PROCEEDINGS OF THE WORKSHOP ON INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT

FOR INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME (IWMP) HELD

ON 28TH OCTOBER 2010 AT NASC COMPLEX, PUSA, NEW DELHI

A Workshop has been organized by the Department of Land Resources,

Ministry of Rural Development on Institutional Arrangement for Integrated
Watershed Management Programme (IWMP) in the Committee Room I at NASC
Complex, PUSA, New Delhi on 28th October 2010, with the following agenda items:
1. Strengthening of PRIs in watersheds
2. Changes in the budget component prescribed in Common Guidelines
3. Fund flow procedure under IWMP
4. Quantification of project fund to be retained at each level under IWMP
5. Procedure of sanction of projects under IWMP
6. Timeline and checklist of parameters for submitting proposals by SLNAs for
release of 14 % funds for IWMP projects
2.
Chief Executive Officers of SLNAs, other State/ District level Officers, Officers
of PIAs, Watershed Development Team Members, Sarpanches of Gram Panchayats,
Secretary of Watershed Committee from different States and senior officers from
different Ministries/ organizations of Government of India have participated in the
Workshop. The list of participants is at Annexure.
3.
The Secretary (LR) welcomed the participants and made opening remarks.
Emphasizing the importance of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) in the light of 73 rd
and 74th Constitutional Amendments, she highlighted the need of involving PRIs in
the implementation of IWMP in a more substantial way than provided in the Common
Guidelines for Watershed Development Projects, 2008. She also emphasized the
much needed convergence of Mahatma Gandhi NREGA with IWMP. She further
added that, for ensuring sustainability of watershed programmes, involvement of
local leadership in the implementation is very crucial, as the local leadership
represented by Panchayats offer institutional continuity and support the watershed
efforts beyond the project period. In this background, she invited suggestions from
the participants on the ways & means of strengthening & involving PRIs in
implementation of IWMP and on other agenda items.
4.
The representatives of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh, Tamil Nadu,
Punjab, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa, Kerala, Haryana, Bihar, Gujarat,
Maharashtra, Jharkhand and Himachal Pradesh expressed their views on status of
role of PRIs in the implementation of IWMP in their respective States. Some of the
notable views are as below:

Page 1 of 8

a. Karnataka: Watershed Committee (WC) which implements the IWMP is a

Sub-Committee of Gram Panchayat and this Sub-Committee is not a
registered body. The Sub-Committee consists of GP members and is headed
by Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat members living in the project area are
members of the Sub-Committee on rotation basis.
b. Uttar Pradesh: If the WC is registered under the Societies Registration Act as
a society, the WC will be under the dual control of Registrar of Societies and
Panchayati Raj Department of the Government and both the Acts, Societies
Regiatration Act and Panchayati Raj Act will be applicable for administering
WC. This may pose a practical problem in coming years.
c. Kerala: The Chairman of WC is the President of Gram Panchayat and other
members of Panchayat are also co-opted in the WC. The system is working
well in Kerala.
5.
On the issue of transferring funds to the Gram Panchayat instead of WC,
some of the States, namely, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh,
Maharashtra and Jharkhand were not agreeable to the suggestion. Whereas some
of the States like Punjab, Haryana, Bihar did not have any specific view on the
subject. The States of Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh were of the view that funds
can be transferred to Gram Panchayats. The States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu
put forward the suggestion that the issue should be left to the SLNAs for a decision
based on local context.
6.
NRAA, represented by Technical Expert, informed that Common Guidelines
for Watershed Development Projects, 2008 was formulated after detailed
deliberations among the stakeholders under the Chairmanship of Additional
Secretary (Land Resources). The present provision of transferring funds to WC
under IWMP should be given a trial and any such change in the Guidelines should
be based only on evaluation of the working of IWMP in coming years. He also
informed that on the matter of WC to be one of the Standing Committee/ SubCommittee of Gram Panchayat, NRAA has sought clarification from Ministry of
Panchayati Raj regarding the structure, composition and functions of the Standing
Committee/ Sub-Committee of Gram Panchayat. The Executive Committee of NRAA
may take a view on the subject in its next meeting.
7.
After detailed deliberations on the issue of involvement of Gram Panchayats
and other agenda items, following recommendations were finalized.
Agenda 1. Strengthening of PRIs in watersheds:
The States may consider following options for involving PRIs in the projects:
a. Watershed Committee may be made as a Sub-Committee of Gram
Panchayat. It was also clarified that registration of Watershed Committee
under Societies Registration Act would not be compulsory.
Page 2 of 8

b. Ward members/ Panchayat members may be co-opted as members of

Watershed Committee.
c. The Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat may be made one of the signatories
along with Secretary, Watershed Committee and a government representative
for issueing cheques for the works under Integrated Watershed Management
Programme (IWMP).
Agenda 2. Changes in the budget component prescribed in Common
Guidelines:
On the question of reducing the budget component for Entry Point Activities
from 4 % to 1 %, it was decided that 4 % may be retained as the maximum limit for
EPA. For changes in the components of Livelihood activities for the asset less
persons (10 %) and Production system and micro enterprises (13 %), the group
recommended that both the components should be merged together and 15 %
provision may be kept for the same. It was also recommended to reduce the
allocation for consolidation phase from 5 % to 3 %, and enhance the allocation for
Watershed Development Works from 50 to 60 %. Accordingly, the recommendations
are summarized below:

Budget component
- Administrative costs
- Monitoring
- Evaluation
Preparatory phase, including:
- entry point activities
- institution and capacity building
- Detailed Project Report (DPR)
Watershed Works Phase:
- Watershed development works
- Livelihood activities for the assetless
persons
- Production system and microenterprises
Consolidation phase
Total

Existing provision in
the Common
Guidelines 2008 (%
of total project cost)
10
1
1

Amendments
recommended by
the group (% of
total project cost)
10
1
1

4
5
1

4
5
1

50
10

60
15

13
5
100

3
100

It was also clarified that above recommended percentages represent the

maximum limit and any savings under any component should be utilized for
Watershed Development Works only.

Page 3 of 8

Agenda 3. Fund flow procedure under IWMP:

a. Institutional fund: DoLR SLNA WCDC
b. Project fund:
i. Administration, capacity building, DPR preparation, monitoring
components - DoLR SLNA WCDC PIA
ii. EPA, Watershed Works, Livelihood, production system & microenterprises
- DoLR SLNA WCDC WC
Agenda 4. Quantification of project fund to be retained at each level under
IWMP:
In view of the roles & functions of different levels and timeliness of carrying
out particular activity, the following breakup of funds (in terms of % of project funds)
was discussed and finalized in the Workshop.

InstallAgency
ment

1st
(20 %)

2nd
(50 %)

3rd
(30 %)

Total
(100%
)

SLNA
WCDC
PIA
WC
Total
SLNA
WCDC
PIA
WC
Total
SLNA
WCDC
PIA
WC
Total
SLNA
WCDC
PIA
WC
Total

Admn.

1.00
1.00
2.00
2.70
2.70
5.40
1.30
1.30
2.60
5.00
5.00
10.00

Monitoring Evaluation EPA

0.05
0.10
0.05

0.30

0.20
0.075
0.200
0.125

0.30
0.35

0.40
0.075
0.200
0.125

0.35
0.35

0.40
0.20
0.50
0.30

0.35
1.00

1.00

I&
CB

Livelihoods,
WaterProduction ConsoliDPR shed
system &
dation
Works
Micro
Enterprise

0.20
0.50
4.00 2.30 1.00
4.00 3.00 1.00
0.10
0.25
1.15
1.50

2.00
7.50
7.50

10.00
32.35
32.35

0.15
0.35

1.00

0.50
0.30
0.90
4.00 3.80 1.00
4.00 5.00 1.00

2.00

10.00
3.00

20.15
20.15

3.00
15.00

60.00
60.00

15.00

0.10
0.10
0.20
2.60
3.00
0.10
0.10
0.20
2.60
3.00

Above quantification for each level is indicative and SLNAs will decide the
exact amount to be disbursed to each level based upon actual requirements.

Page 4 of 8

Total

0.55
0.60
10.35
8.50
20.00
0.525
0.450
13.975
35.050
50.000
0.525
0.450
4.975
24.050
30.00
1.60
1.50
29.30
67.60
100.00

Agenda 5. Procedure of sanction of projects under IWMP:

The existing procedure for sanction of projects under IWMP is slightly
modified as below:
a. The proposal should have recommendation and approval of SLNA
b. The proposal should be presented before the Steering Committee by a
representative of SLNA
c. The Steering Committee would appraise and clear the proposal as such or
suggest modification or reject altogether
d. The CEO, SLNA will issue the Sanction Order for the projects as per the
decisions of the Steering Committee. Any modification suggested by the
Steering Committee must be brought to the notice of SLNA in the very next
meeting of SLNA.

Agenda 6. Timeline and checklist of parameters for submitting proposals by

SLNAs for release of 14 % funds for IWMP projects
Following timeline and checklists are proposed for submitting proposals by
SLNAs for release of 14 % funds under IWMP.
a.

Timeline: Maximum 6 months from date of release of 6 % of central

assistance
b. Checklist for submission of proposal for release of 14 %:
i. Appointment of PIA in all projects sanctioned
ii. Release of funds to WCDCs/ PIAs
iii. Release of matching state share
iv. At least 25 % of experts & staff in SLNA, WCDC, PIA (i.e. WDT) and WCs
be in position for the State
v. Capacity building action plan for the entire project period should be ready
and at least 25 % of fund released for capacity building should be utilized.
vi. EPA for each project area must be identified and action plan prepared.
vii. A certificate from the SLNA that the progress of preparation of DPR is
satisfactory
8.
With the permission of Chair, the issue of Difficulty in appointment of experts
& staff on contract basis in the SLNA/ WCDC by different States was also taken up
for discussion during the Workshop. The group recommended as below:
Appointment of experts by Service Provider is not a practical proposition. The
States may be allowed to appoint the experts & staff by direct appointment and their
salaries may be met from institutional funds released by the Department of Land
Resources for the entire period during which IWMP is being implemented in the
State. The State Govt. should give undertaking that no permanent liability will fall
upon the Central Govt. on account of such engagement by direct contract. However,
the condition regarding the staff dealing with financial matters remains unchanged,
i.e. the Finance-cum-Accounts Officer in the SLNAs and the Accountant in the
Page 5 of 8

WCDC in DRDAs can be either a serving Government Officer on deputation or a

retired Government Officer from a Finance/Accounts Service on contract to the
SLNA/WCDC.

The Workshop ended with the Vote of Thanks to the Secretary (LR).
*******

Page 6 of 8

Annexure
List of participants in the One-day Workshop on Institutional Arrangement for
Integrated Watershed Management Programme (IWMP) organized by
Department of Land Resources on 20th October 2010 at NASC Complex, Pusa,
New Delhi
1. Smt. Anita Chaudhary, Secretary (LR), DoLR
2. Shri Chinmay Basu, Additional Secretary (LR), DoLR
3. Dr. Savita Anand, JS (WM), DoLR
4. Dr. A.K. Sikka, Technical Expert, NRAA
5. Smt. Krishna Tyagi, CCA, MoRD
6. Shri V.M. Arora, Director, DoLR
7. Shri Surendra Kumar, DIGF, DoLR
8. Smt. Arti Chaudhary, AIGF, DoLR
9. Shri Neeraj Srivastava, DS (M&E), DoLR
10. Dr. C.P. Reddy, AC, DoLR
11. Shri Naveen Agrawal, Principal System Analyst, NIC-DoLR
12. Shri Virendra Singh, Additional Commissioner (RFS), Ministry of Agriculture,
New Delhi
13. Shri R.K. Tiwari, Deputy Commissioner (RFS), Ministry of Agriculture, New
Delhi
14. Shri Bun Rao, ASCO, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi
15. Shri S.K. Batra, Consultant, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, New Delhi
16. Shri G. Bhaskar Reddy, Director, Orissa Watershed Development Mission & Special
Secretary, CEO, SLNA, Orissa

17. Shri Debasish Das, Special Secretary (P & RD) & CEO, SLNA, Chhattisgarh
18. Shri B. Nijalingappa, CEO, SLNA, Jharkhand
19. Shri Atul Anand, Executive Director, TAWDEVA-SLNA, Tamil Nadu
20. Smt. Suvarna Chandrappagari, Special Commissioner (RD), Andhra Pradesh
21. Shri Rajesh Kumar, Director, Soil Conservation Dept., Bihar
22. Dr. R.N. Batta, Director, Rural Development Dept., Himachal Pradesh
23. Dr. A. Rajanna, Director, Watershed Development Dept., Karnataka
24. Shri Jayant Deshmukh, Director (Soil Conservation) & CEO, SLNA,
Maharashtra
25. Dr. R.K. Sohana, Director, SAMETI, Patna
26. Shri Surendra Vikram, Administrator, Sharda, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
27. Shri Anil Kumar Sondhi, Chief Conservator of Soils, Punjab
28. Shri Vivek Dave, Dy. Commissioner, Rajiv Gandhi Mission for Watershed
Management, Madhya Pradesh
29. Shri C. S. Mehta, Additional Director, Directorate of Watershed Development
and Soil Conservation, Rajasthan
30. Shri Md. Iqbal, Technical Expert (Agri.), TAWDEVA-SLNA, Tamil Nadu
31. Shri R. Anilan, Programme Officer (Watershed & Training), Commissionerate
of Rural Development, Kerala
Page 7 of 8

32. Shri Gurbinder Dhillon, Soil Conservation Officer, Punjab

33. Shri Madan Chhajed, Project manager, DWDU, Zilla Parishad, Udaipur,
Rajasthan
34. Shri Kailash Ram, Deputy Director, Dept. of Land Development & Water
Resources, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
35. Shri Shankar Dev, Deputy Director, Dept. of Land Development & Water
Resources, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh
36. Shri Sobaran Lal, Deputy Director, Watershed Management Directorate,
Uttarakhand
37. Shri Suvendu Rout, Professional Expert, GSWMA-SLNA, Gujarat
38. Shri N. Gangappa, JDA (SCN), Watershed Development Dept., Karnataka
39. Shri D.K. Verma, Divisional Soil Conservation Officer, Haryana
40. Shri R.K. Khande, PIA, Chhattisgarh
41. Shri D.S. Tomar, WDT Member, Chhattisgarh
42. Shri Paras Ram Rana, WDT Member (Civil), Mandi Dist., Himachal Pradesh
43. Shri Kamlesh Verm, Sarpanch, Chhattisgarh
44. Shri Mukan Singh, Sarpanch, Ghopalpur, Madhya Pradesh
45. Shri Keshu Lal Meena, Sarpanch, Paduna, Girwa, Udaipur, Rajasthan
46. Shri Dhanpeet Sahu, Secretary, WC, Chhattisgarh
47. Shri Goapl Lal Salvi, Secretary, Watershed Committee, Paduna, Girwa,
Udaipur, Rajasthan
48. Shri Pradeep Kushah, Member, WC, Alirajpur, Madhya Pradesh

Page 8 of 8