AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF FOREST ADVISORY COMMITTEE SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 20th December, 2017 Nisheeth Saxena, Sr. AIGF (FC)
S. Area Page File No. Name of the proposal State Category No. (ha.) No. Proposal for diversion of 676.12 hectares of forest land in Rambilli and Kalavalapalli RFS of Visakhapatnam Division for setting up of Andhra 1. 8-70/2010-FC Naval Alternate Operating Base (NAOB) in 676.12 Defence 3 Pardesh favour of Project Director Varuna, Visakhapatnam.
Proposal for diversion of 120.4062 ha of forest land in favour of Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Jhalawar, Rajasthan for 2. 8-55/2017-FC Rajasthan 120.4062 Other 11 Extension of Kolana Air Strip of Existing run way from 1700 mtr to 3000 mtr in Jhalawar District, Rajasthan State.- regarding. Diversion of additional 32.3315 ha forest land for renewal of mining lease under TC no. 87/1953 located at village of Sanguem Taluka 8-62/2006-FC 3. in favour of M/s Sociedade Timblo Irmaos Goa 32.3315 Mining 17 (Vol.I) Limitada, represented by M/s Panduranga Timblo industries Goa in North Goa district of Goa.
11-91/2012- Fixing of dates of holding the meeting of FAC 4. Policy Issue 22 FC for the year 2018
Sandeep Sharma, AIGF (FC)
S. Area Page File No. Name of the proposal State Category No. (ha.) No. Diversion of 167.70 ha of Forest land for Iron Ore Mining in East Bhanupartappur Forest Division, Bhanupartappur, Distt. Kanker in 1 8-53/2017-FC Chhattisgarh 167.70 Mining 24 favour of M/s Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (CMDCL), Kanker Distt., Chhattisgarh. Diversion of 197.173 ha of forest land in favour of M/s SJVN, Limited for construction 2 8-59/2012-FC of 252 MW Devsari Hydro-electric Project on Uttrakhand 197.173 Hydro 34 Pinder River in Chamoli district of Uttarakhand. Application of M/s Navbharat Fuse Company Limited seeking approval of MoEF&CC under Section 2 (iii) of Forest Conservation 3 8-66/2016-FC Chhattisgarh 220.00 Mining 35 Act, 1980 concerning over 220.00 ha of forest land for Rasuli Iron Ore mining in Kanker District, Chhattisgarh.
1 | P a g e
Naresh Kumar, DIGF (FC)
S. Area Page File No. Name of the proposal State Category No. (ha.) No. Request for Exemption of NPV as per order dated 05.10.2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in I. A NO. 2863- 1. 7-78/2017-FC NPV Policy issue 41 64/2010 in W. P (C) No. 2002/1995 titled T. N. Godavarman Thirumalpad vs. Union of India and Others-reg. Request for Exemption of NPV as per order dated 05.10.2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in I. A NO. 2. 7-79/2017-FC NPV Policy issue 43 2666/2009 in W. P (C) No. 2002/1995 titled T. N. Godavarman Thirumalpad vs. Union of India and Others-reg. Request for Exemption of NPV as per order dated 05.10.2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in I. A NO. 3. 7-80/2017-FC NPV Policy issue 45 2388/2008 in W. P (C) No. 2002/1995 titled T. N. Godavarman Thirumalpad vs. Union of India and Others-reg.
ADDITIONAL AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF FOREST ADVISORY COMMITTEE SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 20th December, 2017 Nisheeth Saxena, Sr. AIGF (FC)
S. Area Page File No. Name of the proposal State Category No. (ha.) No. Proposal for diversion of 275.04 ha. of Forest Land in favour of Water Resources Department, Burhanpur Burhanpur for Madhya 1. 8-54/2017-FC 275.04 Irrigation 48 Construction of Bhawsa Medium Irrigation Pradesh Tank Project, in Burhanpur district in the State of Madhya Pradesh.- regarding.
2 | P a g e
Nisheeth Saxena, Sr. AIGF (FC) Agenda No. 1 File No. 8-70/ 2010-FC Sub. Proposal for diversion of 676.12 hectares of forest land in Rambilli and Kalavalapalli RFS of Visakhapatnam Division for setting up of Naval Alternate Operating Base (NAOB) in favour of Project Director Varuna, Visakhapatnam.
1. The State Government of Andhra Pradesh vide their letter dated 16.08.2010 had submitted a proposal to obtain prior approval of Central Government in accordance with section 2 of the Forest (conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of 676.12 hectares of forest land in Rambilli and Kalavalapalli RFS of Visakhapatnam Division for setting up of Naval Alternate Operating Base (NAOB) in favour of Project Director Varuna, Visakhapatnam.
2. The above subject proposal was placed before FAC in its meetings held on 03-04 April, 2013, 16.02.2016 and 21.09.2017.
3. Legal status of the land to be diverted is Reserved Forest. The density of the vegetation is 0.30
4. The forest land proposed for diversion contains 16,586 poles and 53318 trees . Important species available present are Acacia planiforns, Trema politoria, Glycosmis pentaphylla, Santalum album, Dodonaea viscosa, Canthium parviflorum, Pavetta tomentosa, Ziziphus xylopyrus, Manilkara hexandra, Cissus quandrangularis, Glycosmis , Ziziphus oenoplia, Desmodium gangeticum, Wrightia tinctoria, Atalantia monophylla, Carissa spinarum, Aganosma caryophyllata, Cassia siamea, Borassus flabellifer, Andrographis paniculata, Hemidesmus indicus, Aristolochia indica, Broom, Artemisia vulgaris, Phoenix sylvestris, Sapindus emarginatus, Aegle marmelos, Syzygium cumini, Cassia auriculata etc,
5. The area is plain to slightly sloping and is not vulnerable to any kind of erosion. No work in violation has been varied out over the area proposed to be diverted.
6. The proposed area for diversion does not form part of National Park, Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve, Tiger Reserve, Elephant Corridor etc.
7. There are no protected archaeological/ heritage site/ defence establishment or any other important monument is located in the area.
8. Compensatory afforestation is proposed to be raised on 1352.24 hectares of degraded forest land identified in Visakhapatnam Division (852.24 hectares) and Paderu Forest Division (500 hectares).
9. Detailed scheme for creation and maintenance of compensatory afforestation at an estimated outlay of Rs. 58, 21,27,265 has been prepared.
10. The proposal was recommended by the DFO, CF, Nodal Officer FCA and the State Government.
11. The User agency and the State Government of Andhra Pradesh had also submitted following additional information pertaining to the said proposal:
(i) A Naval base is being set up in Rambilli and S. Rayavaram Mandals in Visakhapatnam district.
(ii) While the land for the base has been acquired, there is further requirement of additional land for certain facilities. These facilities are required to be located in the close proximity of the Naval Base. The RF area in Rambilli and Kalvalapalli have been identified to be the most suitable for creation of these facilities.
(iii) The geographical location and topography of the forest area make it suitable for locating the project in the RF area.
(iv) The project being a strategic defence establishment, cost are not being disclosed and thus cost benefit analysis is not possible.
3 | P a g e
(v) No displacement of people is involved.
(vi) The Concerned DFO has proposed collection of following costs from the user agency:
(a) Existing VSS plantation: Rs. 23.758 lakhs
(b) Cost of natural Vegetation in Rambilli RF: Rs. 12.345 lakhs
(c) Cost of natural vegetation in Kalavapalli RF: 56.960 lakhs
12. The Forest land proposed to be diverted had been inspected by the Regional Office (Southern Zone), Bangalore of this Ministry. Important additional information furnished in the site inspection report submitted by the Regional Office, Southern Zone, Bangalore vide their letter dated 1.2.2013 are as below:
(i) Item-wise breakup details of the forest land proposed for diversion have not been furnished by the user agency.
(ii) Detailed project report is not submitted by user agency. The present proposal is an extension of NAOB (Naval Alternate Operating Base) at Ramabilli. It consists of two (2) parts involving number of constructions costing undisclosed expenditure. Details of construction activities proposed to be undertaken in technical area are not furnished. The non-technical/institutional area comprised of several buildings viz. administrative building, Communication building, technical storage, hardware and Kote Rooms, water supply pump and sump rooms, fire fighting Pump and sump buildings, MI building, CSD building, MP halls, garages, MRSS, DG set rooms, ISF accommodations, guard rooms, transit facility (officers) and transit facility (staff) etc.
(iii) Details of cost of project are not furnished by the user agency.
(iv) About 300 nos. of peacocks apart from the other common native birds are found in the proposed forest area. Lizards, Rattle snake, cobra and certain avifauna apart from other smaller mammals are native to the area proposed for diversion.
(v) Density of vegetation ranges from 0.30 to 0.40.
(vi) The forest land proposed for compensatory afforestation shown to the extent of 852.24 ha. and 500 ha. in Visakhapatnam and Paderu Forest Divisions respectively are found to be not suitable for the said purpose because of the following reasons:
(a) Visakhapatman Forest Division: The proposed forest land for CA to be taken up on degraded forest land in Visakhapatnam Forest Division is not suitable for raising CA because these forests are full of natural native miscellaneous forests while some forest areas are under VSS whereas some forest areas are already covered under different forest plantations of different species under State and Central Government schemes like CAMPA, JFM, CFM, ROFR Act apart from certain encroachments etc. ROFR- Phase-II is scheduled for further implementation.
(b) Paderu Forest Division: The forest land shown for CA in this Division are mostly top rocky hill areas. Some portions are prone to shifting cultivation/ podu cultivation. Some areas have already been released to the local tribal individuals and communities under ROFR Act in Phase-I. Now it is learnt that State Government is proposing to take up Phase-II under ROFR Act as per the amended ROFR Rules. It is reported that there are certain encroachments on the proposed land for CA. Hence there is reasonable apprehension and doubt to get the already proposed land for CA since the proposal was made long back.
(vii) As per the proposal submitted by Govt. of AP, there is no involvement of RR package. However, it is observed that there is a black top road passing through the RF connecting the different villages in and around the Reserved Forest proposed for diversion. If the proposal comes through positively, the existing VSS from the nearby villages and villages as such will be disturbed. It needs to be comprehensively examined in the holistic manner from the dimension of RR (Rehabilitation and Resettlement) to avoid potential civil law and order problems that are likely to arise in the wake of the proposal taking ultimate shape.
4 | P a g e
(viii) Proposal involves diversion of two RFs spreading over an area of 676.112 hectares comprising two large sized hills which constitute the catchment area for all the agricultural lands under cultivation in the area. If these two hills consisting of natural forests are diverted, certainly it may have a deleterious effect & impact on soil moisture content and water tables in the surrounding areas having housing colonies as well as cultivated agricultural lands miles together all around. It may also have tangible, intangible as well as untenable effects on the wells, bore-wells, tube wells, water tanks/ water bodies etc. In view of this it is suggested that CAT plan consisting of Integrated Watershed Management/ multi sectoral approach with the Forest Department as the Nodal Agency needs to be considered with the policy of people’s active participation for implementation.
(ix) Forest land proposed for diversion does not have any cultural/religious or archaeological heritage sites. However, these forest lands are grazing and fodder ground for the local cattle population including the milch animals, a source of livelihood for the surrounding villages.
(x) The detailed project report (DPR) is not furnished to examine the project in holistic manner.
(xi) Alternatives examined with a balance sheet of merit and demerits are not furnished.
(xii) Vast stretches of revenue lands with hills/ hillocks are available on the sea-shore all along the east- coast in Visakhapatnam district which are suitable for the proposal of NAOB Phase-II. However, this alternative is not examined by User Agency.
(xiii) Reasons for this Phase-II of NAOB proposal as second thought while the massive Integrated Plan for Phase-I of NAOB is already under implementation and what made user agency to come up with this proposal at this belated stage are not made available. Why user agency did not include this Phase-II package proposal of NAOB in the earlier proposal itself, which is already under the initial stage of construction is not understood.
(xiv) Approval of proposal by the Central Government may be made with a stipulated conditions not to lease/ sub-lease diverted forest land by user agency to any other user agency without approval of Central Government.
(xv) If proposal is approved by Central Government, User Agency should not take up mining in the forest land so diverted or any other activity other than what is proposed and approved in this regard.
(xvi) Fresh suitable degraded forest land to take up compensatory afforestation double the extent of forest land proposed for diversion shall be identified by Forest Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh.
13. Addl. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Central), Regional Office (Southern Zone), Bangalore recommended diversion of the said forest land, with the following conditions in addition to the usual conditions:
(i) No tree felling/ construction shall be done in the portion where the activities are the activities are proposed to be taken up underground. The area shall be protected and preserved.
(ii) The user agency shall furnish a map in 1: 10000 scale, indicating the area where constructions are proposed and where underground activities are proposed;
(iii) The user agency shall obtain and furnish consent of gram sabhas of the concerned villages dependent on the forest land being considered for diversion.
(iv) The state Government shall identify revenue land double in extent to the area being considered for diversion for CA.
(v) User agency shall give all the details of construction/ activities. No other activities including mining/ quarrying activities or construction of commercial/residential buildings will be taken up in the area being considered for diversion and an undertaking to this effect shall be furnished by the User Agency.
5 | P a g e
14. The FAC had in its meeting held on 3rd April 2013 also observed that Ministry received a letter dated 6.2.2012 on the above-mentioned subject from the Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO). The following has been indicated in the said letter:
(a) Due to strategic reasons, the Ministry of Defence has decided to change the name of the applicant/ implementing department i.e. from Navy to DRDO for pursuing the proposal for diversion of 676.12 hectares of forest land in Rambilli and Kalavalapalli Visakhapatnam district.
(b) Navy has agreed/ consented to approach the MoEF for doing the needful and give NOC.
(c) In pursuance of provisions contained in para 2.8 under the heading Transfer of Lease contained in the Handbook of Forest Conservation act, 1980 and guidelines and clarification (upto Jun 2004), DRDO is willing to abide by all the conditions on which the forest land is proposed to be leased to the original user and any other conditions which may be stipulated by the Central/ State Govt. in future.
15. A letter to communicate recommendation of the FAC to the State Government of Andhra Pradesh was issued dated 25/04/2013 (Pg.95-97/c) and further reminded on 16/10/2014 (Pg.110-110/c) informing the Government of Andhra Pradesh that, “……the user agency being a Central Government Undertaking as per the provision of para 3.2 (ix) guidelines issued under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, Compensatory Afforestation may be raised on degraded forest land twice in extent of forest area being diverted.”
16. The State Government of Andhra Pradesh Environment, Forests, Science & Technology (Section .II) Department vide their letter No. 6252/Section.II/2010 dated 21.12.2015 had forwarded information sought vide Ministry’s letter dated 25/04/2015. The point wise details given by the State Government of Andhra Pradesh are as below and the same were considered by the FAC in its meeting held on 16/02/2016.:-
S. Objection raised by the GoI, MoEF & Reply submitted by the Government of Andhra No. CC Pradesh The degraded forest land proposed to be In this regard the State Government informed that the 1. utilized for compensatory Afforestation, user agency has given an undertaking that it will pay in Visakhapatnam and Paderu Forest the C.A. amount towards raising of C.A. plantation in Divisions are found to be not suitable for degraded Forest areas twice the extent of Forest area the said purpose. diverted. The degraded Forest areas proposed for C.A. 1352.24 ha in Visakhapatnam and Paderu Divisions (Visakhapatnam 852.24 ha Paderu 500.00 Ha) are newly selected areas for this project as the previous proposed areas are cancelled due to GoI comments. Proposal involves diversion of two RFs In this regard the State Government informed that the 2. spreading over an area of 676.112 user agency has replied that the observation conveyed hectares comprising two large sized hills in respect of the deleterious effect and impact on soil which constitute the catchment area for moisture content and the water table have been all the agricultural lands under reviewed and taken into the consideration by that cultivation in the area. If these two hills organization. The organization also expressed deep consisting of natural forests are diverted, concerned about the preservation of the environment certainly it may have a deleterious effect and our National forest assets. It once again confirmed & impact on soil moisture content and that the total construction area will not cover more water table in the surrounding areas than 4.80 acres of the forest land and usage of the area having housing colonies as well as / breaking of ground will be as under:-
cultivated agricultural lands miles 3.10 acres together all around. It may also have (a) Strategic Technical Area tangible, intangible as well as untenable 1.10 acres (b) Command & Control Area effects on the wells, bore-wells, tube 0.60 acres wells, water tanks/ water bodies etc., (c) Strategic Institutional Area 4.80 acres (or) 1.94 ha TOTAL:
6 | P a g e
The balance area i.e. 674.18 Ha (i.e. 676.12 Ha. – 1.94 Ha.) is essentially required in view of the safety security and cordoning off the area. The user agency has to reiterate that no activities, which may cause deleterious effect on the ground water regime of the area, will be taken up. Construction activities will be restricted to 4.80 acres (or) 1.94 Ha. only as the organization. The forest land proposed to be diverted In this regard the State Government informed that the 3. is required for extension of Naval user agency has stated that, not more than 4.80 acres Alternate Operating Base (NAOB) at of the forest land will be used for the construction Ramabilli. The project consists of two activities. The details of the construction activities (2) parts involving number of cannot be disclosed being classified Defence Project. constructions costing undisclosed expenditure. Details of construction activities proposed to be undertaken in technical area are not furnished. The non-technical/institutional area comprised of several buildings viz. administrative building, communication building, technical storage, hardware and kote rooms, water supply pump and pump rooms, fire fighting Pump and sump buildings, MI building, CSD building, MP halls, garages, MRSS, DG set rooms, ISF accommodations, guard rooms, transit facility (officers) and transit facility (staff) Item-wise breakup details of the forest land proposed for diversion have not been furnished by the user agency. Vast stretches of revenue lands with In this regard the State Government informed that the 4. hills/ hillocks are available on the sea- user agency stated that a thorough survey and shore all along the east-coast in reconnaissance was carried out by the organization in Visakhapatnam district which are view to select that site for important Defence project. suitable for the proposal of NAOB The survey included areas / hills viz. S. Rayavaram, Phase-II. However, this alternative is Dimili, Mamidivada, Sitapalem, Z.Chintuva etc. It not examined by User Agency; and was found that the land under RFs at Rambilli and Kalavalapalli are only technically and strategically suitable for the very important Defence project under DRDO. Reasons for this Phase-II of NAOB In this regard the State Government informed that the 5. proposal appears to be a second thought user agency has stated that, the proposed defence as the massive Integrated Plan for project under DRDO is independent of the projects Phase-I of NAOB is already under under NAOB and it is not a second thought. implementation and what made user agency to come up with this proposal at this belated stage are not made available. Reasons for non-inclusion of Phase-II package proposal of NAOB in the earlier proposal itself, which is already under the initial stage of construction, is not understood.
17. The FAC in its meeting held on 16.02.2016 also observed that the certificate regarding settlement of rights in accordance with the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
7 | P a g e
(Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 had been countersigned by the District Collector, Visakhapatnam but was incomplete and copy of the same issued by the competent authority under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, is not completed and the consent Gram Sabhas resolution has been submitted in vernacular language. The User Agency had also mentioned in letter addressed to DFO Vishakapatnam dated 21.09.2015 that in spite of concerted effort the consents could not be obtained. The Gram Sabha has refused to extend their consent and it was requested to process the issue related to diversion of the land in subject without the consent of the Gram Sabha. 18. The FAC on 16.02.2016 after consideration of all the details as above and after hearing the user agency carried out detailed deliberations and recommended that the following information be sought from the State Government: 1. The DGPS co-ordinates of the site proposed to be diverted. 2. The DGPS co-ordinates of the CA site and the suitability certificate of the site by the competent authority. 3. The FRA compliance, complete in all respects as per the requisite format be submitted. 19. The above said proposal was last considered in FAC meeting held on 21.09.2017. 20. The FAC on 16.02.2016 observed that the proposal involves diversion of two RFs spreading over an area of 676.112 hectares comprising two large sized hills which constitute the catchment area for all the agricultural lands under cultivation in the area. If these two hills consisting of natural forests are diverted, certainly it may have a deleterious effect & impact on soil moisture content and water tables in the surrounding areas having housing colonies as well as cultivated agricultural lands miles together all around. It may also have tangible, intangible as well as untenable effects on the wells, bore-wells, tube wells, water tanks/ water bodies etc. In view of this it is suggested that CAT plan consisting of Integrated Watershed Management/ multi sectoral approach with the Forest Department as the Nodal Agency needs to be considered with the policy of people’s active participation for implementation.In this regard, the State Government informed that the user agency has replied that the observation conveyed in respect of the deleterious effect and impact on soil moisture content and the water table have been reviewed and taken into the consideration by that organization. The organization also expressed deep concerned about the preservation of the environment and our National forest assets. It once again confirmed that the total construction area will not cover more than 4.80 acres or 1.94 ha of the forest land and usage of the area / breaking of ground will be as under:- (a) Strategic Technical Area 3.10 acres (b) Command & Control Area 1.10 acres (c) Strategic Institutional Area 0.60 acres TOTAL: 4.80 acres (or) 1.94 ha The balance area i.e. 674.18 Ha (i.e. 676.12 Ha. – 1.94 Ha.) is essentially required in view of the safety security and cordoning off the area. The user agency has to reiterate that no activities, which may cause deleterious effect on the ground water regime of the area, will be taken up. Construction activities will be restricted to 1.94 Ha. only. Regarding FRA compliance the State Government informed that the District Collector Visakhapatnam, Government of Andhra Pradesh has issued a FRA Certificate vide his letter No. 1297/2016/F4 dated 22.07.2016 in the format prescribed by MoEF&CC, stating that complete process for identification and settlement of rights, diversion of forest land for facilities managed by the Government and safeguarding the rights of Primitive Tribal Group and Pre-Agricultural Communities as required under the Scheduled Tribe and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 has been carried out and proposal was discussed in the meeting of concerned Gram Sabha (s) maintaining the prescribed quorum. The Gram Sabha has certified that no claims under the FRA, 2006 are pending in the forest land. Documentary evidences in support of settlements of rights under the Scheduled Tribe and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.
8 | P a g e
After careful consideration of the facts placed before it on 21.09.2017 and placed on web portal of forest clearance of this Ministry FAC observed that: a) Regional Office, Chennai will inspect the site for diversion and compensatory afforestation and shall submit its evaluation report to this Ministry within 30 days.
21. The above recommendation of FAC held on 21.09.2017 was communicated to the Regional Office (South Eastern Zone), Chennai vide this Ministry’s letter dated 06th October, 2017 (Pg. 272/c).
24. The Regional Office (South Eastern Zone) Chennai vide their letter No. 4-APA733/2010-BAN/865 20th November, 2017 (Pg. 273-281/c) has been forwarded a Site Inspection Report for proposed land for diversion and Compensatory Afforestation land has been carried out by the APCCF (C) on 10.11.2017 and based on the site inspection and available information a report is submitted as below:-
(i) Introduction
The State Government of Andhra Pradesh vide their letter dated 16.08.2010 had submitted a proposal to obtain prior approval of Central Government in accordance with Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 for diversion of 676.12 ha. of forest land in Rambilli and Kalavalapalli RFs of Visakhapatnam Division for setting up of Naval Alternate Operating Base (NAOB) in favour of Project Director Varuna, Visakhapatnam. Detailed project report has not been submitted by the User Agency for security reasons. Though there is no copy of project report available in the minutes of FAC meetings held so far, site inspection report carried out earlier by the Regional Office, Bangalore, present inspection in the field and discussion with forest officials. It is further mentioned in the SIR that the forest land proposed to be diverted had been inspected by the then Regional Office (SZ), Bangalore and the site inspection report was submitted by them on 01.02.2013. It was pointed out that the proposal involves diversion of two RFs spreading over an area of 676.12 ha. Comprising two large sized hills, which constitute the catchment area for all the agricultural lands under cultivation in the area. If these two hills consisting of natural forests are diverted, certainly, it may have a deleterious effect and impact on soil moisture content and water tables in the surrounding areas having housing colonies as well as cultivated agricultural lands miles together all around. It may also have tangible, intangible as well as untenable effects on the wells, bore-wells, tube wells, water tanks/ water bodies, etc. In view of this, it was suggested that CAT Plan consisting of Integrated Watershed Management/ multi-sectoral approach with the Forest Department as the Nodal Agency needs to be considered with the policy of people’s active participation for implementation. The Additional PCCF (Central), RO (SZ), Bangalore had recommended diversion of the forest land with certain conditions. The proposal had been discussed in the FAC meeting held on 3-4 April 2013 in the MoEF and it had been decided to send a copy of the site inspection report received from RO (SZ), Bangalore to the State Government of Andhra Pradesh for their comments on the issues raised in the said report. In response to the above, the State Government informed that the user agency had replied that the observation conveyed in respect of the deleterious effect and impact on soil moisture content and the water table had been reviewed and taken into consideration by that organisation. The organisation also expressed deep concern about the preservation of the environment and National Forests Assets. The user agency confirmed that the total construction area will not cover more than 4.80 acres or 1.92 ha. of the forest land. The balance area, i.e. 674.18 ha. is essentially required for safety, security and cordoning off the area. The present proposal is an extension of Naval Alternate Operating Base (NAOB) at Rambilli. It is also informed that the Ministry of Defence has decided to change the name of the user agency from Navy to DRDO for strategic reasons and the DRDO has agreed to abide by the rules and regulations in this regard. The FAC has considered the comments of the State Government in its meeting held on 16.02.2016 and again on 21.09.2017. It was decided to request the Regional Office, Chennai to inspect the site and submit its evaluation to the Ministry at the earliest.
9 | P a g e
(ii) Location of the Project
Naval base is being set up in Rambilli and S. Rayavaram Mandals in Visakhaptnam District of Andhra Pradesh. The RF areas in Rambilli and Kalavalapalli have been identified for creation of certain additional facilities connected with the Naval base. (iii) The floristic composition
The important species found are Acacia planiforns, Trema politoria, Glycosmis pentaphuylla, Santalum album, Dodonaea viscosa, Canthium parviflorum, Pavetta tomentosa, Ziziphus xylopyrus, Manilkara hexandra, Cissus quandrangularis, Glycosmis, Ziziphus oenoplia, Desmodium gangeticum, Wrightia tinctoria, Atalantia monphylla, Carissa spinarum, Aganosma caryophyllata, Cassia siamea, Borassus flaberllifer, Andrographis paniculata, Hemidesmus indicus, Aristolochia indica, Artemisia vulgaris, Phoenix sylvestris, Sapindus emarginatus, Aegle marmelos, Syszygium cumini, Cassia auriculata, etc. Though the vegetation exist, the same are shrubby in nature with density varying from 0.30 to 0.40. (iv) Fauna
Lizarda, Rattle, Snake, Cobra and certain avifauna apart from other smaller mammals are native to the area proposed. (v) The Compensatory Afforestation.
Subsequent to the reservations expressed by the Regional Office, the State Government has submitted the revised areas for CA in the Visakhapatnam and Paderu Divisions. This time, it appears that they have taken reasonable care in suggesting suitable areas mostly in the foot hills though in number of small bits. Following area were inspected:- a) Chondpally in Pandchadirla RF area. This area of 23.9 ha. is mostly consisting of eucalyptus plantation with scattered trees. b) Nayanapalem area in Yellamanchili beat of 7.31 ha. with plain lands below hillock. c) Mettapalem – 8.02 ha. immediately after current teak plantation. d) Somannapalem – 6.36 ha. in Vemagiri RF, which are areas immediately after eucalyptus plantation raised by Forest Corporation.
(vi) Remarks and Recommendations of Additional PCCF (Central)
It is observed as below:- a) It is seen that the RF areas at Rambilli and Kalavalapally are degraded forest areas with shrubby growth of vegetation. It is informed by the State Government that only 4.80 acres or 1.92 ha. out of 676.12 ha. is essentially required for construction purposes and remaining area of 674.18 ha. is for safety, security and cordoning off the area.
b) It is also informed that thorough survey and reconnaissance were carried out by the organization to select the sites for important defence project. The survey included areas like S. Royavaram, Dimili, Mamidivada, Sitapalem, Z. Chintuva, etc. and only after that the lands under RFs at Rambilli and Kalavalapalli are found suitable. It is verified in the field and after discussion with local villagers, it is seen that the defence authorities already acquired the lands in K.G Palem Panchayat, taken over also and compound wall is also built. It is also informed that hillocks under revenue department are also taken over in Y. Loha village. It is also seen that these Reserve Forest areas act as camouflage purpose for defence needs and are adjacent to Sharada river, which flows closely and enters the sea at whose mouth the important defence project is coming up. Since the construction area itself is very meagre, i.e., 1.94 ha. out of 676.12 ha., minimum disturbances for forest areas is anticipated.
10 | P a g e
c) CA Areas: It appears that the State Government has submitted new CA area, which is mostly in plains. But, they are in small bits, which are scattered and proper demarcation of all the bits have to be maintained by the Forest Department for proper record and monitoring in future. The respective DFOs have given site suitability certificates and certain bits inspected by the undersigned on 10.11.2017 are found to be suitable for carrying out CA. It is seen that the Shape files / KML file may have to be obtained from the State Government both for diversion areas and CA areas.
d) It is informed that the RoFR certificated in proper formats are obtained from the collector.
e) As minimum areas is going to be utilized for construction purposes and keeping in view the security and strategic purposes for which the diversion is proposed by the State Government of Andhra Pradesh and as all the modalities were worked out by the user agency, such as, commitment towards CA and RoFR certificates, etc. the proposal is recommended with usual conditions. In view of the above, it is proposed that the above facts of the proposal may be placed before FAC in its forthcoming meeting scheduled to be held on 20th December, 2017 for its consideration and appropriate recommendation. ****
Agenda No. 2 F. No. 8-55/2017-FC
Sub: Proposal for diversion of 120.4062 ha of forest land in favour of Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Jhalawar, Rajasthan for Extension of Kolana Air Strip of Existing run way from 1700 mtr to 3000 mtr in Jhalawar District, Rajasthan State.- regarding. 1. The State Government of Rajasthan vide their letter No. P. 1(56) Van/2004 part Jaipur dated 17th October, 2017 submitted the above mentioned proposal seeking prior approval of the Central Government under Section-2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. 2. The facts related to the proposal as contained in the State Government’s letter dated 17th October, 2017 are given below in the form of fact sheet: FACT SHEET
1. Name of the Proposal Diversion of 120.4062 ha of forest land in favour of Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Jhalawar, Rajasthan for Extension of Kolana Air Strip of Existing run way from 1700 mtr to 3000 mtr in Jhalawar District, Rajasthan State. 2. Location (i) State Rajasthan (ii) District Jhalawar 3. Particulars of Forests: (i) Name of Forest Division and Jhalawar Territorial Forest Division. =120.4062 hectares. Forest area involved.
(ii) Legal status/Sy. No. Protected Forest Land.
(iii) Map i. SOI Toposheet – Pg. 115/c. ii. Digital DGPS map- Not submitted. However, google imagery has been submitted at Pg. 116- 119/c. iii. Lay out Plan – Pg. 114/c. iv. Compensatory Afforestation –Pg. 122/c.
11 | P a g e
4. Total period for which the forest 99 years. land is proposed to be diversion (In years) 5. Topography of the area - 6. (i) Geology - (ii) Vulnerability to erosion Medium soil erosion prone area. 7. (i) Vegetation Eco-Class – 3
(ii) Density 0.2 8. Working plan prescription for the Plantation Circle. forest land proposed for diversion. 9. Brief note on vulnerability of the Medium soil erosion prone area. forest area to erosion. 10. The sensitivity of the forest region Not mentioned in the proposal. for soil protection. 11. Details wildlife present in and around Jackal, Fox, rabbit, neelgay. the forest land proposed for diversion:-
12. Whether area is significant from No wildlife point of view 13. Whether forms part of National park, No. Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve, Tiger Reserve, Elephant Corridor, etc. (if so, details of the area and comments of the Chief Wildlife Warden to be annexed). 14. Whether the forest land proposed for Yes, diversion is located within eco- sensitive zone (ESZ) of the protected Diversion proposal consists of 120.40 ha. of Mundari area notified under Wildlife protected area and ramdi protected area and jackal, (Protection) Act, 1972 (Note: In case, fox, rabbit, neelgay hyena etc., animals are inside the ESZ of a Protected Area is not forest land proposed for diversion, besides it, notified, then 10 kms distance from mukundra tiger reserve is located 6.5 Km. from boundary of the Protected Area proposed diverted land. Notification of ESZ is under should be treated as ESZ): process. 15. Whether any RET species of flora and No rare/endangered species of flora & fauna were found in fauna are found in the area. If so the area. details thereof 16. Whether any protected There is no protected archaeological/heritage site/defense archaeological/ heritage site/defence establishment in the proposed area. establishment or any other important monuments is located in the area. 17. Whether any work of in violation of Yes, the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has been carried out (Yes/No). If yes details of the same including period of work done, action taken on erring officials. Whether work in violation is still in progress. a) Details of violation (s): The first phase work done without proper sanction. b) Period of Work done (Year): 2008 c) Area of Forest land 9.71 ha involved in violation (in ha.): d) Whether work in violation is Yes still in progress (Yes/No):
12 | P a g e
e) Name of persons responsible
for violation:
S. No. Name Design ation & Add. Action
still in still
s files in
progress.
court and
Complaint
1. K.K. Mathur XEN PWD Jhalawar
file in
2. V. S. Chitle AEN PWD Jhalawar Complaint s court and in still progress
3. K.K. Dagal JEN PWD Jhalawar Complai nts file in court and still in progress
18. Whether the requirement of forest Yes land as proposed by the user agency in col. 2 of Part-I is unavoidable and barest minimum for the project, if no recommended area item-wise with details of alternatives examined. 19. Whether clearance under the Yes, Environment (protection) Act, 1986 As reported by the User Agency the EC application yet is required? to be submitted. 20. Status of Wildlife Clearance; Yes As reported by the User Agency the EC application yet to be submitted. 21. Compensatory Afforestation - (i) Details of non-forest Not reported area/degraded forest area identified for CA, its distance from adjoining forest, number of patches, sixe of each patches. (ii) Detailed CA scheme including Detailed CA scheme on 120.4062 ha on non-forest land, species to be planted, including species to be planted, implementing agency, time implementing agency, time schedule, cost structure has been submitted copy of the schedule, cost structure, etc. same are available at (Pg. 132-179/c). (iii) Total financial outlay for CA 186.23 lakhs
(iv) Certificate from the competent Area is Suitable for Plantation (Pg. 131/c). authority regarding suitability of the area identified for CA and from management point of view. 22. Catchment Area Treatment NA 23. Rehabilitation of Oustees No displacement. a) No of families involved b) Category of families c) Details of rehabilitation plan 24. Compliance of Scheduled Tribe and The District Collector, Jhalawar, Government of Rajasthan Other Traditional Forest Dwellers vide his letter No. 2750 dated 14.03.2017 (Pg. 24/c) has (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, issued a FRA certificate for diversion of 120.4062 ha of 2006 forest land in favour of Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Jhalawar, Jhalawar District, Rajasthan State.
13 | P a g e
However, the State Government / user agency has not submitted the FRA certificate in prescribed format as per Ministry’s guideline dated 05.07.2013. 25. Cost Benefit Ratio 6.35, (Pg. 35-38/c) However, it is not prepared on latest guideline dated 01.08.2017.
26. Total Cost of the Project (Rupees in 16911 lakhs. lakhs) 27. Employment Potential Permanent / 500 permanent Temporary 420000 Temporary 28. Recommendation Recommended subject to condition (pg. 196-197/c): i. DFO Proposal is recommended for acceptance with penal of FCA violation and reimbursement of incurred expenditure of Rs. 27.474 lakhs in lieu of plantation. ii. CCF Recommended (pg. 181-182/c) iii. Nodal Officer Recommended (pg. 183/c) iv. State Government Recommended (pg.184/c) 29. District Profile (i) Total Geographical area of the 601000 hectares. district (ii) Total Forest area/Divisional 115095 hectares. Forest area (iii) Total area diverted since 1980 with number of cases. 20 cases 1536.959 hectares. (iv) Total CA stipulated since 1980 a. Forest land including penal CA 0 b. Non Forest Land - (v) Progress of Compensatory Afforestation 19.5.2017 a. Forest land 292.79 hectares. b. Non Forest land 63.62 hectares.
The authorities in the State Forest Department and the State Government have recommended the proposal with specific condition. 3. Site Inspection report- proposed diversion of 120.4062 hectare of forest land in favour of Public Works Department for extension of existing Runway of Kolana Air Strip in Jhalawar District of Rajasthan. REFERENCE: MoEF&CC letter no. F.No.8-55/2017-FC. Dated 07-11-2017 Date of Inspection: 15.11.2017. Name and Designation of Inspection officer: K.K. Tiwary, CF (Central)
4. The site inspection of the proposal was carried out by CF (Central) in presence of following officers:
Sri Indraraj Singh APCCF Kota Sri R.S.Jhavar Superintending Engineer Public Works Department Jhalawar Sri S.P Goyal Executive Engineer PWD, Jhwlawar
Others officers/Field staff of the user agency and Forest Department were also present. 5. The report of the site inspection in prescribed Performa is as follows: (i) Legal status of the forest land proposed for diversion.
14 | P a g e
Protected Forest of Block Ramdi C and Munderi under Jhalawar Forest Division. Proposed forest area includes a patch of 10 ha. medicinal plantation undertaken by National Medicinal plantation Board and two plantation raised in Ramdi (2012-13) and Munderi forests(2013-14) of 20 ha. & 25 ha. respectively. (ii) Item wise break up details of the forest land proposed for diversion: The existing runway at Kolana airstrip is 1700 mtr in length and 30 mt in width. The runway is proposed to be extended up to 3000 mt with 60 mt width to facilitate landing of commercial flights. In addition, Taxiway apron & terminal station have to be constructed. A safety zone of 150 mt all along the airstrip and vacant land of 450 mt is required to be maintained at both ends of the airstrip. A copy of the Layout plan for proposed extension of airstrip is enclosed. (Pg.192/c). Out of 120.4062 ha of forest land proposed for diversion, 79.52 ha is proposed for maintaining safety zone and 2.187 ha is proposed for realignment/ shifting of the existing Mega Highway. The component wise breakup is as follows-
Sl. Particulars Forest Non-Forest Total Area(Ha) No. Land(Ha) Land(Ha) 1. Extension of Air Strip 7.62 11.61 19.23 2. Taxiway Apron 9.26 9.64 18.90 3. Terminal Station 21.81 0.00 21.81 4. Mega Highway 2.187 9.56 11.747 5. Safety Zone 79.52 50.9224 130.4424 6. Total Requirement 120.4062 ha. 81.7324 202.1386 (iii) Whether proposal involves any construction of buildings (including residential) or not. If yes, details thereof. The existing airstrip spreads over 49.99 hectare of land having a runway of 1700 mtrs and VIP Lounge. The proposal involves construction of Terminal Station & taxiway apron besides extension of air strip up to 3000 mt and of boundary wall all the periphery of extended area. (iv) Total cost of project at present rates. 16911 Lacs. (v) Wild – Life (Whether forest area proposed for diversion is important from wildlife point of view or not.) Mukundra Tiger Reserve is located about 4 km. from proposed site. Notification of Eco-Sensitive Zone (ESZ) is under process. Jackal, Fox, Rabbit, Neelgay, Hynea etc. have been reported in the area. No rare/endangered/unique species of flora and fauna are reported in the area. (vi) Vegetation: Eco- Class- III with density 0.2 Total number of trees to be felled.- 1212 Effect of remobval of trees on the general ecosystem in the area. Not applicable Important species: Azadiracta indica, Anogeiuss Latifolia, Alibizza Procera, Acalia nilotica, Dillanthes excels, Mangifera indica), Syzaziuum cumini, Madhuca indica. Number of trees to be felled of girth below 60 cm. ---1183 Number of trees to be felled of girth above 60 cm. ----29 Background not on proposal. At present Kolana airstrip is situated about 4 km away from Jhalawar towards Jhalawar-Baran road. It was constructed in the year 2005 to cater to the needs of local administration. Jhalawar-Kota region over the years has emerged as an important centre having potential for huge investment and growth. Several infrastructural and industrial projects are in pipeline in the region. However, Jhalawar-Kota region has
15 | P a g e
got no operational airport in vicinity which is views as a barrier to rapid economic growth and social development in the region. The proposed extension of airstrip is supposed to augment the air connectivity of the area which in turn is expected to create a large multiplier effect in terms of investments, tourism development and employment generation in the area. (v) Compensatory Afforestation:
Compensatory Afforestation is proposed in equivalent non-forest area of 120.4062 Hectare with details as below-
S. Proposed area District Legal Status Area in ha. No. 1. Village- Harnawada Jhalawar Non-Forest Land 120.4062 Tehsil- Gangdhar Total Area in ha. 120.4062
a) Whether land for compensatory afforestation is suitable for plantation and management point of view or not. Yes. The proposed area for compensatory afforestation is adjacent to Salariya Forest block. b) Whether land for compensatory afforestation is free from encroachment/other encumbrances. The proposed Land is reported to be free from encroachment and other encumbrances. Certificate of concerned DFO in this regard is enclosed (Pg.193/c). c) Whether land for compensatory afforestation is important from religious / archaeological point of view. No d) Land identified for raising compensatory afforestation is in how many patches, whether patches are compact or not. Proposed at one location in two adjoining Patches of 82.09 ha and 38.3162 ha (Total-120.4062 ha.) e) Total financial outlay: 183.23 Lacs (vi) Whether proposal involves violation of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 or not. If yes, a detailed report on violation including action taken against the concerned officials:
Commencement or work at Airstrip without obtaining permission under FC Act is reported in this case and area of violation is recorded to be 9.71 hectare. An FIR (No. 19 dated 28.11.2008) is reported to be lodged against 3 officials of PWD for the said violation. (Reference Report of DCF in Part-ii of the Proposal. A Copy of Offence Report (1st page) Dt. 28.11.2008 as made available by DCF, Jhalawar is enclosed (Pg. 195/c). (vii) Whether proposal involves rehabilitation of displaced persons. If yes, whether rehabilitation plan has been prepared by the State Government or not. No & not applicable. (viii) Reclamation Plan: Not Applicable. (ix) Details of catchment and command area under the project.
For extension of Airstrip lands at Kolana, Mandawar, Kherasi, and adjoining villages are proposed to be utilized. A water body is located in the vicinity of existing airstrip. Extension of airstrip is not likely to have any direct adverse impact on the water body. However, conversation measures may be taken up at the project cost. Cost benefit ratio: Benefit / Cost ratio of the project is reported to be 6.35 (x) Recommendation of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest / State Government.
Recommended by the Nodal Officer, FC Act & State Govt.
16 | P a g e
(xi) Utility of the project.
An airstrip at Jhalawar has already been constructed in the year 2004-05 but due to limited runway sixe & non availability of allied infrastructure required for commercial operation, the uses of airstrip is limited to administrative flights only. The existing airstrip is proposed to be updated for commercial operations to strengthen regional connectivity by air. Terminal station, Taxiway, Apron Hanger etc. are required for commercial flight operations. (xii) Numbers of Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribes to be benefited by the project.
Not furnished by the User Agency/ State Government. Whether land being diverted has any socio-cultural/religious value. No. (xiii) Whether any sacred grove or very old growth trees/forests exit in the areas proposed for diversion. No
Whether the land under diversion forms part of any unique eco-system. No. (xiv) Situation W.R.T. any P.A. Mukundra Tiger Reserve is located at about 4 km form the existing airstrip. Notification of eco sensitive zone (ESZ) around tiger reserve is in process.
(xv) Any other information relating to the project: (a) The extension of airstrip that is proposed in the Forest Area is in the direction moving away from Mukundra Tiger Reserve and is stated to be as per technical requirement (as per ICAO standard and DGCA guidelines). Construction of terminal station, Taxiway, Apron, ahanger etc. have been proposed to make commercial operations feasible. (b) The project involves shifting of Megha Highway from Jhalawar to Baran and a police station situated in the area to accommodate extension of airstrip.
(xvi) Recommendation: a) Diversion of Proposed 120.4062 hectare of Forest land may be considered on usual terms and conditions along with Penal provisions as applicable. b) The area of eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) around Mukundra Tiger Reserve has not been delineated. In absence of such delineation, the conditions stipulated regarding activities within 10 km from boundaries of wildlife Sanctuary should be made applicable. All the activities permitted should be governed by the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the rules made thereunder and be regulated in the manner specified. c) Process regarding delineation / notification of ESZ may be taken up expeditiously to remove operational difficulties, if any, with the prescriptions/guidelines of ESZ as applicable. d) Adequate Measures for protection and conservation of the water bodies located near the proposed Airport complex should be taken up at the project cost.
In view of the above facts related to the proposal, if approved, the proposal may be submitted to the FAC in its forthcoming meeting scheduled to be held on 20.12.2017. ****
Agenda No. 3 F. No. 8-62/2006-FC (vol.I)
Sub: Diversion of additional 32.3315 ha forest land for renewal of mining lease under TC no. 87/1953 located at village of Sanguem Taluka in favour of M/s Sociedade Timblo Irmaos Limitada, represented by M/s Panduranga Timblo industries Goa in North Goa district of Goa.
The State Government of Goa vide their letter no. 6-13-(149)/2009-FD/1802 dated 30.06.2010 (F/R) submitted the above subject proposal for seeking prior approval under Section-2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
17 | P a g e
2. Facts contain in the state government’s letter dated 30.06.2010 are given in below:
1. Name of the Proposal Diversion of additional 32.3315 ha forest land for renewal of mining lease under TC no. 87/1953 located at village of Sanguem Taluka in favour of M/s Sociedade Timblo Irmaos Limitada, represented by M/s Panduranga Timblo industries Goa in North Goa district of Goa.
2. Location i) State Goa
ii) District North Goa
3. Particulars of Forests a) Name of Forest Division North Goa Division
b) Forest area involved 32.3315 ha
c) Legal Status/Sy. No Unclassed Forest (Working Plan)
d) Map -
4. Topography of the area -
5. (i) Vegetation Sisam, Matti, Kindal, Zambo, Nano, Kumbyo, Kudo, Hedu, Karo, Char, Ome, Shivan, Gotting etc. at p-107/c (ii) No. of trees which will be 882 affected (iii) Density 0.4 to 0.6
6. Whether area is significant from It does not form part of any National Park, Sanctuary or wildlife point of view Biosphere.
7. Details of Mining i. Total project area 50.40 ha
ii. Notified forest land 45.0336 ha (already broken up 12.7021 ha)
iii. Area of jungle / jhar -
iv. Tenancy land / non-forest -
v. Period of mining lease proposed Up to 21.11.2027
vi. Total reserve 3.3 million tonnes of Iron ore
vii. Reserve in forest area As above
viii. Reserve in non-forest area -
ix. Annual estimated production -
x. Nature of mining operation Open cast
xi. Phased reclamation plan 20 years (2007-2027) (p-6/c) xii. Gradient of the mining area -
18 | P a g e
xiii. No of labourers to be employed Direct and indirect employment to 50 persons.
8. Compensatory Afforestation -
9. Catchment Area Treatment -
10 Rehabilitation of Oustees Nil . a) No of families involved b) Category of families c) Details of rehabilitation plan 11 Reclamation of mined areas - .
12 Cost Benefit Ratio - .
13 Recommendation . i. DFO All have recommended the proposal for approval. ii. PCCF (p-88/c) iii. State Government (p-91/c)
14 District Profile .
(i) Total Geographical area of 1736 sq km District
(ii) Total forest area of District 576.04 sq km Divisional forest area -
(iii) Total area diverted since 1980 359.3120 ha in 49 no. of cases
(iv) Total CA stipulated since 1980 730.3091 ha on forest land (as on ………..) 14.2940 ha on Non-forest land (v) Total CA done since 1980 500.7040 ha on forest land (as on 24.11.2009) 8.8900 ha on Non-forest land
3. Other Remarks: 1. The Title of Concession No. (TC No.) 87/1953, a deemed Mining lease, was originally granted as concession for extraction of iron ore by erstwhile Portuguese regime in 1953, which was subsequently converted under the Goa, Daman & Diu (mining concession abolition and declaration as Mining Leases) Act, 1987 as mining lease and was renewed under various notifications. 2. The mining lease area is located at Sigao village, Sanguem taluka, under North Goa division. The total mining lease area is 50.40 ha, out of which 45.0336 ha is forest land. 3. Of the forest area within the lease, an area of 12.7021 ha has already been broken up prior to 1980 for mining pits, roads and OB dumping at p-92/c. The renewal of mining lease was initially approved by the Central Government on 19.09.2006 for 12.7021 ha of land for a period of 20 years. 4. The instant proposal is for renewal of mining lease for remaining 32.3315 ha of forest land (32.3315 + 12.7021 = 45.0336). 5. The item wise break up of the forest area for different purposes is as below at (p-94/c):
19 | P a g e
Area kept for safety Grand total Already broken To be broken zone along canal (not Sl. Purpose of Use to be disturbed) no. Non- Non- Forest Forest Non-forest Forest Non-forest Forest forest forest
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 Mining Pits 6.0021 1.3978 31.1247 3.9686 1.2068 - 38.3336 5.3664
Workshop/Staff 2 ------Qtrs.
Active Dumps (ore 3 5.5000 - - - - - 5.5000 - & rejection)
4 Roads 1.2000 - - - - - 1.2000 -
Total 12.7021 1.3978 31.1247 3.9686 1.2068 - 45.0336 5.3664
Grand Total 14.0999 35.0933 1.2068 50.40
6. The user agency has submitted the IBM approved Mining plan dated 23.06.2004 at p-139/c. 7. The user agency has also submitted that the Environmental clearance dated 17.09.2007 from the Ministry has already been obtained vide p-116-124/c. 8. The user agency has submitted the details of minerals extracted during the last two years of the ten years period at P-114/c 9. No violation has been reported under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 at p-102/c. 10. The user agency has already deposited NPV for the 12.7021 ha of forest land at p-79/c. 11. The user agency has given an undertaking to bear the cost of exploitation of trees and pay CA and NPV for proposed diversion at p-99/c 12. There is no archaeological / historical / religious or recreational including Wild Life Sanctuary and National Park or any other important monument located in the area at p-108/c. 13. The State Government has submitted that the lease boundary of mining leases from Bhagwan Mahveer Wildlife Sanctuary is 1.50 km away from Bhagwan Mahaveer WL sanctuary. 4. The Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) considered the proposal on 18th November 2010 for diversion of remaining 32.3315 ha of forest land (already diverted 12.7021 ha) and the Committee observed that there are various directives issued by Courts from time to time regarding mining in Goa and the Goa Foundation has also filed petitions for stoppage of mining activities in forest areas in Goa. After taking all these factors into account, the FAC desired that the State Government may be requested to furnish the following: (i) The State Government to explain relevance of all Court orders / Acts / Rules to mining in Goa. (ii) The Goa Foundation to explain why this and other proposals not be given the forest clearance. 5. Based on the recommendation of FAC as mentioned para 4 above, the State Government of Goa was informed vide this Ministry’s letter dated 30.12.2010 for compliance (Pg. 284/c). 6. The State Government vide their letter number 6-13-(149)-2009-FD/6526 dated 08.02.2012 (Pg. 285/c) replied that after due deliberation examination issues involve it is hereby conveyed that the various court orders as passed by the Supreme Court and Hon’bnle High Court of Bombay at Panaji in various cases/ litigation are binding overall mining operation throughout the country and there are no separates act / Rules applicable to the State of Goa only. In view of this the approval of the State Government is hereby conveyed for taking of this case for diversion of forest land for non-forest purpose on similar lines as previous cases have been considered and in conformity with the applicable orders of the Hon’ble Surpreme Court and high Court and the provisions of the forest and Wildlife Acts and Rules.
