...... 20 SITUATION IN GUJARAT 3.24 Thus, it would be seen that the State Government has continued to be indifferent in tacking the issue. The report of the Chief Secretary is more intended to block any action on the issues suggested by the Commission than to address them. In response to the contentions put forth in the Chief Secretary’s letter dated 17.9.2003, the Special Rapporteur of the Commission who was consulted, reported details which supported the Commission’s stand that there was need for a Grievance Redressal Authority. Many of the families displaced in the riots were not in a position either to return to their original homes or carry on their business, in the absence of a secured and congenial environment facilitating their return. The report of Special Rapporteur also indicated that the amount of compensation paid by the State Government to the persons displaced in many cases was grossly inadequate. To illustrate the point he had pointed out that in the case of damage to houses, though the maximum limit of compensation fixed by the State Government was Rs. 50,000, the average compensation being paid for a fully damaged house was only Rs. 6678.28 per house in rural areas and Rs. 8554.58 per house in urban areas. As per the report of the police agency, the total damage to properties (including houses, business establishments, vehicles etc.) was to the tune of Rs. 687.34 crore, whereas the State Government had distributed only Rs. 56.37 crore to the affected persons, which works out to just about 9 per cent of the loss. It was further pointed out by the Special Rapporteur that instances of inadequacy in compensation/relief were not limited to Ahmedabad alone, while the list attached to the SCA refers mostly to cases from that place only. Besides, the mere fact that SCA had been filed before the High Court was not a sufficient ground for not attending to the grievances of affected citizens. The Special Rapporteur disputed the contention that there were no families living in camp-like conditions. 3.25 The Commission, after considering the response of the Chief Secretary and the comments of the Special Rapporteur, felt that there was a strong need to set up an Authority as proposed. The State Government was informed by the Commission by a D.O. letter dated 14.11.2003 of its intention to set up a Grievance Redressal Authority headed by a former Chief Justice of the High Court with a nominee each of the State Government and NHRC as Members so as to provide for an independent forum to the aggrieved citizens to ventilate their grievances and to ensure transparency and speed in the disposal of their grievances. The Commission reiterated its view that a survey of families living in camp-like conditions was necessary and requested the State Government to cooperate with the conduct of the survey. 3.26 The State Government through a D.O. letter dated 31.12.2003 sent by the Chief Secretary stated that the State Government does not accept the suggestion of NHRC to constitute a Grievance Redressal Authority. It termed the suggestion as improper because the State Government, on the direction of the Hon. High Court is actively engaged in the redressal of grievances of the riot affected persons. As regards the survey of displaced families, the State Government stated that it was fully willing and ready to cooperate in the matter but it would like that the NHRC should first give details of the specific complaints. NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION