Latest news with #MoEF&CC
Indian Express
5 hours ago
- Business
- 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
15 hours ago
- Politics
- 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.
The Hindu
3 days ago
- Business
- The Hindu
Wayanad tunnel project gets Union Ministry nod
The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) has issued the final order giving environmental clearance to the proposed Kalladi-Meppadi tunnel road project with stringent norms. The order was issued on Tuesday (June 17) based on the recommendations of an expert committee formed under the Ministry. The latest order will help the State government officially start the construction work at the earliest. The ₹2,134-crore project will be executed with the cooperation of the Department of Public Works, Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board, and the Konkan Railway Corporation (KRC). The tendering process has already been completed for the project, which will be implemented by Bhopal-based Dilip Buildcon Limited and Kolkata-based Royal Infrastructure. According to Public Works department sources, the expert panel has laid 60 conditions to reduce the environmental impact and the concerns raised by various environmental organisations about the natural calamities in the ecologically sensitive areas. One of the major conditions is the strict compliance with all blasts in the project area and all the norms fixed by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research and the Central Institute for Mining and Fuel Research, they added. Also, the latest notification makes it clear that the suggestions by various other government panels related to geology, environment, and mining will have to be considered as such, apart from establishing four ground vibrator monitoring stations to constantly watch the impacts. A four-member committee recommended by the District Collector will also have to be formed to monitor the project and submit a review report every six months after the commencement of the works. Ensuring proper protection of the biodiversity in the project area is another major directive. The concerns raised by various environmentalists' organisations on the same will have to be respected throughout the project implementation. The construction company will have to ensure that the flow of the Iruvazhinji river is not interrupted. Also, it will be responsible for the close monitoring of the quality of air in the constructed tunnel. It was on October 16, 2000, that the blueprint for the 8.17-km twin tunnel, claimed to be the third longest underpass in the country, was unveiled by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan. To speed up the project execution, Mr. Vijayan had included it on the list of 30 special projects directly monitored by him in the State. Despite the opposition on the part of environmentalists, the State government moved ahead with the project citing its importance in improving the connectivity between Kozhikode and Wayanad districts, bypassing the Thamarassery ghat road. The government also found that it would help people of Wayanad to quickly access the better medical facilities in Kozhikode. The possible increase in the export of agricultural produce, including spices, with the seamless connectivity and the subsequent economic growth were also highlighted.
The Hindu
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Uttam urges Centre not to allow modifications to Polavaram
Irrigation Minister N. Uttam Kumar Reddy has written to Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav urging the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) to reject the proposal for Terms of Reference (ToR) sought by Andhra Pradesh for the modified Polavaram Irrigation Project (PIP). He alleged that the AP government's actions represent consistent violations of environmental clearances and tribunal allocations, calling them detrimental to riparian interests and legally untenable. In his letter on Monday, Mr. Uttam stated that Andhra Pradesh has carried out massive deviations in both the Krishna and Godavari basins by enlarging the scope of several components of the PIP, in violation of the permissions accorded by the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal Award (GWDTA) and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). He recalled that the Polavaram project originally received Environmental Clearance from MoEF under letter No. J-12011/74/2005-IA-1 dated October 25, 2005. However, the Andhra Pradesh government later implemented extensive changes without obtaining fresh clearance, prompting the Ministry to issue a 'Stop Work Order' on February 8, 2011. Although the order was issued due to the unapproved changes in the project's scope, it was kept in abeyance and has been repeatedly extended, most recently until July 2, 2026. This allowed the works to continue despite objections raised not only by Telangana but also by Odisha and Chhattisgarh. The Minister further pointed out that the Polavaram project, after being granted 'National Project' status by the government of India, continues to receive reimbursement of expenditures, but only for components that were approved under the original scope. 