In Nepalikuti, the Dikhow has receded, revealing the remains of washed-away homes and lives that will commence rebuilding. The area falls under Assam’s Sivasagar district’s Nazira Assembly, relying predominantly on agriculture and dairy farming for livelihood. Walls that hadn’t collapsed were indistinguishable from the mud around them by the time the water receded. In light of this loss, the Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswas Sarma announced interim relief and financial assistance to residents who lost their houses.
The flood has claimed 95 lives, affecting 11.7 lakh people across 25 districts, and fresh embankment breaches in Biswanath and Darrang, keeping 14 districts on high alert even as the original four, Sivasagar, Charaideo, Golaghat and Jorhat, are reeling from it and totting up what they lost. The government’s own count estimates 3,971 completely damaged houses and 13,535 partially damaged houses (still rising figures) across the entire state.
The government’s response with respect to financial assistance has moved in three tiers; one pertains to housing. The first is the ex gratia for the dead, raised to Rs. 9 lakhs per person. The second is the direct benefit transfer of Rs. 15,000 to severely affected families in the four worst affected districts, explicitly for essential needs, not reconstruction. The third is house damage compensation under the State Disaster Response Fund (SDRF) norms. This is the shelter for the approximately 17,000 damaged houses across the state.
The SDRF norm for a fully damaged pucca house is Rs, 95,100. Assam paid roughly the same amount in 2022, when 2.04 lakh houses were damaged statewide. Families who lost their homes completely received an additional Rs. 1 lakh. This is the same amount offered to the 309 families whose homes were washed away by the floods this year. Four years and one inflation cycle later, the amount remains unchanged, even though this flooding was unprecedented. Partial damage compensation stands lower at Rs. 5,200 for a partially damaged pucca house; Rs. 3,200 for a partially damaged kutcha house. These amounts function as assistance, meagre assistance rather than compensation for lives that have to be rebuilt from scratch. This evaluation excludes consideration of the fact that the loss of a house is not merely a financial or physical loss of shelter but a loss of one’s life, one’s sense of self and security. These are not bungalows that have been washed away for people who may have another shelter or belongings elsewhere. Those whose homes have washed away are families who did not have very much to begin with. The vulnerable have been made even more so.
One of the earliest theories of the origin of the state is that of Thomas Hobbes,s who notes in his work ‘The Leviathan’ that the state emerged to protect those who came together to form a society. It is precisely those who are most vulnerable that the state is obligated to protect. The loss of homes reveals the state’s failure to protect. The financial assistance it offers can assist them in rebuilding houses, es but it is not adequate compensation. No compensation can be adequate, but one that aims to be so aims for more than the needful.
There is also the matter of time. Floodwaters reached Nepalikuti on 19th July, 2026. The door-to-door damage assessment that determines who gets what did not begin until 9th August, after the second wave of flooding had moved the crisis to districts not surveyed for the first. This assessment itself depends on an official walking the plot to determine the extent of the damage. Considering that the water has not completely receded yet, these decisions are hanging in the air, waiting for data to emerge.
Even when it does, no amount can be adequate compensation for the loss of a life built within a home. It cannot offer the sense of security that existed before the sold manifestation of labour and love was washed away, especially now that they know this can recur. These facts leave us with an uncomfortable question of what the purpose of the compensation is. Is it a symbol of response or an actual attempt to compensate for the loss of people’s sense of security? Whether the compensation works or not rests on which one of these purposes it aims to fulfil.
References: