Khawaja Zaheer Ahmed - PDMA

. Restoration of Irrigation Infrastructure:
(i) The Farm sector activity has been revived in the provinces, except
directly affected districts of Jaffarabad and Jhal Magsi in
Balochistan; for the latter two areas, the Hon’able Court has issued
orders for time bound restoration of irrigation supplies in the light of
interim recommendations of the Commission.
(ii) KP and the Punjab reacted promptly to restore losses to irrigation
network from their own resources.
(iii) The Sindh Government did not move as promptly as expected;
however, it finally prioritized execution of 39 development schemes
worth Rs.5,000 million, for rehabilitation of bunds / canals
commenced after receipt of 50% federal subvention, in early March
2011.
(iv) Balochistan too did not initiate rehabilitation of farm sector in
Naseerabad Division, with requisite urgency pending restoration of
damaged infrastructure in Sindh due to paucity of funds.
10. Whether flood affectees are entitled for damages and compensation from
the Government of Pakistan or from the persons who were benefited from the
embankment breaches?
Findings
a. The Calamities Act 1958 did not obligate compensation for losses
on account of any natural disaster, much less 1947 type claims.
However, as a natural social compassion, ex-gratia ad-hoc
compensation is invariably provided to affectees in distress or
victims exposed to natural or man-made disasters beyond their
bearing capacity. The governments also remit abyana and land
revenue in calamity affected areas. With the promulgation of the
NDMA Ordinance/Act, however, fixation of an objective scale for
compensation has become a statutory duty. For the 2010 Flood, a
scale of compensation was approved by the ECC. The ECC
approval did not, however, take into account where affectees lost
their land to rivers or landslides in mountains. The NDMC or other
provincial bodies under the Ordinance LIII of 2007 did not adopt the
ECC’s political guidelines, formally. A limited insurance cover by
ZTBL window is available to farmers but it was/is not availed by
most.
b. As noted in the Commissions’ findings under formulation No 5
supra, no proof of wrongful gains was produced, though extensive
losses were suffered, as stated above.
Page 20 of 211