beginning but later he relented.

The reason that people were motivated to get these work done was that

farm pond is an appropriate structure for them to irrigate their field during the

Rabi season as the water in most of the wells in the village is hard and hence not

fit for cultivation. The result could be seen in 6 months. The people were also

assured of the 50 per cent subsidy for getting a khet talai made. All those people

who had the farm pond were able to cultivate 5-6 bighas of their land. However

the benefits in such schemes generally goes to the well off farmer who has land

and ready cash to spend as all the TBS work in the village was done by the

tractors and TBS works on the first come first serve basis. In making of private

structures the beneficiary directly talks with the TBS official and the Gram

Sabha does not come into play. The intrested person gives an application to the

TBS karyakarta and if the interested person agrees to pay the 50 per cent cost

then the work starts on the chosen site.

The TBS had also started the education programme under which

tarunshala (primary school) was being run in the village. One village boy

95

Tarun Bharat Sangh

the nukta pratha which is quite prevalent in the area, cosumption of alcohol etc.

No sub committees of the Gram Sabha like Gram Kosh or forest and pasture

protection committee was made in the village .The villagers were at a loss when

the researcher posed the question that how will the johad be maintained since

the Gram Sabha broke down within an year of its formation.

The Govt has also done some work in the village. They have made a

well and tanka for drinking water. One johad has also been made.

The Farm Ponds are very beneficial for the people who have made it as

it gives them the security of at least 1-2 irrigations during the Rabi and the

change was very visible. Those farmers who had the pond were growing crops

in at least 5-6 bighas depending upon their capacity. The Sheetala Mata lohad is

very useful for all the households in the village and now it has provided a water

security of 2-3 months to the livestocks. The villagers said that in the last few

years the number of livestocks in the village has decreased due to recurrent

droughts. The direct beneficiaries of Field Pond were happy about the work and

the TBS says that they only wanted to demonstarte the technology of Farm

Pond in the village and now the villagers will them self make such pond after

seeing its benefit. Such initiatives by the villagers have not been seen in till

date. Presently the benefits of the private structures have only gone to those who

have money and good land. The TBS was however successful in bringing

together the villagers to contribute to desilt the old johad in the village, which

was lying, silted up for a long time.

Village - Khajoora

Teshil- Sapotra, District - Karoli

Khajoora is a small Gujjar village of 20 households. The village lies in Sapotra

tehsil of Karoli district. The Gram Panchayat is at Nebhera. The village is only

few Kilometers away from the Kailadevi sanctuary. This is one of the new

villages of TBS where the water harvesting work was taken up in the year 2000-

2001. The primary occupations of the village are Agriculture and Animal

Husbandry. The topography of the village is hilly and undulating. A Rajiv

Gandhi pathshala runs in the village, which is till class 5. The medical and

97

Tarun Bharat Sangh

fixed amount and hence Rs 60,000 was raised on 60 bigha land and the rest of

the amount was put in by TBS. Tractors did the earthwork and 4 tractors were

employed for the earth work. The TBS staff appoints the tractors and in this

case 2 tractors appointed belonged to the sarpanch family and the other two

belonged to another village. Normally TBS appoints those tractors that have

worked with them earlier. The diesel for the tractor is bought by the money that

has been raised by the villagers and after the completion of the work the

measurements are taken and recorded in the formats prepared by TBS for doing

the earth work calculations and the payments are made to the tractor owners In

this case the work also involved some pucca work in which the cost of the

cement and the masonry was borne by TBS. 66 per cent of the total expenditure

of Rs 2.9 lakh was borne by TBS and the rest by the beneficiaries. The people

came together and contributed to increase the capacity of the bandha as they

were very sure of its benefit and the benefits could be seen in in both the Kharif

and the Rabi cropping season.

The magnitude of the structure made is quite big and one of the private

engineers Salotri ji from Jaipur adviced the villagers to keep the height of the

bandha low but the villagers increased it and it fell down. The technical inputs

came from the masons and the experienced villagers but since the structure

being made was quite big their estimation went wrong and they still feel that the

structure made is weak and if it will rain heavily then the structure will get

washed away. The villagers are again negotiating with the TBS karyakarta

Karan Singh that the structure needs to be further reinforced and more work to

the tune of Rs 2 lakh is needed on the bandha. This time the villagers do not

want to contribute as much they did last time and they say that they will be able

to contribute only 25 per cent. Some of them also said that now TBS should

take care of the total costs and they will contribute in the form of labour.

The village has benefited a lot from the bandha. The bandha has

provided them the water security of 4-5 months. The water in the Bandha used

dry up by the month of October and it was also not enough for the paddy crop

and no water was left for the Rabi crops. Now the villagers say that the water

will remain till Holi. This year they had good crop of Rabi and the farmers also

went for Banspatti variety of paddy, which is of better quality and fetches more

99

Tarun Bharat Sangh

price in the market although its yeild is less. Previously they used to go for the

Banaspatti variety, which they normally grow when the water available is less

and it is a hardy variety and the yeild is also more so it provided them more

security in bad rainfall years. The farmers say that even after reaping the paddy

crop they are left with enough water for the Rabi crop and they plan to grow

Wheat. A sluice is made in the Bandha from which the water is released for

irrigating the fields lying in its command. The bandha water is also used by the

hvestocks.

Besides repairing Motho wala Bandha the TBS also constructed 13 Khet

Talais in the village, all of whom are the private structures and in this the

individual beneficiary contributed 50 per cent of the total cost. Those people

who are relatively better off and who have ready cash were able to avail of this

opportunity, however those who did not have ready cash could not get work

done for them. Those who have got the Khet talai made here got assured water

for 1-2 pilai (irrigation) during the Rabi cropping season. The Khet Talai is

much in demand in the area. One of the villager Hari Charan had been

constantly pleading with the TBS karyakarta to get one Khet talai made on his

field but this could not be done as he says that he could not afford the 50 per

cent cost of the structure. Those villagers who are not cash rich and are unable

to pay the required contribution are left behind.

One another organisation Society for Sustainable Development based in

Karoh is also working in the area of soil and water conservation and they have

made two Khet Talais and two private wells in the village. The Forest

department has also made one well and several ponds in the forest land. The

panchayat has also done some good work in the village, the Government first

made the Motho wala Bandha and it has been very important for the villagers

and under JRY scheme also money was spent on its repair. They have also done

solar lightening in the village. Most of the households have solar panels and a

diary has also been running in the village from quite some time. This benefit

they are enjoying since the village is liked with a pucca road.

The TBS Gram Sabha had been formed in the village. However many of

the respondents with whom we talked were not very aware about its functioning

and the minutes register was also not available in the village. The villagers were

100

Tarun Bharat Sangh

also not sure about the office bearers. It appears that it is an informal group in

the village where the office bearers are not properly defined and the interested

people group together to get the work done as in the case of the Bandha and in

the private work the negotiations takes place between the beneficiary and the

TBS directly. No meetings have been held for last few months but the villagers

said that right now they are busy on field and they will restart it later.

The TBS is now in the process of withdrawing from the village. They

have moved on to the newly identified villages, however there was some

negotiation going on in the village under the leadership of the sarpanch to

reinforce the bandha as the villagers fear that it is not strong enough to stand a

good rain. Although the villagers are happy about the work done on the Bandha

they are not satisfied with the safety and they also feel that if the bandha is

made more strong and its height raised further than it will stop more water and

they can even think of having 3 crops a year.

The structures made will fetch direct benefit in Agriculture and Animal

husbandry but it appears they will not have much of the effect on the recharge

as the water stored in these structures will be used during the Rabi cropping

season.

Village - Kraska

T eshil- Thanagazi, District - Alwar

The village is in the Thanagazi block of Alwar District. It is one of the villages

that lie in the core zone of the Sariska Sanctuary. The village is quite old and

inhabited by Gujjar (130 Household), Meena (17 Household) and Brahmin (3

Household). There are 3 dhanis in the village namely Kraska ki dhani, Meena ki

dhani and Johadi. Meena ki dhani is settled by Meena and Brahmin households.

The eviction order was issued in 1972-74 after which the villagers accepted the

compensation and the pattedari land was taken away from the villagers, after

which they are being repeatedly asked by the park authorities to evacuate the

village, force was also used once in which the houses were demolished but the

people are not ready to leave. After the area was declared a sanctuary, the

villagers were offered compensation for leaving the village and the Kraska

villagers also accepted the compensation but some sold away the land they have

101

Tarun Bharat Sangh

received in compensation at throwaway price and returned to the village. They

also said that the land that they got was not fit for cultivation and taing control

was also difficult. Agriculture has been banned in the village and the villagers

practice animal husbandry for livelihood. The animals kept are buffalo, cow and

goat. The villagers had also faced problem of both drinking water as well as for

the livestock. The village had tradition of the johads as there were few old johad

existing in the village and they are very useful in the village. Previously rainfed

agriculture was practiced in the village. There is also a well in the village,

which provides drinking water to the villagers and during the summers when it

is dried up then the villagers has to fetch drinking water from the jharna (spring)

at Aal Gowal 3-4 km downhill.

The TBS first entered the village in the year 1987-88. Rajendra singh

along with his co-workers came to the village in a padyatra. The village

meetings were held and the padyatris talked about the concept of the

conservation of Jal Jungle and Jameen which is also the mandate ofTBS.

The village already had the tradition of johad and villagers solely

depended on them to meet the water need of their livestock and other, hence

when the TBS came with the offer people were interested for such work and

they agreed to the condition of cost sharing.

All the structues made in the Kraska village are community structure.

The community contribution and their participation are guided by the location

of the structure and the direct benefit accrued out of it. Hence it could be seen

that in lakhi banjara ka bandh , Devi ka bandh and Dhari johad all the Meena,

Gujjar and Brahmin have contributed whereas in the structures namely Kund ka

bandh, Khumer ki johadi only the Gujjar community has contributed, since they

were deriving the most benefit out of it.

In Kraska the main benefit of the johad is that it provides drinking water

for the livestocks. The drinking water need of the villagers is met by the sole

well and the two handpumps. One johad in the village was made by a sadhu

named masta baba.

Works done by TBS in the area of Water harvesting are given in the

table below:

102

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Table 2.4

Water Harvesting Structure made by TBS in Kraska

SN Name & Type Ownership Total Vill/lndv TBS Dimensio Location

PuccaiKachha Cost Contributi Contributi n

New/Repaired on on

1 Devi ka Iohad Community 100% 25% 75% Not bandh (Kuccha)

(Meena+ available

(Meena ki New Gujjar)

Dhani)

2 Lakhi Iohad Community 100% 25% 75% Not banjare ka

(Kuccha) (Meena+ available

bandh Old

Gujjar) (Meena Ki Dhani)

3 Kund ka Iohad Community 100% 25% 75% Not bandh

(Kuccha) (Gujjar) available

(Gujjar ki New

Dhani) --

-4 Dharijohad Iohad Community 100% 25% 75% Not

(Gujjar ki (Kuccha) (Meena+ available

Dhani) Old Gujjar)

5 Khumer ki Iohad Community 100% 25% 75% Not johadi

(Kuccha) (Gujjar) available

(Gujjar ki New

Dhani)

The villagers and the TBS together decide the site and then the

contribution is fixed and after the villagers collect the contribution the tractor is

commissioned by the TBS and the work starts on the site. Since the contribution

are made in cash the people prefer tractor as it works out to be cheaper per 100

cu ft of earth taken than by manual labour hence more earthwork can be done

and the time taken is also less. The contribution per household is decided based

on the no of livestock they keep (Rs50 per cent Buffalo or Cow & Rs 20 per

cent Goat presently). After the work is completed the TBS staff makes the

payment after measuring the work. One of the villager also complained that the

103

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Village - Deori Teshil- Rajgarh (Tehla Shetra), District - Alwar

The village lies in the buffer zone of the Sariska sanctuary. The Tehsil IS

Rajgarh (tehla shetra) of Alwar district. The Gram Panchayat is at Talab. It is a

village of approximately 75 households out of which 50 are Gujjar, 20 Meena

and 4 Bairwa (chamar). The village is linked with kuccha road and private

tractor and jeep can reach the village, most of the villagers go on foot, as there

is no communication facility. The primary occupation in the village is Animal

Husbandry and Agriculture. No electricity is there and the drinking water is

obtained from the 10 wells in the village. The village has 3 dhanis (hamlets),

which are Deori (Meena settlement) Baka1a (Gujjar settlement) and Guwada

(Gujjar and Bairwa settlement).

During the TBS entry the village had faced acute shortage of water for

drinking, agriculture and livestock's. They were also harassed by the forest

officials who demanded bribes from them for grazing cattle in the forest and

had also framed false charges against the villagers. The village was also

disunited. They only used to take one crop a year and during the Rabi the water

decreased in the well, which was then only used for drinking.

The TBS came to village on a padyatra in the year 1985-86. Sharavan

Pandit an active worker of TBS started the work in the village; they started with

education and then further moved to forming Gram Sabha and construction of

water harvesting structure in the village. The TBS also provided leadership to

the villagers against the atrocities of the forest department since 1972 the

grazing of animals in the jungle was banned and the grazing permit issued by

the Government was stopped.

