As a school going student I heard
my father talking very highly of the administrative acumen and the concern for
the common good of the people that one Sri Sonti Ramamurty of ICS cadre exhibited
as a civil servant. “If only such collectors and secretaries—who could stand up
against even British officers of Colonial India for a right cause—are there
today, the condition of farming community would have been different”, my father
used to say. Why, if he had succeeded in his [Ramamurty] endeavour to build
Ramapadasagar dam, there would have been no Godavari flood victims of today [of
the extraordinary floods of 1953]. Our
ministers are today more interested in things that are of no relevance to
commoners like us. Excited by it, I felt
like hearing a little more about him. Of course, I had no courage to go to my
father and ask him to elaborate on what he said.
After about 60 years of this
incident, yesterday, I had a chance occasion to flip through the autobiography
of Sri Ramamurty —the same Sonti Ramamurty of the Godavari delta of Andhra
province—published in 1964 by Popular Prakashan, Bombay. I wish to present you
a few excerpts from the book that well speak about this civil servant of yore
who had a responding-heart to the common good of the people he was supposed to
serve as also merit reading by all of us for whatever good it may eventually
deliver:
“It was Sri L. Venkatakrishan Iyer who first
told me of the possibility of a dam near Polavaram below the gorge through the
Papikonda hills being built on the Godavary. …
It gives a maximum of irrigation in the plains below. It
gives as much power as we can reasonably expect to use. It avoids damage to the
Singareni coal fields … It gives enough of head to let a navigation canal reach
the Visakhapatnam harbour and another to reach the Krishna and go even beyond
into Guntur…
In 1946 … I told Lord Wavell of the large irrigation scheme
that I had prepared which would make South India largely self-sufficient for
rice. He was interested. He took me to the map and asked me to show the site. …
He wrote down the name to my dictation. The next day he told Sri V. P. Menon,
his Special Secretary to sanction the Ramapadasagar scheme …
… He actually showed me the typewritten order sanctioning
the scheme for Rs. 60 crores … but told me that as the Resident of Hyderabad
was in Delhi he would show the order to him for courtesy’s sake. Lothian, the
Resident, however, said that the Ramapadasagar Project might damage the
Singareni Coal Fields that no order should be issued unless the Hyderabad
Government was consulted.
In the U.S.A. I visited the Bureau of Reclamation at Denver,
where the Ramapadasagar Project was finalized under the supervision of Savage,
the foremost of the American experts on dams. The special feature of the
proposed dam was that it had to go down 200 feet to the bed of the river but
this was considered feasible by the engineers. …
When I came back from the U.S.A. … I found that the matter was still pending with
the Hyderabad Government. … I was again
to go to the U.S.A. … On the way I went
to Hyderabad with the Minister for Agriculture in Madras: Sri Bhaktavachalam
and called on the Diwan of Hyderabad, Sir Mirza Ismail for a discussion. I
found Sri Ali Nawaz Jung the Consulting Engineer of the Hyderabad Government
with a large number of Engineers … I
told the Diwan that I came without my Engineers and none of the Engineers in
Hyderabad should, therefore, take part in our discussion. The Diwan however
asked to make an exception for Ali Nawaz Jung. After an hour or two of
discussion when I pointed out that the floor of the Singareni Coal Fields was
higher than the top level of Ramapadasagar and that the Ramapadasagar Project
could not therefore harm the coal fields, Sir Mirza agreed with me but Ali
Nawaz Jung did not…
The Diwan gave us dinner and after the dinner we again took
up the discussion till nearly midnight and the discussion went on mainly
between myself and Ali Nawaz Jung. For every point that I was able to meet of
Ali Nawaz Jung, he used to promptly raise another point. At a quarter to twelve
I rose up and said it was a waste of time for me to discuss the matter further.
Ali Nawaz Jung said I was rude to him. I replied that he had been rude to me
all the evening and it was permissible for me to be rude to him once. Everybody
laughed and Sir Mirza drafted a resolution that Hyderabad had no objection to
the Ramapadasagar on account of the damage feared for the Singareni Coal
Fields. …
The next morning I got the resolution signed by Sri
Bhaktavachalam for Madras and Sir Mirza for Hyderabad. …When I returned [from
the US] expecting to find progress made in the sanction… I was told that a specially intelligent
officer in Delhi had stated that agreements between Governments should be
signed by Secretaries to Government and not by members of the Government. On
this technical point the proposal was sent back to Hyderabad.
When I returned to Madras, Govindaraj Ayyangar told me that
he wanted to consult a Construction Engineer, Harper in London regarding the
difficulties of construction. I said it was late in the day for such further
consultation and that delay might kill this scheme. Govindaraj Ayyangar
promised to finish the consultation in 2 months. I reluctantly agreed. Harper’s
Committee in London reported that although there were undoubtedly difficulties
the scheme was definitely feasible.
By the time Govindaraj Ayyangar returned from London, I
acted as Governor of Bombay and did not revert then as Chief Secretary to
Government of Madras to deal further with the Ramapadasagar Project. Next I
found that owing to the doubling of the index figure of prices, Govindaraj
Ayyangar, a very conscientious official, had doubled the cost of the
Ramapadasagar Project and made it Rs. 120 crores in place of the previous Rs.
