In a letter to Chief Minister Keshubhai Patel, which was released to to the press here on Sunday, the GPCC president once again demanded an inquiry into Surat floods by a sitting judge of high court. He has also given a detailed account of what procedure should and could have been followed to avert floods or minimise the damage if the situation was so compelling.

Though short of saying in so many words, Patel has laid the blame on the inefficiency of the district collectorate for ignoring early warnings received from the flood control room. Patel has pointed out that the collector should have immediately swung into action on receiving the data regarding water level in the dam and the flood reports from neighbouring Madhya Pradesh.

In his letter, Patel has insisted that the Surat tragedy was man-made and it was caused by callousness of the administration and therefore, the government must order an inquiry. Patel has sought to know the ideal situations for release of large quantities of dam waters and the factors affecting the decision to release the same. According to him, had the water been released in a phased manner, the mishap could have been averted.

Blaming it on lack of co-ordination between various departments and the collectorate, Patel sought to know whether the necessary flood control drill was carried out following receipt of flood warnings in advance from the department concerned.

Patel has put 15 questions to the chief minister regarding the Surat floods. He has pointed out that no water was released from Ukai dam until it went beyond 341.55 feet after shooting from 338.41 feet on September 13/14 when it started raining in the Tapi basin. Some of the questions put to Patel are: Did local authorities (ie Collector) hold meetings and worked out possible action plan in accordance with Flood Memorandum?

Did focal officer apprise higher-ups like chief engineer, flood cell and the collector of the situation as on September 13/14?

Did the collector hold emergency co-ordination meetings, delegate powers to subordinates and monitor the implementation?

Were the gates of the Dam opened before the water level rose and whether they were opened suddenly or gradually?

Were the rules regarding water level and its flow followed month-wise, if not, why was focal officer not alerted?

Does the government intend to complete flood protective works approved by technical advisory committee?

Why was the construction related work at Shinganpur weir left undone which caused submergence in the area?

Were the lease-holders causing breaches in embankments for carrying away sand from the river Tapi shielded politically? If not, what action was taken against them?

Is it true there are no gates in storm water drains opening in the river which caused reverse flow?

How many such gates are yet to be made and why was a garden allowed on left bank of the river?

With whose permission was it allowed, and was any action taken about it?

Did the collector alert the people living in low lying areas when it became necessary to release more than 3.66 lakh cusecs at one go?

Is it possible that the Tapi level rose because of rising inflow from its tributaries?

What could be the reason for sudden increase of water to eight lakh cusecs in the river Tapti on September 16 when it was just 2.50 lakh cusecs a day ago?

Has the Government been told about the Sangh Parivar activitsts terrorising officials on duty at Ukai dam and creating obstruction to disrupt their operations?

When ideal conditions do not prevail like breaches in embankments, creating obstacles in free flow by raising garden etc, was it advisable for the authorities to release such a large quantity as 8.59 lakh cusecs?