The water harvesting work done by TBS 111 the village, which the

researcher was able to list down, is given below:

106

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Table 2.5 Water Harvesting Structure made by TBS in Deori

SN Name/ Type Ownership Total Vill/Indv TBS Dimen-

Location PuccaIKachha Cost Contribution Contributio sion

n New/Repaired (Year)

I Prem Sagar/ Johad Community NA 25% 75% NA ~

Guwada Kachha

New (1992)

2 Sukh Sagar/ Johad Community 25% 75%

Guwada Kachha

New(1992-93)

3 Kharli Johdil Johad Community 25% 75%

Guwada Kachha

Old( 1995-96)

4 SUlja ka Bandh Private 50% 50% Baandh/

Kachha Guwada

New (1992-93)

5 Bamboo ka Bandh Private 50% 50% Bandh/Deori

Kachha

New (1992-93)

Prabhati Baba Anicut

6 ka Anicut!

Pucca 50% 50% Deori

New (1992) Private

7 Karoj Ki Johad Community 25% 75% Johadi/

Kachha Deori

Old (1988)

8 Dehda Ka Bandh Community 25% 75% Bandh (jahaj

Pucca wala)1

Deori New (1993)

9 Luhari Ki Johad Community 25% 75% Johdil

Kachha Guwada

Old (1997-98)

10 Gaur Wali Johad Community 25% 75% Johad/

Kachha Bakala

New (1994-95)

107

Tarun Bharat Sangh

II Kaimbri Wali Johad Community 25% 75% Johad/

Kachha Bakala

Old (1997-98)

12 Harlal Ka Bandha Private 50% 50% Bandh/

Kachha Deori

New (1992-93)

13 Ram Sagar/ Johad Community 25% 75%

Guwada Kachha

Old (1992-93)

Out of the 13 structures 4 are private structures. 5 of the community

structures have been repaired by TBS and 4 new community structures have

been made by the TBS. In the making of Jahaj wala bandh the whole village had

contributed and in the other community struc~res the benefiting dhanis only

contributed and in the private structures the individual household contributed. It

was observed that only the direct beneficiaries contributed in the programme.

The four people who got their private structures made are the active karyakartas

of TBS or active Gram Sabha member in the village. Most of the structures are

made on a nala, which flows from between the village and flows down to join

the jahaj wala nadi. Till now maintenance work has been done on the 2 bandhas

in the village with the 66 per cent assistance from TBS. The private Anicut of

Prabhati baba also broke this happened because the 2 Bandh in the upper

reaches had broken and the Anicut could not take the load of the water and

broke. It was not repaired since the Anicut was made on a sawai chak

(Revenue) land by Prabhati Baba controlled by other family and he lodged a

case against Prabhati who had made it with the intension to occupy some sawai

chak land he lost the case and the Anicuts is now in a dilapidated condition, Rs

50,000 was spent by Prabhati as his contribution and rest by TBS.

The TBS Gram Sabha was formed in the village in the year 1989-90, the

objective to form the GraIl) sabha was that it will unite the village to fight

against the atrocities of the Forest Department and to facilitate their

participation in the TBS programme of water harvesting the other very

108

Tarun Bharat Sangh

important function was to observe the rules made for the conservation of forest.

The TBS Gram sabha in the village has not met for the last 5-6 years, and it was

also observed that the informal meetings in the village are held hamlet wise to

take community decisions of their interest and the combined meeting of all the 3

hamlets of the village is rare. The women normally do not participate in such

meetings and it was also observed that the awareness regarding the Gram sabha

and its function are fading down in the village. Lachman who is the present

Adhyaksha of the Gram sabha said that the Gram Sabha was quite effective in

the beginning when it used to meet regularly but after the village contact with

the TBS became less the Gram Sabha also became irregular from the year 1988-

93 the contact with the TBS was regular as Sharavan Pandit a TBS karyakarta

stayed in the village and at that time the village was united under his leadership

and the Gram Sabha also used to meet regularly, but now it is in a bad state and

the dhanis are disunited and there is no clear leadership in the village, no

construction activity is going on in the village and the GS also do not have a

permanent source of income to remain active, they are hence an informal body

of villagers who form a committee to make structures in cooperation with the

TBS and to observe the forest conservation rule as guided by the TBS, they

wane away after TBS contact with them becomes irregular.

