Telangana asks Centre to direct AP to restore RLIS site to pre-DPR stage
HYDERABAD: Telangana irrigation officials on Sunday urged the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) to direct the Andhra Pradesh government to immediately restore the Rayalaseema Lift Irrigation Scheme (RLIS) site to its pre-Detailed Project Report (DPR) stage.
In a letter to the ministry, the officials also requested that either the MoEF&CC or the Krishna River Management Board (KRMB) monitor daily activities at the RLIS site and submit fortnightly compliance reports to the National Green Tribunal (NGT).
They pointed out that the NGT had stayed construction work on RLIS and constituted a joint committee to assess the situation. However, the Andhra Pradesh government allegedly continued construction in violation of the NGT order.
The Telangana officials recalled that the joint committee, in its March 2024 report to the NGT, noted that the project proponent had undertaken works beyond DPR preparation.
Excavation was reportedly completed up to 14.14% for the approach channel and 87.03% for the pump house and related works, totalling 18.18% of the proposed excavation.
'Self-certification not applicable'
Since the works exceeded the scope of DPR preparation, the officials argued that self-certification by the project proponent, as discussed in the EAC's 25th meeting, was not applicable. They urged that this clause be removed from the EAC recommendations and replaced with a site inspection report by a competent authority.
Reiterating their demand, the Telangana officials called for immediate restoration of the RLIS site to its pre-DPR stage to safeguard the legitimate rights of Telangana in the Krishna basin.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
6 hours ago
- The Hindu
Illegal sand mining along Yamuna banks continues unchecked, says Congress leader
Former Haryana Minister and senior Congress leader Karan Dalal has written to the National Green Tribunal (NGT), flagging what he described as 'ongoing illegal and unrestrained sand mining operations along the banks of the Yamuna', particularly in the districts of Palwal, Faridabad, Sonipat, and Yamuna Nagar. He urged the Tribunal to initiate 'urgent, firm, and exemplary action against all individuals and entities involved'. In a detailed nine-page letter, Mr. Dalal alleged that 'a systematic and large-scale plunder of the Yamuna riverbed' was under way, allegedly 'orchestrated by a powerful, well-organised and influential sand mining mafia operating with blatant impunity'. He contended that these illegal activities constituted a direct violation of environmental and legal provisions, as well as the binding orders, rules, and guidelines of the Supreme Court and the NGT. These, he said, 'strictly prohibit such unregulated and ecologically destructive mining practices'. The letter further alleged that unauthorised excavation was being carried out well beyond approved zones. 'River boundary pillars have been deliberately removed to erase demarcations, and heavy earth-moving machinery is being deployed midstream, leading to unregulated deep excavation,' it said. This, Mr. Dalal added, had resulted in the creation of hazardous deep pits in the riverbed, which were continually exploited for illegal sand extraction. Citing several instances, Mr. Dalal claimed that multiple departments, the Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee, and the NGT had already noted violations across the affected districts. 'Despite repeated protests by local residents and environmental activists, only cosmetic actions are taken — such as the registration of a few FIRs, seizure of vehicles, imposition of token fines, or isolated 'special raids' — while the core structure of corruption and the mining mafia remains untouched and fully operational,' he said. Referring to specific data, Mr. Dalal pointed out that between January 2024 and March 2025, 117 FIRs were registered in Palwal alone, resulting in the seizure of approximately 188 vehicles. 'However, instead of initiating robust legal proceedings or dismantling the network, a mere fine of ₹7.48 lakh was imposed to cover up the issue, resulting in the illegal sand mining continuing unabated,' he noted.
Indian Express
13 hours ago
- Indian Express
Bombay HC dismisses 2 PILs against Lloyds Metals
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has dismissed two public interest litigations (PILs) challenging the grant of permission to the capacity expansion of the Surjagarh iron ore mines of Lloyds Metals and Energy Ltd (LMEL) in Gadchiroli. While the PILs were quashed on May 9, the order copy was uploaded on June 19. The high court found both the PILs to be without merit. The PILs filed by Samarjeet Chatterjee, a mining contractor from Raipur, Chhattisgarh, alleged that the process of environmental clearance (EC) granted by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) for expansion of mining capacity from 3 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) to 10 MTPA and further Terms of Reference (ToR) towards expansion from 10 MTPA to 26 MTPA were 'illegal'. The division bench comprising Justices Nitin Sambre and Abhay Mantri observed that 'the complete procedure based on the ToR is followed,' and found that both the PILs were devoid of merit. The petitioner also alleged that the public hearing was conducted at a place far away from the project site. The court observed, 'The fact remains that in compliance with the Environmental Impact Assessment notification dated May 29, 2006, as amended on December 01, 2009, a public hearing was conducted at the [Gadchiroli] District Headquarters, which is perhaps properly secured in view of the Naxal menace.' The counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has no locus standi, and since he never attended the public hearing conducted by the collector at the district headquarters, he lost the opportunity to question the legality of the orders impugned in these PILs. Further, the counsel submitted that the initial EC was granted in 2005-06 after the hearing conducted by the collector at the very same place, and the said hearing was never questioned by the petitioner for the last 20 years. The counsel added that the EC for 10 MTPA was issued by the MoEF&CC under strict compliance with and adherence to the provisions of the EIA Notification dated May 29, 2006 and the SOP issued by the ministry. Though the public hearing was conducted at Gadchiroli district headquarters on the recommendation of the Police Department as the project site fell within the Naxal-affected area, all the locals were given due opportunity to present their say on the mining project, the court observed. The high court further stated that the courts should be sensitive and careful to the fact that the petitioner should not be allowed to indulge in making wild and reckless allegations. Since the petitioner stated that his annual income was Rs 4-5 lakh, the court observed, 'We fail to understand as to what is the source of expenses incurred by the petitioner as there is a serious doubt about his bona fides also'. With due observations, the high court dismissed both the PILs without costs.
Indian Express
a day ago
- Indian Express
Plea in Uttarakhand HC challenges 2025 amendment to Doon Valley Notification: ‘Destroys very essence'
A petition in the Uttarakhand High Court challenges the 2025 amendment to the Doon Valley Notification, 1989. According to the petition, the amendment undermines its objective and ignores the ecological sensitivity of the valley by allowing industries in the red category to operate. A Division Bench of Chief Justice G Narender and Justice Alok Mahra Friday sought the government counsel to secure instructions on the same. The petition, amended to incorporate a prayer to quash the gazette notification, filed by Congress leader Abhinav Thapar, claimed that the new amendment to the Doon Valley notification, 1989, which was notified on May 13, fails the original motive of the notification. The 1989 Doon Valley Notification, a significant instrument which classified industries based on pollution levels under green, red, and orange categories, and prohibited mining, change in land use, and grazing without the MoEF&CC nod in Doon valley. The May amendment has given the state government the authority to approve tourism plan, grazing plan, master plan of development, land use plan, and any other plan, including zonal master plans. It also makes the orange category industries not covered under the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, to be considered by the Uttarakhand State Pollution Control Board. The amendment also makes orange category industries, which are now in the red category, continue, and expansion of such orange category industries falling in the schedule of the EIA notification to be allowed under conditions. According to the petition, the amendment does not take into account the ecological sensitivity of the Doon Valley. 'It allows all the industries to work in the area whether it was originally there in the notification of 1989 or not, destroying the very essence of the notification…by this notification, all the industries which now fall under red category are allowed to operate, which fails the original motive of the notification of 1989,' it says.
