Annexure-A Whether there is any litigation pending against the project and/or land in which the project is propose to be set up? Sl. Name of the Court Case No. Orders / directions of Court, if any and its relevance with the proposed project. 1 National Green Tribunal Appeal No. 47 of Disposed by NGT. Copy of order is enclosed. 2018 2 Jharkhand High Court WPC No. 7294/16 Claiming land to be joint family property , Subject Matter is pending at Tribunal Dumka 3 Jharkhand High Court WPC No. 5017/18 Prayer to Quash Land Transfer Order. No orders yet. 4 Jharkhand High Court WPC No. 238/19 Pending for admission. 5 Principal District Judge, LA Case No. 55/18 No Orders yet. Dumka 6 Principal District Judge, LA Case No. 56/18 No Orders yet. Dumka Item Nos.13 & 14 Court No. 2 BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Appeal No. 47 of 2018 (M.A. No. 493/2018) (Earlier Appeal No. 11/2017)(EZ) With Original Application No. 171 of 2018 (M.A. No. 1013/2018) (Earlier O.A. No. 11/2018)(EZ) R. Sreedhar Appellant(s) Versus Union of India &Ors. Respondent(s) And R.Sreedhar Applicant(s) Versus Union of India &Ors. Respondent(s) Date of hearing: 07.01.2019 CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHUVENDRA S. RATHORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. SATYAWAN SINGH GARBYAL, EXPERT MEMBER For Appellant(s) Mr.Ritwick Dutta, Mr.Saurabh Sharma and Mr.Sharna Balakrishna,Advocates For Respondent(s) Mr.Satyalipsu Ray,Advocate for MoEF Mr.Dhruv Mehta, Sr.Advocate, Ms.Rajdipa,Ms Neela Nagpal and Mr.Philomon Kani, Advocates for APJL For Applicant(s) Mr.Ritwick Dutta, Mr.Saurabh Sharma and Mr.Sharna Balakrishna,Advocates For Respondent(s) Ms.Keshav Mohan and Mr.Rishi K.Awasthi, Advocates for MOEF Mr.Neeraj K. Gupta andMr.Ranjeet Kr.Singh, Advocates for NECL Mr.Avijit Roay, Advocate for Assam PCB Mr.Shuvodeep Roy and Mr. Vinayak Gupta, Advocates for State of Assam 1 ORDER Original Application No. 171 of 2018 be detached from Appeal No. 47 of 2018. List this matter on 7th February, 2019. Appeal No. 47 of 2018 At the outset, it has been brought to our notice by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that the source of water in the instant project has been changed from river Chiri to river Ganga. Therefore, the substance of the Appeal has changed to a great extent. In these circumstances, he has prayed that in order to bring subsequent development on record, he may be permitted to file a fresh Application/Appeal. He does not press the present Appeal. Accordingly, Appeal No. 47 of 2018 is disposed of, with liberty as prayed by the Appellant. M.A. No. 493 of 2018 This Application does not survive for consideration as the main appeal itself stands disposed of. M.A. No. 493 of 2018 stands disposed of accordingly. Raghuvendra S. Rathore, JM Dr. Satyawan Singh Garbyal, EM January 07, 2019 jg 2 3/1/2019 Timeline TimeLine Details Proposal received date at each stage of flow. A. General Details (i). Proposal No. : FP/JH/Others/32773/2018 (ii). Name of Project for which Forest Land is required : Construction of Water Pipeline (iii). Short narrative of the proposal and Project/scheme for which the forest land is required : Construction of Water Intake Pipeline from Ganga River passing from Godda & Sahibganj District for Godda Thermal Power Project (iv). State : Jharkhand (v). Category of the Project : Others (vi). Shape of forest land proposed to be diverted : Linear (vii). Area of forest land proposed for diversion(in ha.): 13.3293 B. Time Line Query by Uploading(by Query for Resubmission Nodal U.A.) of Submitted Stage-I Stage-II Shortcoming(if of Proposal Officer for copies of Nodal State Regional Proposal No. by User Division Circle Approval Approval any) by Nodal by User submitting receipt Office Government Office Agency on on Officer Agency Hard received from Copies DFO & DC FP/JH/Others/32773/2018 27/03/2018 10/04/2018 11/04/2018 17/04/2018 23/04/2018 Sahebganj Dumka : Jharkhand: :27/04/2018 27/06/2018 28/02/2019 Godda (Sahebganj) :27/04/2018 Deoghar : 27/06/2018 (Godda) C. Essential Details Sought History Communication between Regional Communication between State Communication between Nodal Communication between Circle & Communication between Division Office & State Government Government & Nodal Officer Officer & Circle Division & User Agency Query raised by Circle (Dumka) Query raised by DFO on:29/08/2018 (Sahebganj) on:22/09/2018 Replied by DFO (Sahebganj) Replied by UA on :12/01/2019 on:21/01/2019 Query raised by Circle (Dumka) on:04/02/2019 Replied by DFO (Sahebganj) on:21/02/2019 NOTE:- Proposal is pending at Nodal Officer . Print page http://forestsclearance.nic.in/timeline.aspx?pid=FP/JH/Others/32773/2018 1/1 1 F. No. 11-63/2012-Fe Government of India Ministry of Environment