'Yet the AP government has proceeded with major infrastructural modifications,' he wrote. Mr. Uttam Kumar Reddy referred to the Supreme Court's order dated September 6, 2022, which clearly observed that 'there are some technical reports available but more may be required depending on the expansion of the project. Similarly, the issue of the environmental clearances would also have to be addressed.' The Court had also suggested that the Minister of Jal Shakti and MoEF&CC play a pioneering role by convening a meeting of all stakeholders to resolve the contentious issues. In his communication, the Minister warned that AP has gone far beyond the approved project parameters. 'The connectivity to draw water from the head sluice of the Polavaram Right Main Canal (PIPRMC) is now being designed for 40,000 cusecs, while the original design was for 20,000 cusecs. Twin tunnels, each with a discharge capacity of 20,000 cusecs, are under execution, and the infrastructure at the headworks has already been created accordingly,' he pointed out. He added that the PIPRMC is being executed with a drawal capacity of 17,560 cusecs against the DPR-approved 11,654 cusecs. Similarly, the Polavaram Left Main Canal (PIPLMC) is being constructed with the same 17,560 cusecs capacity, though only 8,123 cusecs were originally approved. He stressed that these changes in drawal capacities and the 'extensive alterations in the dimensional features of the project components' amount to a complete redesign of the project, undertaken without requisite clearances or approvals. The Minister strongly urged the MoEF&CC not to undertake any appraisal of the Andhra Pradesh government's project proposal in the forthcoming meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC). 'In view of all the above, especially in the interest of justice, it is requested not to undertake any appraisal of this project proposal and outrightly reject the grant of ToR in the upcoming meeting of EAC,' he concluded.
The Hindu
09-06-2025
- General
- The Hindu
Fresh mining push in Tumakuru forest raises ecological concerns
The Forest Department has given its consent for diversion of 119.23 acres of forestland in Tumakuru district for mining purpose that will result in axing of nearly 17,200 trees. The proposed mining project is in Thirtharamapura Reserve Forest, and is spread across Gollarahalli, Hosahalli, Kodihalli, Tonalapura, and Lakmenahalli in Chikkanayakanahalli taluk. The department, in its letter dated May 14, 2025, recommended for 'moving the proposal' with the Union government for according 'in-principle' approval of diversion of 119.23 acres or 48.20 hectares of forestland. Incidentally, the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) had conducted a site inspection close to the current location and had turned down two other mining proposals in the past, by different project proponents. The inspection report carried out by the Deputy Conservator of Forests (Central) in 2017 stated that the area was mined from 1952 to 1998, and the original lease was split to many mining companies by the Department of Mines and Geology in violation of the Forest Conservation Act. The report also stated that 'currently, the forests are showing regeneration and during the visit there were direct sightings of chital, black-naped hare, while scats of sloth bear and leopard were also seen. The area, the report pointed out, sheltered migratory population of elephants from Bannerghatta National Park to Bhadra between September and December. The MoEF&CC also stated that the area was the only watershed for the villages surrounding Chikkanayanakahalli, a drought hit area and hence it would be prudent not to divert it for mining, from the watershed point of view and maintained for ecological restoration. Meanwhile, wildlife conservationist Giridhar Kulkarni has raised alarm over the Forest Department's decision to allow fresh mining in the ecologically sensitive forest areas of Tumakuru district, despite prior rejections of similar proposals by the MoEF&CC. Mr. Kulkarni, in a letter dated June 6, 2025, has appealed to Additional Chief Secretary (Forest, Ecology, and Environment) Anjum Parwez to reject the proposal seeking diversion of forestland for mining on the grounds that the area was rich in wildlife, acts as a critical watershed, and has already suffered from ecologically damaging mining practices in the past. He pointed out that the MoEF&CC inspection report has flagged the potential impact on waterbodies and recommended against any further mining. He warned that if approved, mining will further escalate human-wildlife conflict and undermine the ecological restoration under way in the region. Underlining the imperatives of rejecting the proposal, Mr. Kulkarni said the project will also have a negative bearing on the livelihood of the local communities in and around Chikkanayakanahalli. This is in addition to escalation of human-animal conflict, he added.