20 | P a g e
7. The above reply of the State Government has not found appropriate in this Ministry and accordingly, it was again requested vide this Ministry’s letter dated 30.04.2012 (Pg. 293/c) to explain the relevance of such court orders/ Acts /Rules to mining in Goa. 8. The State Government of Goa vide there letter no. 6-13-(149)-2016-17-FD/6181 dated 27.03.2017 and letter No. 6-13-(149)-2016-17-FD/166 has now submitted the particulars of relevant Court orders having a bearing on mining in Goa which are reproduced below: I. W.P (C) 435/2012. (Goa Foundation v/s Union of India and Others)
The writ Petition was filed on 30.11.2012 by Goa Foundation based on the report of Justice M.B Shah Commission. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had imposed a ban on transportation of Iron and Manganese Ore and mining activities in the State of Goa vide its order dt. 05.10.2012. Subsequently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court lifted the ban on transportation of iron and Manganese Ore and mining activities by framing guidelines vide order dt. 21.04.2014. The Director of Mining and Geology had in 12.03.2015 renewed the lease of 89 companies, whereas the MoEFCC in 20.03.2015 had revoked the EC of 72 mining leases that were kept in abeyance.
The details above Writ Petition (Civil) -435/2012 may kindly be seen at pg. 308-398/c. II. W.P. 377/2014 (Sociedade Timblo Irmaos Limitada v/s State of Goa)
A writ petition was filed on 20.06.2014 by Sociedade Timblo Irmaos Limitada along with others mining lessees seeking a direction to the State Government of Goa for renewal of leases from 2007 and to decide the application for second renewal pending before the Directorate of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Goa. The writ petition, was disposed off on 13.08.2014 by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay, Goa Bench with the direction to Govt. of Goa to decide the pending Applications for second renewal as per Section 8(3) of the MMDR Act. The renewal has been accorded. The matter is however not related to forest clearance.
The details above Writ Petition (Civil) - 377/2014 may kindly be seen at pg. 399-469/c. III. Concession matter (SLP 9459/2001) Consequent upon liberation of Goa on 19.12.1961 whereby it became a part of Indian Union, the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 was made applicable to the Union Territory of Goa. w.e.f 01.10.1963 onwards. Prior to this, the Portuguese who were ruling Goa had granted mining concessions in perpetuity to the concessionaires. On 10th March, 1975, the Controller of Mining Leases, by issuance of notification, called upon every lessee and sub-lessee to file returns under Rule 5 of the Mining Leases (Modifications of Terms) Rules, 1956 and sent copies of the notification to the concessionaires in Goa. The concessionaires, aggrieved by this notification, challenged it before the Bombay High Court, Goa. The Bombay High Court restrained the Union Government from enforcing the said notification against the concessionaires. Thereafter, the Parliament passed the Goa, Daman and Diu Mining Concessions (Abolition and Declaration as Mining Leases) Act, 1987 w.e.f 22.05.1987.
In effect, from 20th December 1961 onwards all the mining concessions are deemed to be mining leases granted under the MMDR Act and the provisions of the MMDR Act will apply to such mining
21 | P a g e
leases and the concession holders shall be deemed to have become holders of the mining lease under the MMDR Act in relation to the mines to which the concession relates. The mining companies have filed Writ Petition challenging the Goa, daman and Diu Mining Concessions (Abolitions and Declarations as Mining Leases) Act, 1987 (Abolition Act of 1987). The matter is before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The details above SLP -9459/2001 may kindly be seen at pg. 470-473/c. IV. I.A. 1000 in W.P. (C) 202/1995. (T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD v/s Union of India & Ors).
The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 04.08.2006, while granting Temporary Working Permit of Permission (T.W.P), as an interim measure directed to maintain one kilometer safety Zone from the boundary of the Sanctuary, subject to the Orders that may be made in I.A No. 1000 regarding Jamua Ramgarh Sanctuary. Thus prohibited the mining within one kilometer of protected area was prohibited.
The MoEFCC, Govt. of India had issued final notification of the Eco-sensitive zone as, one kilometer of land or water body whichever is nearer to the boundary of Bhagwan Mahaveer Wild life Sanctuary and National Park in Goa vide no S.O. 221(E) dated 23.01.2015. No restrictions are therefore applicable for mining activity beyond this Eco-sensitive zone. The said mining is located at a distance of 1.4 kms from the boundary of Bhagwan Mahavir Wild Life Sanctuary & National Park. The details above W.P. (C) 202/1995 may kindly be seen at pg. 474-495/c. 9. Now the project proponent vide his letter dated 28.11.2017 furnish an affidavit stating that no court case pending specifically pertaining to said mining lease namely Advona Toleamati E Galligro mine (T.C. No. 87 of 1953) admajoring 48.2207 ha. of forest land (Pg. 537-538/c) and a copy of certificate issued by the then Chief Secretary vide his No. 16/64/2015 –RD dated 14.09.2017 (Pg. 536/c) regarding non-availability of land for compensatory afforestation.
In view of above, it is propose that the above facts for the proposal may be placed before FAC scheduled to be held on 20.12.2017, for appropriate examination and suitable recommendation. ****
Agenda No. 4
F. No. 11-91/2012-FC
Sub: Advance fixation of dates of meeting of Forest Advisory Committee for the year 2018.
It was desired that FAC is needed to be held on predetermined/scheduled dates to enable the members of FAC to plan their availability on the fixed dates preferably on third Thursday of the month. These dates may be changed in case of holiday falling on third Thursday or other unforeseen reasons or emergency with the permission of the Chairman.
22 | P a g e
Sl. No Date and Month of FAC Meeting on Wednesday/Thursday in 2018 1 18.01.2018 (Thursday) 2 22.02.2018 (Thursday) 3 22.03.2018 (Thursday) 4 19.04.2018 (Thursday)
5 17.05.2018 (Thursday)
6 21.06.2018 (Thursday)
7 19.07.2018 (Thursday)
8 16.08.2018 (Thursday)
9 20.09.2018 (Thursday)
10 24.10.2018 (Wednesday)
11 15.11.2018 (Thursday)
12 20.12.2018 (Thursday)
FAC's approval may be solicited during its meeting fixed on 20.12.2017 ****
23 | P a g e
Sandeep Sharma, AIGF (FC) Agenda No. 1 F. No. 8-53/2017-FC Sub: Diversion of 167.70 ha of Forest land for Iron Ore Mining in East Bhanupartappur Forest Division, Bhanupartappur, Distt. Kanker in favour of M/s Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (CMDCL), Kanker Distt., Chhattisgarh. The State Government of Chhattisgarh vide their letter No. F-5-62/2017/10-2 dated 11.10.2017 submitted a project of diversion of 167.70 ha of Forest land for Iron Ore Mining in East Bhanupartappur Forest Division, Bhanupartappur, Distt. Kanker in favour of M/s Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (CMDCL), Kanker Distt., Chhattisgarh. The facts related to the proposal as contained in the State Government’s letter dated 11.10.2017 are given below in the form of factsheet FACT SHEET
1. Name of the Proposal Diversion of 167.70 ha of Forest land for Iron Ore Mining in East Bhanupartappur Forest Division, Bhanupartappur, Distt. Kanker in favour of M/s Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (CMDCL), Kanker Distt., Chhattisgarh
2. Location: State Chhattisgarh.
District Uttar Bastar Kanker
3. Particular of Forests
i Name of Forest Division East Bhanupratappur
ii Area of Forest land for Diversion Compartment Proposed area no. (in ha.) 608 166.80 Approach road 0.90 Total 167.70 iii Legal Status of Forest land Reserve Forest
iv Density of Vegetation Density : 0.4 to 0.5 Eco class : III and IV
4. Species-wise (scientific names and Terminalia Tomentosa (Saja) diameter class-wise enumeration of trees Pterocarpus Marsupium (Bija) (to be enclosed. In case of irrigation / Anogeissue Latifolia (Dhawada) hydel Projects enumeration at FRL, & FRL-4 meter also to be enclosed. 51218 trees are enumerated in the proposal. Details are placed in file at Pg. 71-90/c)
5. Brief Note on vulnerability of forest area No to erosion
6. Approximate distance of proposed site for Boundary of ML application will be marked precisely at diversion from boundary of forest. the time of prospecting .
7. Whether forms part of National Park, No Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve,
24 | P a g e
Tiger Reserve, Elephant Corridor etc. (if so, the details of the area the comments of the Chief Wildlife Warden to be annexed)
8. Whether any rare/endangered/unique No species of flora and fauna found in the area – if so details thereof.
9. Whether the forest land proposed for No, eco-sensitive zone area falls with in 10 Km. radius lease is located within eco-sensitive zone of the Mining lease. However, it is mention by the (ESZ) of the protected notified under concern DFO in his SIR that Tullu Reservoir is wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972-Yes/NO If about the distance of 2.3 Km. , Rajori Reservoir is Yes then give details. about the distance of 4.95 Km. and Picchekatta Reservoir is about the distance of 4.93 Km. , from Mining lease area.
10. Whether any protected archaeological/ NO heritage site/ defense establishment or any other important monument is located in the area. If so, the details thereof with NOC from competent authority, if required.
11. Whether any work in violation of the Act NO has been carried out (Yes/ No). If yes, details of the same including period of
work done, action taken on erring officials. Whether work in violation is still under progress. 13. Whether the requirement of forest land as Area applied is minimum unavailable as area is iron ore proposed by the user agency in col. 2 of bearing. Part-I is unavoidable and barest minimum
for the project, if no recommended area item-wise with details of alternatives examined.
14. Whether clearance under the Yes , (pg. 24-31/c) Environment (protection) Act, 1986 is required?
15. Period of diversion sought 50 years
16. Compensatory Afforestation
17. (i) Details of non-forest area/degraded Total Area provided for C. A = 348.800 ha forest area identified for CA, its distance from adjoining forest, No. of patches = 18 (Raigarh 7 + Kanker 11) number of patches, size of each CA has been identified on orange forest area (PF) patches. and Revenue Forest land (Deemed forest land), degraded forest land, double in extent to the forest area proposed for diversion, in Kanker and Rajgahr districts in the State of Chhattisgarh.
25 | P a g e
Being a State Government undertaking CA may be taken up on non-forest land / revenue forest land and not on degraded forest land. The CA details are placed in file pg. 162-534/c
(ii) Map showing non-forest/degraded Enclosed. (Pg. 535-547/c) forest area identified for CA and adjoining forest boundaries. (iii) Detailed CA scheme including Detailed CA scheme including species to be planted, species to be planted, implementing implementing agency, time schedule, cost structure, etc agency, time schedule, cost structure, . pg. 162-534/c etc. (iv) Total financial outlay for CA On the basis of prevailing model cost estimate per ha. Cost of CA in Rs. 545657/- total oulay for CA afforestation will be 348.800x545657 = Rs. 190.325 lakhs.
(v) Certificate from the competent The Certificates given by the concern DCFs and details authority regarding suitability of the of Suitability certificate are as under. area identified for CA and from management point of view. S. Div. Compt. Area Pg. no. N. OA i. 32.047 1606 OA ii. 24.100 1575 OA iii. 14.000 1540 Sub 70.147 total OA iv. 15.000 1553 Pg. 488/c OA v. 15.000 1527 OA vi. Kanker 20.000 1454 OA vii. 10.000 1450 OA viii. 20.000 1468 Sub 80.000 total ix. OA 472 9.000 x. OA 485 20.000 Pg. 489/c xi. OA 545 15.000 Sub 44.000 total Total 194.147 xii. 40/1 11.50 167/c xiii. 153/1 22.560 181/c xiv. 375/1 22.775 195/c Dharam xv. 20/1 17.540 207/c jaigarh Sub 74.375 total xvi. 339/1A 20.316 221/c
26 | P a g e
340/1 xvii. 115/1A 23.552 245/c Sub 43.868 total xviii. 633 36.410 xix. 655 xx. 492 Sub 36.410 total Total 154.653 Grand 348.800 total However, no detail certifying the land free from encroachment and other encumbrances has been certified by the DCFs. 18. Compliance of Scheduled Tribe and Certificate of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 has been submitted. The District Collector, Kanker 2006. vide his certificate dated 03.08.2015 in Hindi and 07.04.2017 in English with the Gram Sabha resolution are given an placed in file at Pg. 125-152/c.
19. Catchment Area Treatment Not Applicable
20. Cost Benefit analysis Enclosed (Pg. 94-101/c)
21. Cost Benefit Ratio 1:4.57 (pg-101/c)
22. Employment to be generated i). Whether the Project is likely to Yes generate employment?
(ii). Permanent/Regular 100 Employment(Number of persons):
(iii). Temporary Employment(Number of person-days): 100
23. Rehabilitation of Oustees
a) No of families involved Nil b) Category of families Nil c) Details of rehabilitation plan Nil 24. Total Cost of the Project Rs. 500 Cr.
25. Sit inspection report of the DCF Enclosed. (pg. 577-578/c) especially highlighting facts asked in col.
7 (xi, xii), 8 and 9 above.
26. Recommendation Proposal is recommended by the applicant institute, Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation i. DFO Limited. (pg. 112-113/c)
ii. CCF Recommended (Pg. 115/c)
27 | P a g e
iii. Nodal Officer/ PCCF Recommended with subject to general conditions (Pg. 116/c) as below: (i) Labour working in the mine should be provided with the LPG to avoid pressure on surrounding forests. (ii) Residential accommodation for the labourers working in the mine should be ensured to avoid pressure on forest land for temporary residential accommodation. (iii) A committee, including DFO as member, should be constituted for the monitoring of conditions to be stipulated by the Government of India and implementation of reclamation plan. (iv) Safety zone should be fenced with recoiled barbered wire fence to ensure protection of the surrounding forest.
iv SG Recommended (Pg. 117/c)
24. District Profile (i) Total Geographical area of the 4043.299 sq. KM district.
(ii) Total Forest area/Divisional Forest area. 144015.367 ha.
(iii) Total area diverted since 1980. (iv) Total CA stipulated since 1980 (Forest land) a. Forest land 3079.851 haNil b. Non Forest land Nil
(v) Progress of Compensatory Afforestation. 3986.505 ha. a. Forest land Nil b. Non- Forest land
3. Site Inspection Report: The Site Inspection Report (SIR) for this proposal was carried out by Sh. Charanjeet Singh, Scientist ‘C’ Regional Office, Nagpur. The report (Pg. 580-593/c) is reproduced below: i. Legal status of forest land proposed for diversion: Legal status of forest land proposed for diversion is Reserved Forest. Entire land of the mining lease of the user Agency is forest land i.e. Reserved Forest land. ii. Item-wise break-up details of the forest land proposed for diversion. S. No. Description Area (Ha.) (A) With the mining lease area: 1. Area under Pits 42.62 2. Area under roads 2.30 3. Area under Crusher & Screening Plant 0.50 4. Area under Weigh bridge/ Stock 0.20
28 | P a g e
5. Area under office/infrastructure 0.25 Sub total of (A) 45.87 (B) Area for dumps: 6. a) Area under top soil / lateritic soil stock 12.62 b) Area under BHQ, Waste Dump 27.44 c) Area under metapilites, etc Waste Dump 22.97 Sub total of (B) 63.03 (C) Area for other uses : 7. Area for green belt development work 4.35 8. Area proposed for further detailed exploration work within 53.55 first five year Sub total of (C) 57.90 Total Lease Area 166.80 (D) Area required outside the mining lease area: 9. Approach road (area outside lease) 0.90 Sub total of (D) 0.90 Grand total (A+B+C+D) 166.80
The Representative of the User Agency has informed that entire area of the lease will be used for mining and activities ancillary thereto only. No infrastructure facilities will be housed in the lease area. All infrastructure facilities will be setup in the non-forest land. iii. Whether the proposal involves any construction of building (including residential) or not? : No, residential building will be constructed with the mining lease area. However, construction of buildings for Magazine Office, security post, First Aid Centre, water Tank, etc. will be required to be constructed by the UA as per directive of DGMS. Detail of such area was not available readily with the UA. The UA has been advised to assess the area required for such ancillary activities. iv. Total cost of Project at present. : Total cost of project has been reported as Rs. 500 crores, Comprising of 100 (Departmental Mode) and Rs. 400 crores (outsourcing Mode). v. Wildlife : Whether the forest area proposed for important from Wildlife point of view or not : the representative of the State Forest Department informed that area does not have major wildlife. Important species reported in the area sloth beer, hyena, fox, deer, wild cat, common hare, etc. The area proposed for diversion does not form the part of any wildlife corridor, protected Area and Wildlife Sanctuary. vi. Vegetation: Forest Types of the area comprised of Moist peninsular Low Level Sat Forest , southern Moist Mixed Deciduous Forest and southern Dry Mixed Deciduous Forest. Representative of the state Forest Department has informed that forest vegetation, as per prescription of the working plan, is managed under Selection-Cum-Improvement working circle. (i) Total number of trees to be felled. : as per the vegetation density assessment, conducted by the State Forest Department in area proposed for diversion, the vegetation density ranges from 0.1 to 0.6 with total 51218 project affected trees, comprising of all girth classes. As per the results of the DSS analysis, total area proposed for diversion falls in following density classes:
S. No. Density Area (ha) 1. Very Dense - 2. Moderately Dense 134 3. Open Forests 10 4. Non- Wooded area 24 Total 168
(ii) Effect of removal on the general ecosystem in the area:- Important species:- Mining lease of the user agency over an area of 167.70 ha has total 51,218 project affected trees of al girth
29 | P a g e
classes. The vegetation of the area mostly comprised of young crops. Major vegetation I the area is termialia tomentosa, Anogeisses latifolia, tectona grandis, Madhuca indica, Schelichera oleosa, Termialia belerica, Diospyrus melanoxylon and Mitrgyna parviflora etc in top canopy, Cleistanthus collinus, emblica officnalis, Cassia fistula, Terminalia chebula and Buchanania latifolia and bamboo etc. in middle canopy.
Removal of such a large number of trees over an area of 167.70 ha will certainly have adverse impact on the local environment. The representatives of the UA have informed that not all the trees enumerated in the lease area will be felled. Trees falling in the safety zone area, around internal roads, magazine area, etc. will be maintained as intact as far as possible. It was also informed that all trees will not be felled in one go. Area will be development for mining in phases and with the advent of mining felling of trees will be undertaken under the supervision of the State Forest Department. vii. Background of the proposal:
(i) Originally, the lease over an area of 921.06 ha, covering the entire Aridongri hill in village- Aridongri, District-Bastar was granted to M/s Stell Authority of Indian Limited (SAIL) by the then Mineral Resources Department, Govt. of Madhya radish, for a period of 30 years w.e.f. from 18.03.1963 to 17.03.1993. M/s SAIL, during the currency of the said lease period carried out mining in the area for some time. After expiry of the first term of the lease period, M/s SAIL, on 22.02.1993, had applied for renewal of mining lease only for an area of 106.600 ha and the renewal application of the m/s SAIL was rejected by Govt. of Chhattisgarh vide its order dated 17.07.2002 and directed the Collector, Bastar for throwing open the earlier lease area of 921.06 ha pursuant to above referred order of the Govt. of Chhattisgarh Collector, Kanker had thrown open the entire lease area of 921.06 ha by Gazette Notification dated 04.12.2002. An area of 313.0 ha, out of total 921.06 ha was granted under prospecting licence to M/s CMDC limited and an area of 106.60 ha was grated as lease to M/s Godavari Ispat and Power ltd. for mining of iron ore. (ii) CMDC was granted approval of the Central Government for carrying out prospecting over an area of 327.0 vide letter no. 8-113/2008-FC dated 09.06.2009 (Pg.589/c). A copy of the letter dated is enclosed at Annexure- I CMDC after carrying out prospecting in the said area, submitted an application for mining lease on 20.05.2011 over an area of 245.0 ha out of the total area applied for mining lease the State Govt. of Chhattisgarh issued letter of intent (LoI) over and area of 166.80 ha on 10.11.2015. (iii) Mineral Reserve in the lease area of the user agency : The representative of the User Agency has informed that exploration and investigations in the lease area have established proven mineral reserve of 10.01 MT with average FE grade of 62.28 %. It was further informed that subsequent detailed exploration, which will be undertaken with the advent of mining operations, may further add to the mineral reserve base by minimum 2-3 times of the existing reserves in the backdrop of following facts: a) GSI has demarcated outcrops of iron ore in many areas within the lease area but has gone for detailed drilling in only limited areas. The detailed drilling will definitely increase the existing reserve. b) Inspite of continuity of the iron ore beyond 50 mtrs depth, GSI has estimated iron ore reserves only upto 50 mtrs depth below surface level. c) The beneficiation of the Banded Haematite Quarzite (BHQ) will definitely increase the existing reserve. (iv) Justification for mining project by CMDC : the representative of the UA has informed that there are more than 80 sponge iron and steel plants in the State of Chhattisgarh whose total requirement of iron ore is approx. 12 million tones per annum. Besides this, there are several pellet plants running in the State of Chhattisgarh requiring iron ore to run their operations. Total iron ore requirement in the State of Chhattisgarh, for these plants, has been reported to be approximately 20 MTPA, supply of iron ore available from the Bailadila Sector and from private captive mines is approximately estimated at only 5 million tones. To bridge the huge gap of demand – supply, iron ore is procured from the State of Odisha.
30 | P a g e
It was also informed that as per the existing national scenario, by 2025, the demand for iron ore will be 363 MTPA against the estimated supply of 188 MTPA. Therefore, with a view to cater to the iron ore requirement of State of Chhattisgarh, the CMDC has proposed to undertake mining in the area proposed for diversion. viii. Compensatory Afforestation: CA has been proposed over degraded forest land, double in extent to the forest area proposed for diversion, in Kanker and Rajgahr districts in the State of Chhattisgarh. The legal status of the forest land is orange forest area (PF) and Revenue Forest land (Deemed forest land). The certificate issued by the Chief Secretary is inconsistent, Further, as per extant guidelines, Revenue Forest land may be treated at par with non-forest land for the purpose of raising CA , provided they are declared as RF under the IFA. In the instant case the User Agency has already made available an area of 154.653 ha of revenue Forest land which is not under the administrative and management control of the State Forest Department. Therefore, being a State Government undertaking CA may taken up non -forest land / revenue forest land and not on degraded forest land.
(i) Whether land proposed/selected for compensatory afforestation is suitable from plantation and management point of view? not : As per the certificate of the DFO Kanaker and DFO Dharamjaigarh, the land identified for raising CA is suitable for plantation. CA sites could not be verified as the land for CA has been identified in 18 sites located at far away from the area proposed for diversion. Detail of degraded forest land identified for raising CA in Kanker and Dharmjaigahr Forest.
Area Name of the Forest Name of S. No. Compt. proposed for Legal Status Division Range CA i. OA 1606 32.047 Orange Forest Land ii. Korar OA 1575 24.100 Orange Forest Land iii. OA 1540 14.000 Orange Forest Land Sub – total 70.147 iv. OA 1553 15.000 Orange Forest Land v. OA 1527 15.000 Orange Forest Land vi. Charama OA 1454 20.000 Orange Forest Land vii. Kanker OA 1450 10.000 Orange Forest Land viii. OA 1468 20.000 Orange Forest Land Sub – total 80.000 ix. OA 472 9.000 Orange Forest Land x. Narahpur OA 485 20.000 Orange Forest Land xi. OA 545 15.000 Orange Forest Land Sub – total 44.000 Total 194.147 xii. 40/1 11.50 Revenue Forest Land xiii. 153/1 22.560 Revenue Forest Land Laliunga xiv. 375/1 22.775 Revenue Forest Land xv. 20/1 17.540 Revenue Forest Land Sub – total 74.375 Dharamjaigarh 339/1A Revenue Forest Land xvi. 20.316 Bakaruma 340/1 Revenue Forest Land xvii. 115/1A 23.552 Revenue Forest Land Sub – total 43.868 xviii. 633 36.410 Revenue Forest Land xix. Boro 655 Revenue Forest Land xx. 492 Revenue Forest Land Sub – total 36.410 total 154.653 Grand total 348.800
Examination of the Google Satellite Imagery and DSS results revealed that in Baskund (Patch-7 has nearly 22 ha moderately dense forests while patch 13 in Kamrga revealed encroachment in the form of
31 | P a g e
cultivation. Further, out of total proposed area, 15 ha of land has been observed with canopy density corresponding to very dense forest and 62 ha of land with canopy density corresponding to moderately dense forest while 66 ha of land observed to be falling in open forest category and 205 ha of land as Non-wooded land. Detail is enclosed at Annexure-II(pg.590-593/c) (ii) Whether land for compensatory afforestation is free from encroachments/ other encumbrances : As per the certificate of the DCFs concerned, the land identified for raising CA is suitable for plantation. No details certifying the land free from encroachment and other encumbrances has been certified by the DCFs. Detail could not be verified as the land for CA has been identified in 14 sites which were located far away from the site proposed for diversion. (iii) Whether land for compensatory afforestation is important from Religious/Archaeological point of view : No information has been provided in the proposal. However, representative from the Forest Department has informed that CA land is not important from the religious/archaeological view point. (iv) Land identified for raising compensatory afforestation is in how many patches, whether patches are compact or not : Land for compensatory afforestation has been identified over an area of 348.80 ha in 18 patches in Kanker and Dharamjaigarh Forest Divisons. (v) Map with details : Differential GPS maps of the area identified for CA for all 18 patches along with its kml/shapes files have been submitted along with the proposal. (vi) Total financial outlay : Rs.19,03,24,967/- as per the financial estimates for 10 years submitted along with the proposal. ix. Whether proposal involves violation of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 or not. If yes, a detailed report on violation including action taken against the concerned officials : No violations of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 have been reported. x. Whether proposal involves rehabilitation of displaced persons. If yes, whether rehabilitation plan has been prepared by the State Government or not. Detail be furnished specifically if rehabilitation plan would affect any other forest area by trans-locating outstees in an around the said forest : No rehabilitation is involved in the proposal. xi. Reclamation Plan: Not applicable i. Details and financial allocation. NA xii. Details on catchment and command area under the project : NA xiii. Cost benefit ratio : Cost benefit analysis has been undertaken in accordance with the MoEF&CC’s Guidelines dated 01.08.2017. Detail of cost and benefits is given as under: Cost- Rs.367.566 crores. Benefits – Rs.1680.50 crores Cost benefit ratio = 1:4.57 xiv. Recommendations of the Principal Conservator of Forests/State Government : The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of Chhattisgarh has recommended the proposal for grant of approval under Section 2 (ii) of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 subject to fulfilment of following conditions: (i) Labour working in the mine should be provided with the LPG to avoid pressure on surrounding forests. (ii) Residential accommodation for the labourers working in the mine should be ensured to avoid pressure on forest land for temporary residential accommodation. (iii) A committee, including DFO as member, should be constituted for the monitoring of conditions to be stipulated by the Government of India and implementation of reclamation plan. (iv) Safety zone should be fenced with recoiled barbered wire fence to ensure protection of the surrounding forest. xv. Recommendation of Regional Chief Conservator of Forests along with detail reasons : Recommendations of the Addl. PCCF (Central) have been appended separately. xvi. Addl. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Central) shall give detailed comments on whether there are any alternatives routes/alignments for locating the project on the non-forest land.: Comments of the Addl. PCCF (Central) are as follows.
32 | P a g e
The detailed observations on the proposal have already been made in the inspection report. The Government of Chhattisgarh in Rajnandgaon, Balod and Kanker district has executed 14 mining leases. Out of which 7 leases have been executed in the Kanker district and out of 7 leases only 3 are non- working while rest 4 are working . In addition to the above, 4 new mining leases have also been allotted by the State Govt. in District, including the extant mining lease, which are in the advance stage of obtaining statutory clearances. The mining lease to the UA i.e. M/s CMDC is Agency is contiguous to the mining leases of M/s Godavari Power and Ispat Limted (138 ha) where mining is continuing. Mining of iron ore has been proposed by the UA to meet the demand of iron ore in the State of Chhattisgarh which, as per projection adverted by the UA, is likely to increase in near future. Though the crown density in part of the area is said to be high, but the crop is said to be young. Therefore, in view of the aforementioned facts the proposal may be considered for approval under the FCA, 1980. The legal Status/ administrative control of the orange forest land proposed for CA has not been mentioned in the proposal. Its legal status need to be ascertained before considering it for CA.
xvii. Utility of the project. Numbers of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes to be benefited by the project: It is informed that mineral reserve of 10.0 million tons of iron ore will be mined during the life of mine. It was informed that ore to be mined out from the lease area will help to bridge the huge gap of demand-supply in the State. It was further informed that project will generated direct and indirect employment to 192 and 600 persons respectively. It was also informed that project will significantly enhance the socio-economic environment in the 10 KM radius of the mine area by undertaking improvement of physical infrastructure facilities, livelihood promotion, skill development, health and sanitation, improvement in drinking water regime, education, etc. xviii. Whether land being diverted has any socio-cultural/religious value. Whether any sacred grove or very old growth trees/forests exists in the area proposed for diversion. No, as per information provided by the user agency and the representative of the State Forest Department, the area is not important from the socio cultural/religious view point. xix. Situation w.r.t any P.A : It is indicated in the proposal, that land proposed for diversion is located beyond a distance of 10 km from the boundary of any PAs. It is indicated nearest. Tiger Reserve in Indravati Tiger Reserve which is located at a distance of approximately more than 400 km from the project site. xx. Any other information relating to the project. (i) Examination of the Google Satellite Imagery and DSS results revealed that in Baskund (Patch-7) has nearly 22 ha moderately dense forests while Patch 13 in Kamrga revealed encroachment in the form of cultivation. Further, out of total proposed area, 15 ha of land has been observed with canopy density corresponding to very dense forest and 62 ha of land with canopy density corresponding to moderately dense forest while 66 ha of land observed to be falling in open forest Category and 205 ha of land as Non-wooded land. Detail is enclosed at Annexure-II(Pg.590-592/c).
(ii) It was also observed that boundary of the mining lease of the User Agency is contiguous to the mining lease of M/s Godavari Power and Ispat Limited (138 ha) where mining is continuing. Further, Dallirajhara-Rawghat railway line, which is currently, under construction, is passing through at a distance of approximately about 0.9 Km from the boundary of the proposed mining lease area of CMDC. A State PWD road from Dallirajhara to Bhanupratappur is also located at a distance of almost 1.0 Km from the proposed mining lease boundary of CMDC.
(iii) It may also be mentioned that region has working and non-working mines. The details of the mining leases in the area. Detail is enclosed at Annexure-III (Pg.593/c). It can be ascertained that the State Government, at present, has executed mining leases for 7 mining leases in Kanker, out of which only 3 are non-working while rest 4 are working. In addition to the above, 4 new mining leases have also been allotted by the State Government in the District. Out of the 4 new mining leases, mining leases
33 | P a g e
allotted to M/s Pushp Steel Limited, M/s Monnet Ispat Limited, and M/s Inds Energy Limited in East Bhanupratapur Forest Division are in the advance stage of obtaining statutory clearance.
(iv) Examination of the proposal using Decision Support Analysis, revealed the areas as non- inviolate area (Annexure-II: Pg.590-592/c). In view of above, the facts related to the above proposal may be placed before FAC in its forthcoming meeting scheduled to be held on 20th December, 2017 for their examination and appropriate recommendation. ****
Agenda No. 2 F.No.8-59/2012-FC
Sub: Diversion of 197.173 ha of forest land in favour of M/s SJVN, Limited for construction of 252 MW Devsari Hydro-electric Project on Pinder River in Chamoli district of Uttarakhand. The above mentioned agenda item was at last considered by the FAC in its meeting held on 30.8.2017. 2. The FAC observed that there is dispute on forest land of 0.754 ha which is falling under submergence zone of proposed Devsari Hydroelectric project. 3. It was brought to the notice of FAC that the disputed forest land (0.754 ha) had already been diverted in favour of Deval Hydroelectric project under the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act 1980. The same land cannot be diverted twice to different user agencies without the consent of the user agency that had been using the land. 4. It was pointed out that present proposal was discussed in different meetings of FAC held on 21st - 22nd December 2012, 28th Jan 2015, 31st Dec 2015, 16.02.2016 and 28.02.2017. 5. This proposal had already been recommended on 16.02.2015 subject to general , standard and specific conditions related to such project and following additional conditions 1) The area of 0.992 ha proposed for office and store was not recommended for approval as it was non- site specific activity 2) The area of muck disposal will be kept at the minimum
The FAC further recommended that the proposal for diversion will be put before competent authority for approval only on receipt of the following:
(i) Copy of R and R plan duly approved by competent authority. (ii) Comments of the Impact Assessment division on status of applications, if any, received by them for grant of Environmental Clearance to the Project may be obtained (iii) Details of recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial Group constituted by NGRBA vide O.M. dated 15th June 2012 and decision, if any, of NGRBA on these recommendations. On submission of incomplete compliance by the state government and the issue of dispute referred by the IA division the facts were once again placed before FAC on 28.02.2017. FAC in that meeting recommended that the proposal file shall be placed before competent authority after receipt of following information a. State government shall submit copy R&R plan duly approved by competent authority b. State government shall settle the issue related to Deval HEP which is coming under proposed submergence zone of the Devsari HEP. 6. It was observed that the Nodal officer of Uttarakhand State Forest department had forwarded a clarification given by Devsari Hydroelectric project vide which the project proponent had proposed to exclude the disputed forest area of 0.754 ha, approved in favour of Deval HEP, from the instant proposal. As per the requirement of the stipulated under the provisions of FCA 1980 it seem right but at the same time the proposal to exclude such area from submergence zone by constructing wall around, as proposed
34 | P a g e
by user agency, need to be reviewed technically. It was observed that it is responsibility of the state to settle the dispute between two user agencies.
7. FAC in its meeting held on 30.08.2017 after thorough deliberation and discussion with User agency, representative of Deval HEP, APCCF regional office Dehradun, recommended that: 1) State government shall analyse the technical feasibility of the proposition proposed by user agency to exclude the disputed forest area from the present proposal by constructing wall around the Deval HEP and same shall be recommended by the state government accordingly. 2) If the proposition proposed by the user agency is technically feasible, State government shall submit revised shape file and land use of the proposal after excluding the disputed area from the instant proposal 8. Based on the recommendation of the FAC in its meeting held on 30.08.2017, the State Govt. was requested vide this Ministry’s letter dated 13.09.2017 for submission of compliance.
9. Now, the APCCF & Nodal Officer, Uttarakhand State Forest Department vide their letter no. 1827/1G- 3112(Chmoli) dated 01.12.2017 (Pg.890-897/c) has informed that the user agency through Divisional Forest Officer, Badrinath Forest Division, Gopeshwar vide his letter No. 2024 / 12-1 dated 27.11.2017 has forwarded the information and Geo-reference Map,Digital map and CD in original. But the same has not yet been received in this office. However, a photocopy of letter dated 01.12.2017, DFO’s letter dated 27.11.2017 and letter of Deptt. Of Energy dated 20.11.2017. It is reported by the said DFO that the user agency in their letter clarified that the reference of land of Deval HEP in the proposed land of Devsari Hydro-Electric Project has inadvertently been mentioned. But after intensive inspection it is found that the land of Deval HEP only falls in the submergence area of Devsari Hydro HEP and the diverted forestland of Deval HEP is not included in the proposal of Devsari HEP. Therefore, there is no need of shape file.
10. The user Agency has intimated that they submitted their proposal to the Secretary (Energy) Govt. Of Uttarakhand for construction of Protection Wall around Debal SHEP (5MW) to avoid its submergence in the reservoir in Devsari Hep and Secretary (Energy) vide her letter dated 20.11.2017 addressed to Secretary, (Forest GoUK has conveyed the approval of Govt. Of Uttarakhand that as advised in the approval, M/s SJVN Ltd. Further undertake that before constructing the above protection Wall, the above proposal will be got technically vetted from IIT Roorkee or any other reputed Institute and there after shall obtain the approval of Govt. Of Uttarakhand. It is also mentioned by the user agency that as there is no over lapping of forest land in our proposal vis-a-vis forest land diverted in favor of Debal SHEP, it is once again submitted/ clarified that the issue of exclusion of 0.754 Ha of forest land was inadvertently discussed during the FAC meeting held on 30.08.2017 and is not applicable in this case.
It is proposed that the above facts of the proposal may be placed before FAC scheduled to be held on 20.12.2017 for appropriate examination and suitable recommendation. ****
Agenda No. 3 F. No. 8-66/2016-FC Sub.: Application of M/s Navbharat Fuse Company Limited seeking approval of MoEF&CC under Section 2 (iii) of Forest Conservation Act, 1980 concerning over 220.00 ha of forest land for Rasuli Iron Ore mining in Kanker District, Chhattisgarh.
The State Government of Chhattisgarh vide their letter No. F 5-56/2016/10-2 dated 15.12.2016 has forwarded an online application of M/s Navbharat Fuse Company Limited under Section 2 (iii) of Forest Conservation Act, 1980 over 220.00 ha of forest land for Rasuli Iron Ore mining in Kanker District, Chhattisgarh.
35 | P a g e
2. The above mentioned proposal was considered by the FAC in its meeting held on 26th December, 2016 and the FAC, after examination of the proposal and discussion with user agency, observed as below. i. The State Government of Chhattisgarh vide their letter No. F 5-56/2016/10-2 dated 15.12.2016 has forwarded online application of above said proposal under Section 2 (iii) of Forest Conservation Act, 1980. ii. The project is located in the East Bhanupratappur Forest Division, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh iii. The legal status of the forest land is Reserved Forest. iv. The area falls under Eco-class- 3 and the vegetation density is 0.5. v. The proposed area does not form part of National Park, Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve, Tiger Reserve, Elephant Corridor etc. vi. No protected archaeological/ heritage site/defense establishment or any other important monuments is located in the area. vii. No work of in violation of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has been carried out. viii. Certificate of District Collector, Uttar Bastar Kanker regarding FRA for an area of 220.00 has been given. However, copies of Gram sabha resolutions, Minutes of SDLC etc. are not given. Thus, the complete compliance on FRA is yet to be received. ix. The RO, Nagpur vide this Ministry’s letter dt 20.12.2016 has been requested to carry out SIR. x. As per information available on FC website, no proposal for this Mining Lease has been submitted for approval under section 2 (ii) of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. However, the permission for prospecting of iron ore over 400 ha. of forest land for the applicant co. in Kanker, Chhattisgarh was granted vide this Ministry’s letter no.8-36/2005-FC dated 23.06.2005. xi. Nodal Officer has recommended the proposal. xii. State Government of Chhattisgarh has recommended the proposal.
3. Recommendation of FAC :FAC after through deliberation recommended that On analysis through DSS (Decision support system) it is observed that the area seems to be in violate as per draft parameters .Regional office shall carry out site inspection prior to any decision on the issue. The matter will placed to FAC upon receipt of report from Regional Office. The matter stands deferred till such time. 4. Ministry vide its letter dated 20.12.2016 requested the Regional Office, Nagpur to carry out Site Inspection of proposed forest land. The Regional Office, Nagpur vide their letter no. FC-III/CH-14/2016- NGP/1204 dated 05.01.2017 in response to this Ministry’s letter dated 20.12.2016 has furnished Site Inspection Report(SIR) and placed in file at pg. 14-20/c .The detailed SIR is reproduced below: i. Legal status of the forest land proposed for diversion. Legal status of the land proposed for diversion is Reserved Forests. Entire land of the mining lease of the User Agency is forest land i.e. Reserved Forest land. The proposed to be acquired under lease is composed of two compartments viz. 615 and 616 in Durg Kondal Range. An area of 126 ha of the lease falls in the compartment no. 616, which has been handed over to the Forest Development Corporation, while 94 ha falls in the compartment no. 615 under the control of State Forest Department. ii. Item-wise break-up details of the forest land proposed for diversion. i. Mining and infrastructure – 21.60 ha. ii. Safety Zone - 5.10 ha iii. Area for further exploration- 70.00 ha iv. Area to be kept intact - 123.00 ha Total – 220 ha It may be noted that area proposed to be acquired for mining lease is located deep in dense forests. The details of approach road etc. could not be made available by the State Forest Department and the representative of the User Agency. From the above, it can be ascertained that the User Agency requires additional forest land, outside their mining lease, for approach road to get access to their mining lease. iii. Whether proposal involves any construction of buildings (including residential) or not. If yes, details thereof. Same as given under para 2 above.
36 | P a g e iv. Total cost of the project at present rates. Total cost of project is Rs. 55.52 crores. v. Wildlife Whether forest area proposed for diversion is important from wildlife point of view or not. The forest land proposed for diversion is part of a stand-alone hill range running north to south. The representative of the State Forest Department informed that area does not have major wildlife. Important species reported in the area sloth beer, hyena, fox, deer, blue bull, jungle cat, common hare, etc. The overall landscape of the area indicates area proposed for lease constitutes the part of extension of Bailladilla mountain range i.e. connected to mountains range of Bailadilla in south and terminating in North near Dalli-Rajahara area. The extension of said mountain ranges runs over a distance of approximately more than 100 kms in Dantewada, Bijapur, Kanker, Balod and Rajnandgaon Districts of Chhattisgarh. Though the area proposed for diversion does not form the part of any wildlife corridor, Protected Area and Wildlife Sanctuary, yet the area has high landscape integrity value.
vi. Vegetation:- i. Total number of trees to be felled. 90,000 (approx) ii. Effect of removal of trees on the general ecosystem in the area. Important species:- Some of the areas of the compartments is under bamboo (overlapping) the forest is mixed with Termialia tomentosa, Anogeisses latifolia, Tectona grandis, Madhuca indica, Schleichera oleosa, Termialia belerica, Diospyrus melanoxylon and Mitrgyna parviflora etc in top canopy, Cleistanthus collinus, Emblica officinalis, Cassia fistula, Terminalia chebula and Buchanania latifolia and bamboo etc. in middle canopy. Average Density of the area proposed for is approximately 0.7 to 0.8. The representative of the State Forest Department have informed that during laying out of sample plots for enumeration of trees 400 trees per ha have been worked out in the area. Total number of trees in the lease area of 220 ha has been enumerated to be more than 90,000. Enumerated trees do not include trees having girth of 20 cm or below. Removal of such a large number of trees over an area of 220 ha will certainly has adverse impact on the local environment. The area proposed under the lease forms the immediate catchment of local nallah, though stated to be seasonal catering to the water needs till winter season. Opening of the area and removal of the trees will also disturb the existing water regime of the area. vii. Background note on the proposal. The mining lease of the User Agency is located at a distance of approximately 20 km from the Bhanuprappur near village Rasuli. The extant mining lease is among the 10 mining lease allotted by the State Government of Chhattisgarh to private companies in the year 2009. The extant mining lease was accorded on 1.07.2009. The User Agency has reported that they have moved a proposal in the year 2009 for grant of approval under Section-2 (ii) of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and the proposal is currently pending with the DFO, East Bhanupratappur for want of identification of CA land. It may also be mentioned that region has working and non-working mines. The details of the mining leases in the area given as under:
Details of the mining lease in the region
S. Name of the Name of the Name of the Area Lease period Status No. District Mining lease User Agency (ha) M/s Godavari Boriatibbu 15.03.2010 to 1. Rajnandgaon Power and Ispat 110.0 Working Mining lease 14.03.2030 Limited
37 | P a g e
M/s Sharda 15.05.2002 to 2. Dongarbor 80.710 Working Energy Limited 14.05.2032 Pandar Dalli and 28.04.2003 to Working 3. M/s SAIL 220.420 Rajhara Hill 27.04.2023 working Kondeksa, 1.06.2003 to 4. Jharan, Dalli M/s SAIL 719.60 Working 31.05.2003 Balod Pandirdani 21.08.2003 to 5. Dalli Forests M/s SAIL 100.0 Working 20.8.2023 4.11.2001 to 6. Mahamaya M/s SAIL 1522.670 Working 3.11.2021 M/s Jayaswal 21.06.2005 to Non- 7. Narayanpur Chhote Dongar 192.250 Neco 20.06.2035 working M/s Jeevanlal 14.03.1996 to Non- 8. Barbaspur 17.930 Jain 13.03.2016 Working M/s Jayaswal 17.01.2002 to 9. Metabodali 25.0 Working Neco 16.01.2022 M/s Godavari 30.09.2008 to 10. Aari Dongri Power and Ispat 138.960 Working 29.09.2058 Limited Kanker 21.10.2009 to Non- 11. Rowghat M/s SAIL 2028.797 20.10.2029 working 1.04.1975 to Non- 12. Kalwar M/s SAIL 938.058 31.03.2005 working M/s Bajrang Ispat 21.1.2014 to 13. Hahaldi 75.0 Working Power Limited 20.11.2044 Lion Dongri M/s Jayaswal 16.10.2014 to 14. 14.40 Working Barbaspur Neco Limted 15.10.2044
From the above, it can be ascertained that in District Kanker the State Government at present has executed mining leases for 7 mining leases, out of which only 3 are non-working while rest 4 are working. In addition to the above, 4 new mining leases have also been allotted by the State Government in the District. Out of the 4 new mining leases, mining leases allotted to M/s Pushp Steel Limited, M/s Monnet Ispat Limited, M/s Navbharat Fuse Company Limited and M/s Inds Energy Limited in East Bhanu Pratapur Forest Division are in the advance stage of obtaining statutory clearance. viii. Compensatory afforestation: The representative from the User Agency has informed that process for identification of land for compensatory is under process. It was also informed by the User Agency that orange forest land is being identified for raising CA. ix. Whether proposal involves violation of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 or not. If yes, a detailed report on violation including action taken against the concerned officials. :No violations of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 have been reported. x. Whether proposal involves rehabilitation of displaced persons. If yes, whether rehabilitation plan has been prepared by the State Government or not. Detail be furnished specifically if rehabilitation plan would affect any other forest area by trans-locating outstees in and around the said forest. :No rehabilitation is involved in the proposal. xi. Reclamation Plan: Not applicable i. Details and financial allocation. NA xii. Details on catchment and command area under the project. NA xiii. Cost benefit ratio. :Not provided. xiv. Recommendations of the Principal Conservator of Forests/State Government: The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Government of Chhattisgarh has recommended the proposal for grant of approval under Section 2 (iii) of the Forest Conservation) Act, 1980 without any specific conditions.
38 | P a g e
xv. Recommendations of Regional Chief Conservator of Forests along with detail reasons: Recommendations of the Addl. PCCF (Central) have been appended separately. xvi. Addl. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Central) shall give detailed comments on whether there are any alternatives routes/alignments for locating the project on the non-forest land. The Government of Chhattisgarh in Rajnandgaon, Balod and Kanker District has executed 14 mining leases. Out of which 7 leases have been executed in the Kanker District and out of 7 leases only 3 are non-working while rest 4 are working. In addition to the above, 4 new mining leases have also been allotted by the State Government in the District, including the extant mining lease, which are in the advance stage of obtaining statutory clearance. The mining lease to the User Agency i.e. M/s Navbharat Fuse Company has been allotted by the State Government in the year 2009. The proposal of the User Agency for obtaining permission under Section-2(ii) of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 is still in nascent stage. The detailed observations on the proposal have already been made in the inspection report. Given the fact that area proposed for mining lease is a pristine forest having fairly high density (upto 0.8), high landscape integrity value, biodiversity richness, the proposal does not deserve consideration and accordingly, not recommended for approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. xvii. Utility of the project. Numbers of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes to be benefited by the project. :It is informed that mineral reserve of 9.4 million tons of iron ore will be mined during the life of mine. It is informed during the inspection that iron ore will be used for captive use in the Sponge Iron Plant of the company located in Jagdalpur. xviii. Whether land being diverted has any socio-cultural /religious value. Whether any sacred grove or very old grown trees/forests exists in the areas proposed for diversion.:No as per information provided by the User Agency and the representative of the State Forest Department, the area is not important from the socio cultural/religious view point. xix. Situation w.r.t. any P.A. :It is indicated in the proposal, that land proposed for diversion is located beyond a distance of 10 km from the boundary of any PAs. It is indicated nearest Tiger Reserve is Indravati Tiger Reserve which is located at a distance of approximately 400 km from the project site. xx. Any other information relating to the project. a) The proposal seeking prior approval of the Central Government under Section 2 (ii) of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has been submitted by the User Agency in the year 2009 and the currently, the proposal even after lapse of a period of 7 years is still in nascent stage. The User Agency has reported that due to the issue related to compensatory afforestation, the proposal could not be forwarded by the Divisional Office. b) The Part-II of the Form-A mentioned the density of the area as 0.5. However, during the inspection, it was observed that maximum area of the lease falls in the category of very dense forest. The representatives of the Forest Department have also informed that density of area as high as 0.8 except very few patches which have density below 0.4. c) The representative of the User Agency has informed that complete compliance of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 has been submitted in accordance with the Advisory dated 5.07.2013. However, details of compliance of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 have not been made available by the User Agency. d) The water sources in the area have been reported to be seasonal. It was observed that local nallah passing through the Rasuli village and small village ponds and hanpumps cater to the water requirement of the area. The local nallah, stated to be seasonal was observed to have scanty water flow during the inspection. The area proposed for mining leases forms the catchment of the said local nallah. e) Infrastructure of the area, viz. road network, does not appear to be adequate to cater to the infrastructural requirement for the transportation of million tonnes of iron ore proposed to be excavated from the leases allotted in the Kanker District. f) The proposed for approval under Section – 2(iii) constitutes the part of Reserved Forest having forest cover. Maximum area of the lease has forest density between 0.7 to 0.8. Non-of the area of the lease
39 | P a g e
was observed to be falling in the open forest category except smaller portion on the hill top where hard rock, mainly iron ore, is exposed surface. g) The area proposed for the lease is a virgin pristine forest maintaining its landscape integrity. The overall landscape of the area indicates area proposed for lease constitutes the part of extension of Bailladilla mountain range i.e. connected to mountains range of Bailadilla in south and terminating in North around Dalli-Rajahara area. h) Examination of the proposal using Decision Support Analysis, the area falls under the category of pristine forest as per Decision Rule 2. Two grids of 1 km x 1 Km size have score of attributes viz. Forest Cover, biodiversity richness and landscape integrity value, etc above 70.
5. It is also mentioned that this Ministry vide its letter no. 5-01/2017-FC dated 08.02.2017 (pg. 29/c) was requested the State Governments to provide a list of existing mining leases executed on or before 11.1.2017 and status of validity of all mining leases which had been saved under the provisions of MMDR Act, 2015, and pending in this Ministry for consideration under Section 2 (ii) & 2(iii) of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
The State Government of Chhattisgarh (GoC) vide their letter no. 331-29/1199 dated 03.05.2017 (pg. 30-32/c) has provided the status of various pending proposals including instant proposal of M/s Navbharat Fuse Company Ltd. Raipur. The State Govt. mentioned that “Mining Lease Sanction has not been issued due to non -producing of essential approval under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Accordingly, the project proponent has been informed on 20.01.2017 for rejecting /closing of the proposal. However, the matter is under consideration of Hon’ble Court, Bilaspur. It is also informed by the State Govt. that the Mining Lease application shall not be treated in illegible and its application shall remain alive for consideration as per the order of Hon’ble Court dated 24.01.2017. 6. It is also imperative to mention here that as per para 2.1 (vi) of Forest (Conservation) Act guidelines, “State Government are advised not to consider/process cases, which are pending in various courts or sub-judice to avoid all sort of administrative and legal complications”
The facts related to the above proposal may be placed before FAC in its forthcoming meeting on 20.12.2017 for their examination and appropriate recommendation. ****
40 | P a g e
Naresh Kumar, DIGF (FC)
Agenda No. 1 F. No. 7-78/2017-FC Sub: Request for Exemption of NPV as per order dated 5/10/2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in I.A. No. 2863-64/2010 in W.P. (C) No. 202/1995 titled T.N. GodavarmanThirumalpad vs. Union of India and Others – reg.
MOEF&CC has vide letter dated 24.05.2016 (F/X) and 25.08.2017 (F/X) requested the Sh. Lokanadha Naidu S/o Sh. Doraswami Naidu M/s Tirumala granite, Sed No. 3 Industrial Estate, Chitoor, Hyderabad to represent their case before the competent authority of this Ministry so that a fair and lawful decision can be taken in the matter pertaining to exemption of NPV as per order dated 05/10/2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. However, there is no response from the State of Orissa as of date.
The facts submitted by the Applicant in I. A. No. 2863-64 of 2010 are as under:
1. The Applicant has filed the Present application for clarification and direction of this Hon’ble court pertaining to Applicant’s lease hold land situated at gape area of Patrapalli village and Vottivaripalli village in YadmariMandalChittor district, which has been renamed as compartment No.217 & 218 of Veerasettipalli “B” “RF” Chittoor by the State of Andhra Pradesh imposing forest act provision without having any notification for that area that is also under political and business pressure.
2. The applicant has been running his proprietorship export business of black granite stone under name and style “M/s Tirumala granite at Shed No.3, Industrial Estate, Chitoor Andhra Pradesh India. The above said area was a hill area having rich black granite rock with no tree even grass root. This area is known as “Gap area” as it is between the village and boundary line of the reserve forest area Chittoor West.
3. That the Applicant is stating that the area in question cannot be accepted as reserve forest area and the respondent has no legal right to impose any cost or penalty in the name of reserved forest area. It it further stated by the applicant that this land belong to the two village and has been defined a gap area since very beginning.
4. That in the month of January 1996 applicant applied for 5 Ha. Hill area/land for black granite mining. The Department of mines and Zoology requested forest department to provide their report about the location of the area. After inspection it was found in the DFO’s report dated 30.08.1996 that the lease hold land area was out of the forest area but under political pressure it has been renamed as compartment.
5. The Applicant is further stating that the said area neither is a forest area nor come within any notification of the State of Andhra Pradesh U/s-3 of the forest Act, therefore the Applicant does not come within the provision of the forest act and should not be compelled to pay any cost/levy under the new name of reserve forest area.
6. That matter came up in the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 19.03.2001 in SLP No.18786 of 2001 and directed that petitioner application be decided a fresh as and when will be submitted with further observation that no mining operation in a reserved forest can be carried out without express prior permission of the Central Govt.
41 | P a g e
7. That the petitioner filed his fresh application for mining right for 8 Ha. for the same hill area land situated which was considered and the State Govt. Leased out only 6.10 Ha. It is further stated that on 04.10.2002 Central Govt. Approved/permitted diversion 6.10 of forest land with conditions subject to final approval and further asked State Govt. to file revised map of the said forest area for 6.10 Ha. to their office. The Govt. of India vide letter dated 21.01.2003 accorded Stage-II approval.
8. That till date of filing the present petition State of Andhra Pradesh has not published any Notification U/s 3 of the forest act.
9. The Applicant has inter-alia prayed for; (i) Direction declaring Applicant’s lease hold land 6.10 Ha. Situated in the gap area of Patrapalli village and Vottivaripalli village in YadmariMandalChittor district, which has been renamed as compartment No.217 & 218 of Veerasettipalli “B” “RF” Chittoor, does not come within the provision of the Indian Forest Act.
(ii) The Applicant has prayed for direction declaring that the area in question does not attract order/direction of this Hon’ble Court passed in I.A. no.566 of 2002 in W.P. No. 202 of 1995.
(iii) Be further pleased to declare that Applicant is entitled to keep continue his mining lease permission as valid till 14.02.2023 in the area in question.
(iv) Be pleased to set aside all action/orders against the Applicant, if any, what respondent have already done in the name of reserved forest area upon the Applicant.
The operative part of the order dated 05/10/2015 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed in W.P (C) No. 202/1995 is produced as under:
“CATEGORY – III: MATTERS RELATING TO EXEMPTIONS FROM THE PAYMENT OF THE NPV: Various applications have been filed by different applicants to exempt them from payment of Net Present Value (‘NPV.). Now all those applications will be transferred to MoEFCC by the Registry within 45 days’ time from today. The MoEFCC will consider those applications in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. If, for any reason, any person is aggrieved by the said decision, he shall be free to file an appropriate applications/ petition before the National Green Tribunal ‘NGT’) within 60 days’ time from the date of the order passed by the MoEFCC.
Liberty is reserved to NGT to condone the delay, if any, in approaching it within the time granted by us if a satisfactory explanation is offered by the applicant/petitioner.
With the aforesaid observation and directions, we dispose of the Interlocutory Applications/maters specified in Annexure – III to the note supplied by Shri Harish Salve, learned amicus curiae.”
It is important to mention here that the CEC Report is not available in the present matter.
The matter was considered by the FAC in its meeting held on 16.11.2017, Sh. R. Lokanadha Naidu M/s Tirumalu Granite, Chitoor.
The applicant did not appear before the FAC. It was decided by the FAC to issue final notice to the applicant to appear before the FAC in the next meeting & proposal is deferred.
42 | P a g e
A copy of the minutes of FAC meeting is placed below at (F/x)
We may keeping in view the observation of FAC. A letter has been sent to the concerned user agency with request to depute their representative for presenting the case before the FAC on 20th December, 2017.
The facts of the matter is place in front of the FAC for examination & reconsideration.
****
Agenda No. 2 F. No. 7-79/2017-FC Sub: Request for Exemption of NPV as per order dated 5/10/2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in I.A No. 2666/2009 in W.P. (C) No. 202/1995 titled T.N. GodavarmanThirumalpad vs. Union of India and Others – reg.
MOEF&CC vide letter dated 24.05.2016(F/X) and 25.08.2017 (F/Y) had requested the State of Madhya Pradesh to represent their case before the competent authority of this Ministry so that a fair and lawful decision can be taken in the matter pertaining to exemption of NPV as per order dated 05/10/2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. However, there is no response from the State of Madhya Pradesh as of date.
The facts submitted by the Applicant in I. A. No. 2666 of 2009 are as under:
1. The Applicant seeks exemption from payment of NPV for construction of rural roads under Pradhan Mantri Gramin Yojna (Hereinafter being referred to as “PMGSY”) and for granting permission to construct Rural roads in protected and reserved forest areas in Madhya Pradesh.
2. The PMGSY was launched on 25th December, 2000 as a 100% Centrally Sponsored Scheme to provide all- weather road connectivity in rural areas of the country. The PMGSY envisages connecting all unconnected habitations with a population of 500 plus in the plain areas and 250 plus in hilly and tribal areas and substantial population of the tribal areas will be benefited by these roads.
3. The Applicant submits that the committee on NPV made recommendations regarding exemption of the activities/projects from payment of NPV. The recommendations focus around infrastructure and basic services like village tanks, drinking water pipelines, electricity lines in rural areas like community centers have also been included in the category of exemptions.
4. That in order to provide road connectivity to habitations in remote areas, it is sometimes required to construct new roads or upgrade the existing roads or portion thereof through the forests. It is required to obtain the forest clearance under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 and its subsequent amendments for the constructions of the new roads.
5. The order dated 28th March 2008 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court directs payment of NPV for using forest land and the said order concludes with certain categories (ten) exempted from payment of NPV rates for three years and subject to variation thereafter.
6. Subsequently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 9th May 2008 modified its earlier order dated 28th March 2008 in lieu of some typographical mistakes.
7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 9th May 2008 deleted the exemption on payment of NPV in case of villages roads which had been allowed vide the earlier order dated 28th March 2008.
43 | P a g e
8. That in Madhya Pradesh under the PMGSY presently 117 roads are required to be constructed wherein a part or full portion of land of reserved or protected forest is involved.
9. That construction of new roads/upgradation of existing roads under PMGSY brings many socioeconomic benefits to the rural population and therefore is in national interest.
10. That ‘Rural Roads’ being a State subject, projects under PMGSY are executed by State/UT Governments through their agencies, i.e. SRRDA (State Rural Roads Development Agency) for monitoring, financial management and coordination at the State Level and Programme Implementation Units (PIUs) for Programmme Implementation at the District level.
11. The applicant has stated that if the alleged amount of NPV will be allowed to be paid, then it will cause heavy burden on the State exchequer, and it will be difficult to execute the programme.
12. The Present Application has been filed for seeking indulgence of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to review/modify the order dated 9th May 2008.
13. The Applicant has prayed for grant of exemption from the payment of NPV for construction of rural roads under PMGSY where either in part or in full forest land (Protected or Reserved) is involved.
The CEC in compliance to the Hon’ble Court’s order dated 06.11.2009 filed its report dated 22nd February 2010 in the present matter. The observations made by the CEC inter-alia are as follows:
Recommendation of the CEC
“8. In the above background the CEC reiterates the recommendations made by it in its Report dated 29th September, 2009 in IA No. 2506 of 2009 filed by the Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India seeking exemption from the payment of the NPV for the forest land diverted for construction of rural roads including in the State of Orrisa and recommends that no relief in the present IA may be granted.”
The operative part of the order dated 05/10/2015 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India passed in W.P (C) No. 202/1995 is produced as under:
“CATEGORY – III: MATTERS RELATING TO EXEMPTIONS FROM THE PAYMENT OF THE NPV: Various applications have been filed by different applicants to exempt them from payment of Net Present Value (‘NPV.). Now all those applications will be transferred to MoEFCC by the Registry within 45 days’ time from today. The MoEFCC will consider those applications in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. If, for any reason, any person is aggrieved by the said decision, he shall be free to file an appropriate applications/ petition before the National Green Tribunal ‘NGT’) within 60 days’ time from the date of the order passed by the MoEFCC.
Liberty is reserved to NGT to condone the delay, if any, in approaching it within the time granted by us if a satisfactory explanation is offered by the applicant/petitioner.
With the aforesaid observation and directions, we dispose of the Interlocutory Applications/maters specified in Annexure – III to the note supplied by Shri Harish Salve, learned amicus curiae.”
44 | P a g e
The matter was considered by the FAC in its meeting held on 16.11.2017 and FAC studied CEC on this matter, since the applicant did not appear before the FAC. It was decided by the FAC to issue final notice to the applicant to appear before the FAC in the next meeting & proposal is deferred.
A copy of the minutes of FAC placed at F/x.
In view of the observation made by FAC in its meeting held on 16.11.2017. A letter has been sent to the concerned user agency with request to depute their representative for presenting the case before the FAC on 20th December, 2017.
The chief executive officer, M.P. Rural Department Authority has been requested to depute one representative well conversant with the matter to present before FAC.
The facts of the matter is place in front of the FAC for examination & reconsideration.
****
Agenda No. 3 F. No. 7-80/2017-FC Sub : Request for exemption of NPV as per order dated 05/10/2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in I. A. No. 2388 of 2008 in W.P. (Civil) No. 202/1995 in the matter titled as T. N Godavarman vs. Union of India and in the matter of State of Jharkhand – reg.
MOEF&CC has vide letter dated 12.05.2016 (F/X) requested the State of Jharkhand to represent their case before the competent authority of this Ministry so that a fair and lawful decision can be taken in the matter pertaining to exemption of NPV as per order dated 05/10/2015 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. However, there is no response from the Applicant, State of Jharkhand as of date. Accordingly, this Ministry has once again vide e-mail dated 25th August 2017 requested State of Jharkhand to represent their case before FAC meeting dated 30th August 2017 in order to arrive at an appropriate decision. The copy of the e-mail is enclosed at F/A.
The facts submitted by the Applicant in I. A. No. 2388 of 2008are as under:
1. The Govt. of India has approved a new scheme i.e. Rajiv Gandhi Vidyutikaran Yojana Scheme for rural electricity infrastructure and house hold electrification (a Central Govt. sponsored scheme). 2. The said scheme is to be implemented through Rural Electrification Corporation. 3. Under the said scheme, non-electrified villages and non-electrified hamlets of electrified villages out of all the districts of Jharkhand are to be electrified. 4. There are about 24 districts which are to be electrified within the State of Jharkhand by laying out transmission lines. The transmission lines are also to be laid through some forest/waste land recorded as Jungle Jhari in the revenue records. 5. Under the said scheme 90% amount is to be borne by the Central Govt. as subsidy and balance 10% is to be given to the State Govt. be the Central Govt. as loan. 6. That for the implementation of the said scheme approximately 3200 Ha. of forest land will be used. 7. That it is not possible to avoid the forest land for laying out transmission line because approximately 38% of the geographical area of the State falls under the forest. 8. That survey has been conducted in the districts of Dhanbad, Koderma and Bokaro regarding the status of use of forest land while for other districts, survey is in progress. The Regional Office Bhubaneswar of MOEF&CC has accorded Stage-I clearance to some of the blocks in these districts.
45 | P a g e
9. The Applicant, State of Jharkhand has inter-alia stressed that the said scheme is not of commercial nature, it isa public welfare scheme important for the all-round development of the villages within the State of Jharkhand, it will uplift the livelihood of the poor residing within the State and the State of Jharkhand is different from other States as it has a major chunk of unelectrified areas. 10. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the Applicant, State of Jharkhand as per the Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 28th March 2008 and 9th May 2008 in W.P (C) No. 202/1995has prayed for exemption from payment of NPV and compensatory afforestation cost so that the said scheme be implemented within the fixed time frame and the large population of the State of Jharkhand get benefit from the said scheme.
The CEC in compliance to the Hon’ble Court’s order dated 24.10.2008 filed its report dated 29thSeptember 2009 in the present matter. The observations made by the CEC are as follows:
“5. This Hon’ble Court by order dated 28.03.2008 and 9.5.2008 has prescribed the rates of NPV for the forest area falling in the different eco classes and the different density classed and has exempted certain category of projects from the payment of the NPV. Pursuant to the above orders of this Hon’ble Court, transmission / distribution lines upto 22 KV are exempted from the payment of the NPV provided the forest area required is upto 1 Hectare and no felling of tree is involved. While issuing the above orders, the issue regarding the general exemption of transmission lines and distribution lines from the payment of the NPV was examined in detail and was not accepted by this Hon’ble Court.
6. The CEC is of the view that this Hon’ble Court’s orders dated 28.3.2008 and 9.5.2008 regarding NPV have been issued after detailed examination of all the relevant issues and do not need any modification. In the present case, as per the Applicant State, use of about 16,500 Hecatres of forest area is involved. Instead of seeking exemption from the payment of the NPV, it would be appropriate that the State of Jharkhand, wherever possible, identifies the alternate routes for laying of the electric lines so that the use of forest land can be avoided to the maximum possible extent. Any general exemptionfrom the payment of the NPV for the use of the forest land in the State of Jharkhand for the laying of the transmission lines is bound to lead to demand for similar exemption from the other States and also for other Government projects particularly as the grounds on which the exemption has been sought in the present case are equally applicable to the other Centrally Sponsored Schemes and Government projects.”
Recommendation of the CEC
“In view of the above it is recommended that the request made by the State of Jharkhand for exemption from the payment of the NPVfor the use of forest land for laying of the transmission lines under the Rajiv Gandhi GraminVidyutikaranYojna Scheme may not be accepted.”
The order dated 5th October 2015, 28th March 2008 and 9th May 2008 in W.P (C) No. 202/1995passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India are enclosed at F/B, F/C and F/D respectively.
The matter was consider by the FAC in its meeting held on 16thNovember.2017. PCCF, Jharkhand state govt of Jharkhand.
The applicant did not appear before the FAC. It was decided by the FAC to issue final notice to the applicant to appear before the FAC in the next meeting & proposal is deferred
A copy of Minutes of FAC placed at (F/x)
In view of the observation of FAC, a letter has been sent to concerned user agency with request to depute their representative for presenting the case before the FAC on 20th December, 2017.
46 | P a g e
This matter is related to exemption of NPV for use of forest land under Rajiv Gandhi Gram Vidyutikran Yojna in state of Jharkhand. The Principal Secretary Energy Department, Govt of Jharkhand is requested to represent this matter through his representative.