It was observed by the researchers during their field visit that in one case

of theft in the village the traditional panchayat of the village came together to

solve the issue and in this old system of using a mirror to catch the thief was

used it is believed that children below their teens can see the reflection of the

thief in the mirror. Although the thief could not be identified in the end some of

the villagers also feel that this is a superstitious thing and now they do not

believe in it much. No meeting of the Gram Sabha was even called to settle this

theft issue. There is no links between the different Gram Sabhas of the region,

nor they have any formal status to interact with the Government Department it

was said that one visible change beside the making of rain water harvesting

structure in the village that the villagers have become aware of their rights and

now they refuse to pay any bribe to the forest officials. The TBS has also helped

the villagers to fight their cases with the forest department.

109

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Presently under the UNDP programme one non-formal school is being

run in the village by the TBS where one local boy Hira has been employed,

under this a village education committee has also been formed in the village by

the TBS. This is a project-based committee and is not linked with the TBS

Gram Sabha.

Due to the repair of old 10hads and the making of new one has had a

positive effect on the availability of water in the village and this has benefited

the Rabi crop a lot which previously was not assured as the villagers said that

when it rains well and the lohad gets filled up the water from the waste weir

starts flowing then the water table in the wells increases and they get some

water to irrigate their Rabi crop. There are 10 wells in the village that are

controlled by different group of families and hence the benefit of all these have

been more to the well owners as they also sell water to others who don't have

their own well. One of the villagers from Bakala also said that the structures

would not be effective if it doesn't rains, which raises concerns over the drought

proofing ability of the 10hads during the drought years.

Animal husbandry has been the main source of income in the village and

the milk collection booth has also been set up in the village by the dairy. A

tractor comes from the dairy to collect the mil from the village every morning

and a dairy committee also exists in the village, which has been made by the

dairy. The committee collects the mil and measures the fat content and then

pays the money to the farmers. The dairy has played an important role in village

economy. The livestock owned by each family depends on the size of the family

and the land they own as larger the family more livestock they keep. The 10hads

have also provided more water for the livestock's in the village.

110

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Village- Bhawnta-Kolyala

Tehsil- Thanagazi, District- Alwar

This is actually a twin village comprising of Bhawnta and Kolyala. Gujjars

(OBC) are the largest community in Bhawnta followed by the Balais (SC)

community and Rajputs, while Kolyala has an all Gujjar community. The two

villages(or hamlets) constitute parts of two separate statutory panchayats. The

village is connected with a kuccha road from Agar which is the panchayat of

Kolyala and is 3-4 Km away from the village. The village has got electricity for

agriculture and they have good drinking water facility from various wells and

hand pumps. Agar has the facilities of telephone, post office and provision

shops. The main occupation of the Gujj ars and Rajputs who are the land owning

class is Agriculture and Animal Husbandry. The Balais are landless or own very

little land hence their primary occupation is carpet weaving and animal

husbandry, They rear goat, sheep and buffalo or they work as daily labourer or

migrate to the towns. Migration is quite rampant in all the communities of the

village. Most of them work in Delhi where they are able to earn around Rs 100-

150 per day.

The village is one of the core villages where the TBS has worked. TBS

worker Kanhaiyya belongs to this village. Nanag Ram a TBS karyakarta had

relatives in Bhawnta. He first told them about TBS and its work. Later Rajendra

Singh carne to the village on padyatra in 1984 where he held meetings with the

villagers and introduced themselves and the TBS mission. The village had been

suffering from the severe drought situation and the villagers in the past had

attempted to make a bandh at Sankda, which had been washed out, and they

perceived good benefit once the bandh was at the place. After initial suspicion,

the villagers accepted the TBS and then several works were got done in the

village starting from Bandi johadi. The work done by the TBS over the years,

which the researchers were able to list down, are given below.

111

14

15

16

17

18

Tarun Bharat Sangh

(Bhawnta+ Kolyala)

Kolyala wali Kuccha Old Community 25% 75% johadi repaired

(Kolyala)

Khanya wali Kuccha Old Community 25% 75% johadi repaired

(Kolyala)

Shamshan wali Kuccha New Community 25% 75% johadi

(Kolyala)

Gopal Tanwar ka Puce a New Private 50% 50% Anicut

(Gujjar)

Chittar Doi ka Pucca New Private 50% 50% Anicut

(Gujjar)

Besides 4 medhbandis indicated in the table around 20 other medhbandis

were also done in the village. The first structure made in the village was Bandi

johadi, which was an old johadi, which had got silted up. Only Sundra baba's

family worked on the site and they gave sharm daan by foregoing 25 per cent of

their wage. In the building of Sankda bandh and Bhaironji wala bandh almost

all the households from both the villages contributed. However from the table it

can be seen that several of the works done in the village are private in nature

and for these 50 per cent of the cost was contributed by the beneficiaries. In the

community work done in the village only those who a perceived direct benefit

contributed their share. The Balais have been the indirect beneficiaries who

have very less land and mostly depend on traditional occupations like carpet

weaving and also rear animals.