and Forests (FC Division) Paryavaran Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110510. Dated: 7th January, 2013 To The Principal Secretary (Forests), All State / Union Territory Governments Sub: Guidelines for diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 - Modification in para 4.4 and 2.2 (iii) thereof. Sir, I am directed to say that the Central Government has received representation from various Ministries and user agencies to relax para 4.4 and para 2.2 (iii) of the guidelines issued under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 in respect of linear projects involving use of forest land falling in a portion of their length falling in several Forest Divisions/States. The issue has been examined in its entirety in considerable depth by this Ministry and after careful considerations; this Ministry hereby takes the following decisions: 1. The following shall be added in para 4.4 of the guidelines for diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980: In the case of linear projects inmlving use offorest land falling in a portion of their length, pending consideration ofapproval under the Act, work on non-forest land may only be executed upto such point (to be selected by the user agency) on either side offorest land ifit is explicitly certified by the user agency that in case approval under the Act for diversion of forest land is declined, it is technically feasible to execute the project along an alternate alignment without involving diversion of forest land. Details of all such stretches along with alternate alignments identified to bypass tire forest land should be explicitly provided in the proposal seeking approval under the Act. It is specifically clarified in terms of the Lafarge judgment that commencement of 7.oork on non forest land 'will not confer any right on the user agency with regard to grant of approval under the Act. The projects involving widening! upgradation of existing roads will only be allowed to be executed on the entire stretch located in non- forest land, provided the user agency submits an undertaking that execution ofroark on non-forest land 2 shall not be cited as a reason for grant of approval under the Act and in case approval under the Act for diversion of forest land is declined, width of the portion of road falling in the forest land will be maintained at its existing level. This will also be incorporated as specific condition of the Environment Clearance. This clarification will not apply to the roads falling in Protected Areas and the eeo-sensitive zones around Protected Areas. 2. Similarly, para 2.2 (iii) of the said guidelines shall read as below: The proposals for linear projects such as roads, rairway line, transmission lines etc. may be processed in their entirety. However, to facilitate phased preparation and processing, the proposals seeking prior approval of the Central Government under the Act for such projects may be prepared Forest . Division/ state-wise starting from one end from which work on the project is proposed to be initiated. Howe'ver, a map indicating alignment of the entire project, highlighting the portions passing through forest land, along with a write up on salient features of the entire project and details ofapprovals already obtained and/ or sought under the Act for other sections of the project, if any, shall be provided in each ofsuch proposals. Wherever the project passes through the forest land, the user agency shall indicate an alternate alignment 1Dhich may be used if approval under the Act is declined. This will be a specific condition of the Environment Clearance to the project. Provided further that to prevent occurrence offait accompli situations, proposals prepared Forest Division/ state-wise shall be considered only if it is certified by the user agency that in case appro'val under the Act for diversion of forest land required for the remaining portions/stretches falling in other Forest Divisions/states is declined, it is technically feasible to execute the project along an alternate alignment without involving diversion of forest .land. Details of alignments identified to bypass the forest land in these stretches should explicitly be provided in the proposal seeking approval under the Act. In case of proposals involving widening! upgradation of existing roads, it shall be certified by the user agency that grant of approval under the Act to the extant proposal shall not be cited as a reason for grant ofapproval under the Act for diversion of forest land required for other stretches of the project and in case appr01lal under the Act for diversion of forest land is declined, width of the portion of the road falling in the forest land will be maintained at its existing leuel.