The facts of the matter is place in front of the FAC for examination & reconsideration. ****
47 | P a g e
ADDITIONAL AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF FOREST ADVISORY COMMITTEE SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 20th December, 2017
Nisheeth Saxena, Sr. AIGF (FC) Agenda No. 1
F. No. 8-54/2017-FC
Sub: Proposal for diversion of 275.04 ha. of Forest Land in favour of Water Resources Department, Burhanpur Burhanpur for Construction of Bhawsa Medium Irrigation Tank Project, in Burhanpur district in the State of Madhya Pradesh.- regarding. 1. The Addl. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Land Management) and Nodal Officer, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, State Government of Madhya Pradesh vide their letter No. F-3/101/2016/10- 11/10/2966 Bhopal dated 07th October, 2017 (Pg. 1-356/c) submitted a proposal to obtain prior approval of the Central Government, in terms of the Section-2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of 275.04 ha. of Forest Land in favour of Water Resources Department, Burhanpur Burhanpur for Construction of Bhawsa Medium Irrigation Tank Project, in Burhanpur district in the State of Madhya Pradesh. 2. The facts related to the proposal as contained in the State Government of Madhya Pradesh letter dated 07th October, 2017 are given below in the form of fact sheet: FACT SHEET
1. Name of the Proposal Diversion of 275.04 ha. of Forest Land in favour of Water Resources Department, Burhanpur Burhanpur for Construction of Bhawsa Medium Irrigation Tank Project, in Burhanpur district in the State of Madhya Pradesh. 2. Location (i) State Madhya Pradesh. (ii) District Burhanpur. (iii) Category Irrigation. 3. Particulars of Forests: (i) Name of Forest Division and Forest Burhanpur Territorial Forest Division. area involved. 275.04 hectares area involved.
(ii) Legal status/Sy. No. Division Forest Legal Status Land (Ha.) Burhanpur 129.6 Village Forest Burhanpur 0.1 Protected Forest Burhanpur 145.34 Reserved Forest (iii) Maps i. SOI Toposheet – Not Given. ii. Digital DGPS map- Not submitted. However, google imagery has been submitted at Pg. 41-46/c. iii. Land Use Plan – Not Given. iv. Compensatory Afforestation –Pg. 47-59/c. 4. Total period for which the forest land is 100 years. proposed to be diversion (In years) 5. Topography of the area - 6. (i) Geology -
48 | P a g e
(ii) Vulnerability to erosion Not Mentioned in the proposal. 7. (i) Vegetation Eco-Class – 4 (ii) Density 0.5 8. Working plan prescription for the forest Comp. No. RF 428, 433, 434 are R.D.F. working circle land proposed for diversion. No. RF 435 is Forest village & Comp. No. RF 436 is S.C.I. working Circle.
9. Species-wise (Scientific names) and
diameter class wise enumeration of trees
Name
150)CM
60) CM 90) CM
120)CM in unbroken area. -
- -
-
Name
S. No.
Scientific Scientific
(>150)CM
(31 (61
Local Local (91
(121
n 8 4
1.
42
286
6236
Teak
Sagwa
s
2.
791 308 311
1168
Misc. Misc.
Plants
11192
Mixed Mixed
Specie FRL-2
150)CM
-
60)CM 90)CM 120)CM
- - -
S. No. Scientific Name Local Name (31 (61 (91 (121 (>150)CM
N I L FRL-4
150)CM
-
60)CM 90)CM 120)CM
- - -
S. No. Scientific Name Local Name (31 (61 (91 (121 (>150)CM
1. Teak Sagwa n 1084 30 0 0 0
2. Misc. Species Mixed plants 5962 224 103 10 09
10. Brief note on vulnerability of the forest Not mentioned in the proposal. area to erosion. 11. The sensitivity of the forest region for Not mentioned in the proposal. soil protection. 12. Details wildlife present in and around the No. forest land proposed for diversion. 13. Whether area is significant from wildlife - point of view (i) Whether forms part of National park, No. Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve, Tiger Reserve, Elephant Corridor, etc. (if so, details of the area and comments of the Chief Wildlife Warden to be annexed). (ii) Whether any national park, wildlife No. sanctuary, biosphere reserve, tiger reserve, elephant corridor, wildlife migration corridor etc., is located within 1 Km. from boundary of the forest land proposed for diversion:
49 | P a g e
(iii) Whether the forest land proposed for No. diversion is located within eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) of the protected area notified under Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (Note: In case, ESZ of a Protected Area is not notified, then 10 kms distance from boundary of the Protected Area should be treated as ESZ): 14. Whether any RET species of flora and No rare/endangered species of flora & fauna were fauna are found in the area. If so details found in the area. thereof 15. Whether any protected archaeological/ There is no protected archaeological/heritage heritage site/defence establishment or site/defense establishment in the proposed area. any other important monuments is located in the area. 16. Whether any work of in violation of the No. Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has been carried out (Yes/No). If yes details of the same including period of work done, action taken on erring officials. Whether work in violation is still in progress. 17. Whether the requirement of forest land as Yes proposed by the user agency in col. 2 of Part-I is unavoidable and barest minimum for the project, if no recommended area item-wise with details of alternatives examined. 18. Whether clearance under the Yes, Environment (protection) Act, 1986 is As reported by the User Agency the EC application required? yet to be submitted. 19. Status of Wildlife Clearance; No, Wildlife Clearance required. 20. Compensatory Afforestation - (i) Details of non-forest area/degraded CA details are given copy of the same is available at forest area identified for CA, its (Pg. 150-345/c). distance from adjoining forest, number of patches, sixe of each patches. (ii) Detailed CA scheme including Detailed CA scheme including species to be planted, species to be planted, implementing implementing agency, time schedule, cost structure agency, time schedule, cost structure, has been submitted copy of the same are available at etc. (Pg. 150-345/c). (iii) Total financial outlay for CA 2261.99 Lakhs
(iv) Certificate from the competent Area is Suitable for Plantation (Pg. 147/c). authority regarding suitability of the area identified for CA and from management point of view. 21. Total Command Area of the project (in 3750 ha. ha.) However, approved CAT plan is required with the estimated cost. 22. Catchment Area Treatment The approved Catchment Area Treatment Plan has not given, with estimated Cost. 23. Rehabilitation of Oustees No displacement. a) No of families involved b) Category of families c) Details of rehabilitation plan
50 | P a g e
Compliance of Scheduled Tribe and 24. The District Collector, Burhanpur, Government of Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Madhya Pradesh vide his letter dated 28.03.2013 (Pg. (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 30/c) has issued a FRA certificate for diversion of 275.04 ha. of Forest Land in favour of Water Resources Department, Burhanpur Burhanpur for Construction of Bhawsa Medium Irrigation Tank Project, in Burhanpur district in the State of Madhya Pradesh. However, the State Government / user agency has not submitted the FRA certificate is prescribed format as per Ministry’s guideline dated 05.07.2013. 25. Cost Benefit Ratio 9.94 lakhs Cost Benefit Ratio has not been given as per the latest Ministry’s Guideline dated 01.08.2017. 26. Total Cost of the Project (Rupees in 12330 lakhs lakhs) 27. Employment Potential Permanent / 500 permanent Temporary 26 Temporary 28. Recommendation Recommended (pg. 346/c): i. DFO It is recommended that wild life protection plan should be prepared because in the proposed area there are habitat of beer and leopard and other valuable wild life species. The Dam site is located near the forest area, so that wild life will get benefited and also vegetation will improve in nearby forest area and people of this area will be benefited by irrigation and employment (Pg. 347- 348/c). ii. CCF Recommended (pg. 350/c)
iii. Nodal Officer Recommended (pg. 355/c)
v. State Government Recommended (pg.356/c) 29. District Profile, Burhanpur (i) Total Geographical area of the 342700 hectares. district (ii) Total Forest area/Divisional Forest 190102 hectares. area (iii) Total area diverted since 1980 with 17 cases number of cases. 182.312 hectares.
(iv) Total CA stipulated since 1980 a. Forest land including penal CA 0 b. Non Forest Land 136.900 hectares. (v) Progress of Compensatory Afforestation 25.08.2016 a. Forest land 136.900 hectares. b. Non Forest land 16 hectares. 3. The State Government of Madhya Pradesh in their said letter dated 07.10.2017 submitted following additional information pertaining to the proposal: (i) The State Government has reported the 42 Pattedhari farmers may be affected in the in this project this may be compensate by the Water Resources Department Government of Madhya Pradesh. The WRD has also given an undertaking in this regard.
51 | P a g e
4. The forest land proposed to be diverted has been inspected by Shri B. Abhay Bhaskar, Dy. Conservator of Forests (Central), Regional Office (Central Zone), Bhopal along with representatives of the State Forest Department and the user agency on 15th – 16th November, 2017. 5. Important information furnished in the inspection report submitted by the Central Regional Office of this Ministry vide its letter dated 01.12.2017 are as below: 6. Officers present during site inspection:- a) Shri B. Abhay Bhaskar, DCF(C), R.O Bhopal b) Shri V.P Bhagora, SE, WRD, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh. c) Shri V.K. Mandloi, EE, WRD, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh. d) Shri R. S Rojh, Range Officer, Dhamnod, Dhar. e) Field staff of Forest Department & WRD, M.P. (i) Legal Status of Forest land proposed for diversion.
Sl. No. Division Forest Land (ha.) Legal Status 1 Burhanpur(T) 129.6 Village Forest 2 Burhanpur(T) 0.1 Protected Forest 3 Burhanpur(T) 145.34 Reserved Forest 4 Non-forest area 00.00 Non-forest area Total 275.04 Comp No. RF 428,433,434, PF481 are R.D.F. working Circle & Comp No. RF 435 is Forest Village & Comp. No. RF 436 is S.C.I. Working Circle. No non-forest area required for project.
(ii) How the land proposed for diversion is to be utilized? : Storage of water for irrigation project. (iii) Whether the proposal involves any construction of buildings (including residential): No. (iv) Total cost of Project: Rs. 12,330 lakhs. (v) Wild life: Whether the forest area proposed for diversion is important from Wildlife point of view or not: Proposal is not a part of any protected area.
(vi) Aerial distance from the nearest boundary of any protected area: 80 km from Kharmopore National Park. (vii) Vegetation:
Species-wise local/scientific names and girth-wise enumeration of trees at FRL
S. Scientific Local (31- (61- (91- (121- (>150)c No. Name Name 60)cm. 90)cm. 120)cm. 150)cm. m. 1 Teak Sagwan 6236 286 42 8 4 2 Misc. Mixed 11192 1168 791 308 311 Species Plants Total 17428 1454 833 316 315
a. Trees to be felled: 20,346 nos. are marked. i FRL-2 : NIL ii FRL-4: 7,422. b. Effect of removal on the general ecosystem in the area: the irrigation project. As per Part-II, Canopy Density is 0.2 to 0.6 & Eco-class 4. The vegetation of area contains Tectona grandis, Azadiracta indica, etc were observed. The forest is mixed forest with teak as major species.
52 | P a g e
As per Site Inspection, the area is in two part 129.60 ha – forest patta holder and 145.44 ha = 275.04 ha. The forest is situated on foot hills of surrounding mountains and may be at FRL -2 & 4 level. All the land allotted to pattan holders will come in main submergency. (viii) Background not of the proposal: The project is Bhawsa medium irrigation tank project with command area of 3750 ha spread over 9 villages. The project will bring command area under multiple cropping pattern, which will bring the uplifting of peoples. Majority of population belongs to tribal community. The total catchment area of the project is 3750 ha and CAT plan of 76.80 sq. km. is proposed. (ix) Compensatory Afforestation: Applicable, non-forest land = 277.13 ha.
A Whether land proposed / selected Yes for C.A is suitable for plantation and management point of view? B Whether land for C.A is free from Yes encroachment of other encumbrances? C Whether land for C.A is important No from religious or archaeological point of view? D Land identified for raising C.A is 6 (six) patches in how may patches? Whether S. District Village Area Khasra No. patches area compact or not? N Name o. 1 Burhanpur Chandigarh 44.85 212,289,511,51 9,271,528,449,4 51,575,619,613 2 Burhanpur Ichhapur 68.04 1239,1303,1304 ,1305,1307,162 4,1645,1253 3 Burhanpur Doifodiaya 24.92 72 4 Burhanpur Dedtalai 10.05 114/1 5 Katni Keolari 33.39 130/1 6 Burhanpur Mohad 95.88 417,420,421,42 3,425,445,446,4 50,460,479,980, 981,982,985,98 6,987,988,989,9 91,994,996,997, 545,915,931,68 7,706,808 Total 277.1 3
E Maps with details Yes F C.A are should be clearly shown Yes on the map, patches wise and their contiguity to the forest area, etc G Total financial outlay of 10 years 22.62 Crores. CA Programme
(x) Whether proposal involves violation of Forest (Conservation) Act? : No, as per Part-II (DCF report). (xi) Whether proposal involves violation rehabilitation of displaced people? : During site inspection it was informed that 42 nos. of families would be affected which have been given land under FRA. (xii) Reclamation Plan details and Financial Allocation: Not Applicable, (xiii) Cost benefit ratio: 1:1.67 (10%) & 1:2.94(5%)
53 | P a g e
(xiv) Utility of project: for what storage and irrigation in command area. (xv) Number of Scheduled Cast and Scheduled Tribe involved in the Project: Yes / Forest Village Choundi Camp. No. 435 of 42 vangram patta holders – families dependent on this 129.60 ha as per SIR of DFO. (xvi) Compliance of FRA 2006-DC Certificate: for 276.84 ha from, DC, Burhanpur dated 28.03.2013. (xvii) Whether the land being diverted has any socio-cultural / religious valur : No. (xviii) Whether any sacred groves or very old growth of tree of forest exist in the area proposed for diversion? : No (xix) Recommendation of Nodal Officer and the Stat Government:
a. The Nodal officer – recommended. b. The State Government – recommended. (xx) Details of comments of the APPCF (LM), MP on alternate routes/alignments for locating the projects: Recommended by APCCF (LM), MP. (xxi) Recommendation of Nodal Officer and the State Government: The Site Inspection was carried out on 15th and 16th November 2017. The proposal will bring 3750 ha area spread over 9 villages under command irrigation. Specific observation and suggestion for project based on Site Inspection:-
a) The 129.60 ha out of 275.04 ha of forest land is allotted to 42 nos. of villagers under FRA, 2006. b) The rights of the peoples allotted under FRA, 2006 shall be settled by following due procedure prescribed under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, whichever applicable. c) During settlement of patta holders FRA, 2006, User Agency shall not ask any new forest area. d) There is no major road which will submerge in event of dam construction: the User Agency shall submit the plan for re-alignment of above said road & preferable forest land shall not be asked. e) As the project is only for dam, the User Agency shall be asked / submit the comprehensive proposal for irrigation Canal, DISNET involving forest land. f) CA on non-forest land is proposed, the area is having very low soil depth / barren land hills. Wherein the fertile land is being asked for diversion. So, 25% over the CA plan shall be used for the Soil Moisture Conservation Work. g) In accordance to SIR of DFO & CCF, Burhanpur, 10% of the project cost or cost of CA scheme shall be proposed / used for Wildlife Management Plan. h) The User Agency shall obtain Environment Clearance under EPA, 1986. i) The approved CAT plan shall be submitted. The proposal is completely situated in the forest land and User Agency is providing 277.13 ha of non- forest land for CA which is rocky and barren land. The forest land which is proposed for diversion is occupied by the 425 nos. of patta holders under FRA, 2006. The area was covered by commercial crop like banana, cotton. Chilly and arhar and farmers are using modern agricultural technique like drip irrigation. As told by one of the farmer that the land is very fertile. As told by WRD, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh the project will bring command area under multiple cropping pattern. Considering the economic condition of farmers and future of 42 nos. of patta holders after land submergence, some of the families will lose all their land & may become non-agriculture / landless, this matter need to be addresses by State Govt. So, in such cases EC may be sought before FC, as EC is given only after the Public hearing, EIA & EMP reports. In view that project requires forest land only and majority of the area (i.e. 129.60 ha out of 275.04 ha) is given to patta holders under FRA, 2006 and based on the above specified observation and suggestion, it is proposed that user agency shall obtain Environment Clearance under EPA, 1986, NOC for 42 nos.
54 | P a g e
of patta holders under FRA, 2006 and approved CAT plan before case to be considered for diversion under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The site inspection report is submitted for consideration in Forest Advisory Committee. (xxii) Recommendations of the Regional, APCCF (C) Bhopal are as below:-
(i) In view of all details mentioned in the site inspection report of Dy. Conservator of Forest (C), undersigned recommends the proposal for the diversion of 275.04 ha. Forest land in favour of water resource department, Burhanpur division for construction of Bhawsa medium irrigation tank project in Burhanpur district of Madhya Pradesh under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 with above specific condition. 7. The APPC (Central), Regional Office (Western Zone), Bhopal finally recommended that the proposal may be considered for approval.
It is proposed that the proposal along with site inspection report received from the Regional Office (Western Zone), Bhopal may be placed before the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) during its next meeting for its consideration and appropriate recommendations. ****
55 | P a g e