60 crores…
When I was Prime Minister, Udaipur, I attended a conference
in Delhi with Sri Gadgil, Member for Public Works in the Central Government
where it was stated that the Bhakra-Nangal Project cost only about Rs. 50
crores while Ramapadasagar Project cost Rs. 120 crores. I asked if the former
had also been upgraded in cost owing to the rise of prices and said that either
both should have the revision in cost or neither. …
While
in Delhi, I wished to explain the Ramapadasagar Project to Pandit Nehru in
order to put some of my faith in Ramapadasagar into him. I was able to see the
Prime Minister at about 1 p.m. when I explained the Project to him. I showed
him the picture of Ramapadasagar as depicted by an artist of Savage, the
American expert of dams. Pandit Nehru was very impressed by the picture and exclaimed
with pleasure, “what a wonderful sight!”…
A
meeting of the Central Cabinet was held that afternoon. Pandit Nehru asked me
for a note on the Ramapadasagar Project which I sent him by 3 p.m. By 5 p.m.
the Cabinet decided that the Project be proceeded with. There was next a
Committee of the Central Government presided over by the late N. Gopalaswami
Ayyangar to allot funds for river valley schemes. I learnt from him that
Ramapadasagar Project was not allotted any funds because the Government of
Madras had replied to the Committee that the scheme was not O.K. …
The
opinion of Harper’s Committee was recast by the Madras Government in the form
“although the scheme was feasible, there were undoubted difficulties” and a
commentary was written thereon, expatiating on the difficulties in supplying
the steel and cement needed. Gopalaswami Ayyangar said that his committee would
have given some money for Ramapadasagar Project but could not do so as the
State Government had not supported it….
I told him that it was not for
politicians to say whether an engineering scheme was sound or not, that I
consulted Savage the best known expert on dams and if the Government of India
wanted to consult experts further they might do so. …
I saw
the Finance Minister: Sri John Mathai, the Home Minister: Sardar Vallabhbhai
Patel and the Prime Minister. They all agreed that the matter should be further
examined. Savage was asked to see the Prime Minister to satisfy him and the
Finance Minister: Sri Mathai and he satisfied them that the scheme was sound.
Gopalaswami Ayyangar also heard from the Central Water and Power Commission that
the scheme was sound but by that time all the available funds had been allotted
and there was no money left to be allotted for the Ramapadasagar Project. This
Project has thus been languishing since….” (pages:
88- 94).
That’s
how even the best efforts of a diligent civil servant could be turned
unfruitful by the inept governance… [?] Interestingly, we must note here that as this persuasion comes to the end, Sri Ramamurty had no positional power to follow it up, for by then he left Madras presidency. Yet he could pursue the matter with equal effect because that is the 'referent power' that his personality afforded him. That puts him on a pedestal as a Civil Servant less ordinary.
In
a similar vein, another interesting submission of Sri Ramamurthy, ICS, to even
Pandit Nehru, could not succeed to deliver the intended result:
Andhra Province was among the first attempts
at applying the linguistic principle to provinces. It is a good principle when
applied with restraint. When the Andhra Province was in the offing, I opposed a
proposal to have the Province without the capital being at Madras city, jointly
with the Madras Province. I did not want the Province anyhow but only in a good
form. I had an interview with the Prime Minister, Pandit Nehru and explained my
view to him. After hearing me, he asked what Sri Prakasam’s view was. I replied
that Sri Prakasam was a politician who could not refuse a Province offered
anyhow. I said I was not a politician.
We asked for bread. If he could give us bread, he might do so. But if he could not, I asked him not to
give us a stone” (page -151).
What a courage! And of course,
history tells us that Nehru gave what Sri Ramamurty precisely asked him not to
give. And what is the most interesting element to be noticed here is: his ability to foresee what could happen if the province is given with no capital: reports indicate that its new secretariat functioned from tents for quite sometime (as could be seen from the image in which the then Governor reported to be visiting the tents).
There is yet another interesting
incident where this civil servant took a stand of his own in the best interest
of the citizens of Madras, which merits our reading:
In 1940, I found that military authorities in
Madras … were obsessed by the idea that the public should not clutter the roads
to the detriment of army movements. I found them, therefore, insisting on a
“stay-put” policy for the public if there was any invasion of South India. I
felt that with the stories given out by Sir Anthony Eden after the fall of
Nanking as to how the Japanese converted half of it as brothel, it would be
inadvisable for the Indian government to support the “stay-put” demanded by the
obsessive military commanders. One of my colleagues as Adviser said he agreed
with me but said he could not do anything against it. I said that such a
position must not be tolerated. As Chief Secretary I went to Delhi and got the
Defence Secretary and Chief of Staff to agree with me that the “stay-put”
policy must not be allowed to stand and that a corridor from Madras to the West
must be allowed to the public who should be given as early notice as possible
of an impending invasion. After instructions were received from the Chief of
Staff, the local military commanders no longer demanded the “stay-put” policy (page:
73-74).
After putting down his biography of this ICS officer of versatility, who had battled all through his career for the good of the common man and his development,
many questions swarmed over my mind. And I am sure you could as well guess
them…
There is a lesson there!
There is a lesson there!
Wonderful piece of information on the efforts of a great man and his ability to stand for what is best in the interest of the commonest man.
ReplyDeleteKudos to you Sir.