The TBS Gram Sabha in the village was formed in the year 1987-88 and

the main people in the village who took up leadership in the village and

cooperated with TBS are Sundra, Dhanna and the Thakurs. Kanhaiyya the TBS

worker also took up the leadership. The TBS Gram Sabha in the village has

been meeting regulady and they also have sub committees like the Gram Kosh

and the Forest protection committee. Both the committees are also active in the

village. The Gram Kosh also has a bank account and they have received money

as award from the President of India and from the Ford Foundation besides

getting money from the sale of minor forest produce and the fines received as

113

Tarun Bharat Sangh

The villagers clearly felt that the Johads had benefited them in terms of

better water yields in wells and more water being available in the village

Johads. However with poor rainfalls over the past 3-4 years the villagers had

now started feeling pressure on water despite the existence of the Johads. The I

vegetable farming has picked up in the village and Tomatoes are grown

abundantly beside kala jiri in last few years.

Village- Hamirpur

Teshil- Thanagazi, District - Alwar

The village lies in Thanagazi Tehsil of Alwar district. This is a Meena (ST)

dominated village with Jogis (OBC) being the next largest group followed by

Haryana Brahmin (OBC), Regar (SC) and Balai (15). The total no of household

in the village is approximately 345. The village is quite big having 12 dhanis

(hamlet) out of which 2 belong to the Jogis, 2 are of Brahmins 1 of Chaukidar

Meena and rest all are of Meenas. In the main village also most of the families

are of the Meena community; the other castes in the village are Bania, Balai,

Bhangi, Regar, Koli, Khumar etc. The village is connected with a pucca road.

Electricity is available for both agriculture and domestic purposes. The primary

occupation of the villagers is Agriculture and Animal Husbandry This is one of

the old villages of TBS where work has been going on for a number of years

unlike other places where some work are done within a short period with a

slowdown of TBS activities subsequently. However there have been bursts of

work being undertaken in 1988-90, 1994-98 and 2000-2001.

The first contact of the village with TBS was made by Ruda mal Meena

who first heard about its work from his relatives in Gopalpura. Foreseeing an

opportunity for such work he went to Bheekampura and brought Rajinder Singh

to his village in 1986. The work started with the private medhbandi of Ruda and

since then 49 different works have been done in the village. The details of the

work done by TBS in the village in the area of water harvesting is given in the

table below:

115

Tarun Bharat Sangh

Table 2.7

Water Harvesting Structure made by TBS in Hamirpur

S Name Type New/Repaired Pvt/Comm

No. PuccaiKachha

1. Bainada ka johad Kuccha New Comm

(Meena)

2 Mandya wali johadi Kuccha New Corom

(Meena)

3 Dadi wala Bandh Kuccha New Pvt

(Brahmin)

4 Medhbandi (Ruda) Kuccha New Pvt

(Meena)

5 Jogion kajohad Kuccha New Community

(Jogi)

6 Jogion ka kheda wala johad Kuccha New Community

(Jogi)

7 Gali ka johad Kuccha Old Community

(Meena)

8 Medhbandi (Khairu) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

9 Bhagirath ka Anicut Pucca New Pvt (Meena)

10 Jabbar Sagar (Ani cut) Pucca New Community

(All caste)

II Beydi wala Bandh Kuccha Old Community

(Meena)

12 Baisa Bandh Kuccha New Pvt (Brahmin)

13 Badri Bandh Kuccha New Pvt (Brahmin)

14 Medhbandi (Nyama) Kuccha New Pvt (Naik) SC

IS Medhbandi (Nyama) Kuccha New Pvt (Naik) SC

16 Lamoda Ka lohad Kuccha New Community

(Meena)

17 Sadak ke paas wala johad Kuccha Old

18 Chira wala bandh Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

19 Medhbandi (Nagrakala) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

20 Medhbandi (Khairu) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

21 Bharthari walajohad Kuccha New Community

(made by Satsang)

