Final list elusive, anxiety mounts among eligible landslide survivors in Wayanad
In the government order defining the criteria for the second phase (B) rehabilitation list, a specification stating that only `isolated houses within 50 metres of the no-go zone' would be considered has proved a setback for excluded families.
In the government order defining the criteria for the second phase (B) rehabilitation list, a specification stating that only `isolated houses within 50 metres of the no-go zone' would be considered has proved a setback for excluded families.
In the government order defining the criteria for the second phase (B) rehabilitation list, a specification stating that only `isolated houses within 50 metres of the no-go zone' would be considered has proved a setback for excluded families.
Kalpetta: For many families left out of the Mundakkai–Chooralmala landslide rehabilitation township project despite being eligible, anxiety continues to mount as clarity on the final beneficiary list remains elusive.
Several families from different `paadis' (hamlets) across Mundakkai, as well as from areas near the HNL factory at Rattappaadi and localities such as Attamala, HSC Road, Padavettikkunnu, Gopimoola and Koynakulam, continue to remain outside the beneficiary lists announced by the government despite meeting the eligibility criteria. The excluded families had earlier announced plans to stage a protest by setting up huts on March 1, the day of the township’s first phase inauguration. They later withdrew the agitation following assurances from the authorities that favourable action would be taken.
However, no further steps have followed since. The families had also expected an announcement on the final list at the inauguration of the township’s first phase. Instead, the Chief Minister and the Revenue Minister left the event without making any reference to the inclusion of additional families in the list.
Earlier, on January 17, the government issued an order constituting a committee chaired by the Land Revenue Commissioner to address the grievances of families excluded from the list. The order also stipulated that all applications, including 17 appeals received on the recommendation of the appeal committee, be heard and that the final list be published before January 31. However, even a month after the inauguration of the township’s first phase, the final list is yet to be published.
In the government order defining the criteria for the second phase (B) rehabilitation list, a specification stating that only `isolated houses within 50 metres of the no-go zone' would be considered has proved a setback for these families.
As the term ‘paadi’ was not specifically mentioned in the order, authorities too have washed their hands of the issue. Though they had indicated that the order would be revised, no action has been taken so far. After the 2019 Puthumala landslide disaster, families living in such `paadis' were similarly excluded from the list of rehabilitation beneficiaries announced by the government. Families in Mundakkai, Attamala and Rattappadi now fear that the same fate awaits them too.
Residents of Padavettikkunnu, one of the worst-affected areas in the landslide, have also been left out of the list. Along the four-kilometre stretch from Chooralmala School to Padavettikkunnu, large portions of the road were washed away as the river changed its course during the landslide. Under the second phase (B) list, which considers only houses within 50 metres of the no-go zone, just three out of around 30 houses in the area have been included.
Meanwhile, no steps have been taken to address discrepancies in the latest list of 49 beneficiaries. According to the disaster-affected families, as many as 22 names were arbitrarily included in it. Raising these concerns, the Janashabdam Action Committee, a collective of affected families, submitted a complaint to the district administration in August last year. However, no action has been taken so far either to include eligible families or to remove ineligible names.
The list is also marked by glaring inconsistencies. For instance, two members from the same ration card have been included. Individuals who own houses in other states, as well as those with homes elsewhere, also feature on the list. Even those who have been living away for years after marriage have been included. At the same time, while tenants who lived in houses in the disaster-hit areas have been listed, several homeowners have been left out, allege the affected families.