Log has written
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 2009
  • Posted: Thu, Dec 27 2007. 1:17 AM IST

Are the govt’s green clearances a farce?

Many projects could have been approved based on inaccurate environmental impact assessment reports

Padmaparna Ghosh

  • font size

The RTI documents show that the first EIA was done by Yogiraj Industrial Consultant, a Pune-based firm. Speaking to Mint, Chandrashekhar P. Vibhute, an engineer and proprietor of Yogiraj, defended claims made in that EIA. “The structure of EIAs is same all over the world,” he maintained. “Moreover, EIAs don’t come under any copyright. Whatever vegetation details are given have been done after site inspection.” He said he couldn’t recall the inspection date.

Significantly, the original EIA was also the basis on which the Delhi high court upheld a case in favour of Ashapura after the company filed a petition seeking the court’s intervention in expediting clearance for the project. Similarly, a mandated public hearing in Umbershet village was also conducted based on the original EIA’s findings, such as water quality.

But, “unless, by some amazing coincidence, mineralization in the Barja river in India and the Vorykva river in Russia both peak at 452.95mg/l during the summer months, then the water quality information in the Indian EIA for the Ashapura project in Ratnagiri is fraudulent,” says E-Law’s Chernaik.

Post Comments
1 2 3  
READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
Himanshu Said:


Excellent report and even better edit on Dec 28, 2008. Keep up the great work. One of the important follow ups can be seeing what happens to the conditions under which the environmental clearances are given and what happens to the environment management plans submitted with the clearances. And if there are consequences when the conditions are not adhered to and EMPs are not implemented, rather laws are violated with impunity. The Ministry of Environment and Forests is not just a rubber stamp, it seems to be an agent of environmental destruction, the way they have been performing. Another way to look at MEF's performance would be see how many of the projects that come to them are rejected. Very few, and that also mostly becasue of the limitations imposed due to the Supreme Court directives. In case of Allain Duhangan Hydropower project in Himachal Pradesh, this IFC (International Finance Corporation - the private sector arm of the World Bank) has an interesting approach: violate the law with impunity, pay fines when cought. It has paid fine to the tune of over Rs 7 crores in less than three years of its functioning. And it was amazing to see that the ministry rewarded the company with more forest land recently. The monitoring offices of the MEF do not have either any proper guidelines for monitoring the complaince of the law or conditions, nor do they seem to have any mandate. They do not do any surprise visits to the projects, in fact they pay visits using the facilities of the project promoters! And in case of National Hydroelectric Power Corporation, the ministry gives it clearances to projects like Chamera 3 and Parbati 3 even when the state government wrote to the MEF that these projects should not be given clearances. In case of Karcham Wangtoo Hydropower project, the ministry refuse to add the conditions recommended by the state govt. As they say, "log to ankhon me dhul jhonkte hain, ye to puri ki puri ankhen hi dhul main jhonkte hain."

Posted On 12/28/2007 3:48:36 PM
Most Read
Most E-mailed
Editor's Picks
Copyright © 2009 HT Media All Rights Reserved