22 Ghati wala johad Kuccha New Community

(Meena)

23 Medhbandi (Chari) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

116

Tarun Bharat Sangh

24 Nyama ka Bandh (Medh) Kuccha New Pvt (Balai)

25 Ram Kumar ka Bandh Kuccha New Pvt (Meena) (Medh)

26 Medhbandi (Laxmi Narayan Kuccha New Pvt (Meena) Meena)

27 Medhbandi-I (Girdhari Kuccha New Pvt (Meena) Meena)

28 Medhbandi-2 (Girdhari Kuccha New Pvt (Meena) Meena)

29 Chittar ka nadi wala bandh Kuccha New Pvt (Meena) (Medh)

30 Medhbandil (Ramdhan Kuccha New Pvt (Regar) Regar)

31 Medhbandi2 Kuccha New Pvt (Regar)

(Ramdhan Regar)

32 Medhbandi 3 Kuccha New Pvt (Regar)

(Ramdhan Regar)

33 Gopal Sharma ka Bandh Kuccha New Pvt (Brahmin) (Medh)

34 Medhbadi (Gopal Sharma) Kuccha New Pvt (Brahmin)

35 Medhbandi (Chaju) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

36 Medhbandi (Ramdhan) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

37 Medhbandi (Ruda) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

38 Medhbandi (Kati Pati) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

39 Kund ki bo wali bandh Kuccha New Pvt (Brahmin)

40 Medhbandi (Mandyala) Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

41 Khora wali johadi Kuccha New Community

(All Caste)

42 Medhandi (Ruda) Kuccha New Private (Meena)

43 Medhbandi (Ruda) Kuccha New Private (Meena)

44 Nahar nale ka bandh Kuchha New Community

(All Caste)

45 Dakao ke nale ka bandh Kuccha New Community

(Meena + Jogi)

46 Potni ki johadi Kuccha New Community

Uogi)

47 Shravan ka kundali wala Kuccha New Community bandh

(meena)

48 Aansoo dhal ki pati Kuccha New Pvt (Meena)

49 Sultan ka anicut Pucca New Pvt (Jogi)

117

Tarun Bharat Sangh

The work started in the village with the making of several private

medhbandis and then the first community johad -Jogion wali johadi -was

desilted and till date 49 structures have been made in the village. From the table

it could be seen that nearly 70 per cent of the works done in the village are

private in nature in which the direct beneficiaries have contributed 50 per cent

Of the total cost. 7 Community built structures are those in which the direct

beneficiries are the Meena community only and they have contributed the 25

per cent of the total cost. Out of those who had contributed are those who

perceive good private benefit and also some who contributed with the attitude of

chanda for good work. The Jogi community has made 3 community structures

only. 5 structures are such in which different communities have come together

and have all contributed.

J abbar Sagar is the largest structure made in the village. This is a pucca

ani cut made on the course of Arvari. The Anicut came in the news when the

Meena community of the village, which considers fish as sacred, campaigned

vigourously to stop the Government issueing fishing permit for Jabbar Sagar.

The work on the ani cut started in the year 1996. The total cost on the structure

came to Rs 4,16,448.40 out of which the TBS contributed Rs 3,51,229.80 and

the community Rs 75,000.00 in form of cash and labour (Financial Details taken

from the TBS Annual report 1995-1999). In the making of the Anicut most of

the contribution came from the Meena community of the main village and very

little contribution was forthcoming from the Dhanis. The major contributors

were from the 40 households belonging to the Badi Have1i who contributed both

in the form of cash and foregoing their land coming in the submergence area of

the Anicut. The people who parted with their land are Ruda mal Meena, Rewad

Patel, Nanak Ram, Gyarsilal, Ramdhan, Badri Patel and Ram Kuwar most of

them are from the same family. The TBS Gram Sabha played the role of

collecting the beneficiaries contribution and in negotiating the disputes about

the selection of site. The villagers said that the structure has benefited the

villagers in term of raising the ground water level in the village, and Ruda Ram

whose 4 bighas of land coming in the submergence area gives him a bumper

Rabi harvest as the water recedes during the winters from the agricultural field

118

Tarun Bharat Sangh

and there is no need of irrigating the crop as the soil holds good moisture for

several months.

The Dakao vala Bandh was made in the year 1999-2000 .In this

the contribution was given by 34 families (I-Brahmin, 29 Meena and 6 Jogi) of

4 Dhanis namely Gali ka Guwada inhabited by Jogis and Khairuka Dhani

inhabited by Meenas, Jogion ki Dhani (Jogi) and Sarna ki Dhani (Brahmin). The

total cost on the structure was 1.5 lakh out of which the community contributed

Rs. 32,000. The contribution given by all was not equal the contribution was

raised as chanda and the main contributors were Khelan, Nathu and Davkal

Meena who together contributed Rs. 13,500. Rest of the contributions ranged

between Rs. 50-300. Davkal Meena took the lead and moved from house to

house to raise the contribution. He also negotiated with the TBS workers. The

TBS Gram Sabha of the Hamirpur village did not play any role in this whole

exercise. The dimension of the bandh is L-20 Ft, Upper width- 10Ft Lower

width 35 Ft At the deepest point the water level is 15-20 Ft. The work was

completed in 3 month and 2 tractors and 1 JCB was hired for the work. The rate

of tractor is Rs. 500 per day and JCB Rs. 700 per day. Murari the TBS worker

supervised the thing and he only kept the records. In the end the measurement

was taken in the prescribed format of TBS and the due payments were made.

The Paal of the Bandh broke down in the Rains of 2001. This happened because

the Spillway was not given the proper depth and later on this was repaired by

the villagers on their own for which one manday worth Rs. 80 was contributed

by each family. The benefits of the structure will go to all the 4 Dhanis as the

animals will get the water and it will also raise the water table. Rudamal Meena

made one Johad and he was the sole contributor.

Although the TBS work in the village started in the year 1986-87 the

Gram Sabha was formed only in the year 1997-98, the year in which the work

on Jabbar Sagar started. Most of the office bearers of the TBS Garm Sabha

belonged to the Badi Haveli family of the Meenas and recently only the office

bearers were changed to accommodate the dissatisfied members. The

Adhyaksha post was taken over by Mewa Ram Meena from N athu Ram Patel

Meena and Bhagwan Sharma is the new Sachiv in the place of Rudamal Meena.

119

Tarun Bharat Sangh

there were only 4-5 villagers belonging to the Gram Sabha who came forward

to talk. The total no of people who had gathered on the spot were not more than

30 people. The Tehsildar prepared an on the spot report of the development and

he asked them to pull down the structure. The Tehsildar did not recognise the

TBS Gram Sabha and in the report he wrote the names of the villagers involved

in the construction and the TBS employee Murari was also named in the report.

It was said that if they do not stop the work immediately and pull down the

structure or even if they venture close to the site then the people named in the

report would be arrested. The villagers were looking towards Rajendra Singh

for help and accordingly no action was taken from the villager's side and

eventually the structure was pulled down. It was also noted by one of the

researchers who was present during all these events in the village that no one

from any other village took part in this process -even the adyaksha of the Arvari

Sansad Chaju ram Gujjar who resides in the Samra village was not present

when the incident took place, and it was only the few concerned people of the

Hamirpur who took part in it. It is surprising to note that the people who had

mobilised against the fish contractor did not do anything this time.

The villagers feel that the water harvesting works have been able to

provide them water security for at least 2-3 months each year depending on the

capacity of the johads made. There is utter lack of awareness among the

villagers regarding the Arvari movement and the sansad building was

demolished by the Revenue Department without much protest from the villagers

of Hamirpur.

121

Tarun Bharat Sangh

References

Hanumantha Rao, C. H. (2000), "Watershed Development in India: Present Experience and Emerging Issues" Loveraj Kumar Memorial Lecture, Societyfor prevention of Wasteland Development, New Delhi.

Institute of Environmental Studies (1994), Working of Tarun Bharat Sangh, Bhikampura, District Alwar Rajasthan: An Evaluation Study, Jaipur.

Kumar, Pankaj and B.M. Kandpal (1997), "Building 250 Water Harvesting Structures (Johads) in Bansut and Umren Blocs of Alwar District of Rajasthan", SIDA, Dehradun, January.

Progress Report 2000-2001, Mahilaaon main Jaaga Aatmvishvaas, TBS Alwar.

Ravi, Rajesh and Jinesh Jain (1997), Gram Swaraj Ki Raah Par- Bhavta Kolyala, Varanasi: Sarv Seva Sangh Prakashan.

Sunny Sebastian (2003), "Rebuilding the lives of Banjara Gujjars" The Hindu, 13 January 2003.

UN-Inter Agency Working Group on Water & Environmental Sanitation (1998), "Johad-Watershed in Alwar District Rajasthan".

122