___________

I don’t have the letter that the Odisha government wrote. But the following excerpts from a report in tathya.in gives some idea.

… However responding to the report, in a letter to the Ministry of Environment & Forest (MOEF), the State Government has said that “it is shocking to note that the Saxena Committee has preferred to discuss in a derogatory manner the issues, which have been considered and adjudicated by the Supreme Court of India.” 

Upendra Nath Behera, Principal Secretary of the Department of Forest & Environment (DOEF) in his letter to the Secretary, MOEF has said that a preliminary study of the report shows that it has raised serious allegations against the State Government. 

It has cast aspersions on the intention of the State Government about implementing the Forest Rights Act (FRA), when the Government of Odisha is credited to be the second best performing state in the country in implementation of FRA. 

The report has asked the MOEF to reject the application of the State Government for diversion of forest land for the above purpose as mining in Niyamgiri will destroy wildlife habitat and it will cause hydrological disaster. 

It has also said that mining will destroy the cultural, religious and economic habitat of the Dongaria Kondhs, who reside in the forest area proposed for diversion. 

The State Government has pointed out that the issues raised by the Saxena Committee were the subject matter of different PILs filed by various activists before the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), which ultimately came up before the Supreme Court. 

In view of the technical issues raised in the applications, the Apex Court had directed MOEF to appoint expert bodies for examining various issues. 

The Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun had conducted studies on the impact of the mining project on biodiversity and wildlife including its habitat. 

The Central Mine Planning & Design Institute (CMPDI), Ranchi conducted studies on the impact of the mining project on soil erosion, impact of ground vibration on hydrological regime including ground porosity and permeability. 

All these issues were discussed in the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) on 30 August, 2006, when the project was placed before the Committee for scrutiny. 

Similarly the project was challenged in the Supreme Court on the grounds of violation of FRA. 

After elaborate discussion of the reports of the expert bodies, views of the State Government and MOEF covering all issues relating to ecology, wildlife, hydrology, soil erosion, tribal life and implementation of different environmental laws, the Supreme Court on 23 November, 2007 cleared the project with certain directions. 

On compliance of all the directions of the Apex court, the project was cleared by the Supreme Court on 8 August, 2008. 

The State Government has said that “it is of course, understood that the MOEF has not taken a view on the recommendation of the Committee."

The Government of Odisha in its’ letter has said that “it believe that if a judicious view is taken by the MOEF, most of the findings of the Saxena Committee will not hold water." 

Under this backdrop, the State Government has urged the MOEF to provide an opportunity to present its’ views before taking a final decision in this matter.

People reading this blog must must have seen the news about the Saxena committee (which was empowered by Jairam Ramesh and the environment ministry) report on Vedanta’s operations in Lanjigarh, Odisha.

Although the report reads like an activist team’s report, the fact remains that the laws of the country are sacred and needs to be followed.

It is a different matter that laws are broken with impunity at all levels ranging from the laws reported to be broken by Vedanta to normal people extending their houses and gardens into government land, groups building temples as a ruse to capture government land where ever they feel like, people blocking roads, trains, doing bandhs whenever they feel like, etc. etc. In India laws are broken with impunity and are broken more often than they are adhered to. But this does not excuse what Vedanta is reported to have done. The committee report also rebukes the Odisha government for its hand in the whole affair.

However, one needs to put this report in perspective with what the environment ministry and Jairam Ramesh have found in rest of India. Following are excerpts from a report in rediff.in that gives us some added perspective.

… several industrialists are also upset about what they call Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh’s activist-like positions. "He is taking positions, which are normally associated with unreasonable activists and their organisations," says one leading industrialist whose project is stuck. …

… Data from the ministry’s website show that of the 58 projects that have come up for Coastal Regulation Zone clearance since April 2009, it gave only half a dozen of them the green signal.

Over 1,800 projects are awaiting clearances as of the first week of this month.

…"There are people who consciously instigate and organise people in coastal Andhra against projects coming up in the region," says a spokesperson of a power company,  which is promoting a project in coastal Andhra Pradesh.

"Land availability is a big issue in India. Developers can approach the ministry only after either acquiring the land or have assurances to get the land, to request for the terms of reference to carry out an Environmental Impact Assessment study. By that stage, a lot of investment and time may have gone into execution of the projects, and still you are not sure of getting the clearance," says Sanjay Sethi, executive director (infrastructure) at Kotak Investment Banking.

"It is necessary to have more transparent and clear guidelines and checklists for land available for various commercial and industrial uses, with clear maps of sensitive zones, which should be easily available to project developers," he adds.

… To be fair to the environment ministry, there are issues like misrepresentation of facts by project developers and the state, or conflicting reports on issues by expert panels.

In a recent development, the environmental clearances for at least four projects in an around Srikakulam in Andhra Pradesh were suspended by the ministry.

On July 15, the ministry cancelled the clearance given to Nagarjuna Construction Company’s 2,640 megawatt (Mw) coal-based super critical thermal power plant at Gollagandi and Baruva villages in Srikakulam.

An expert panel said most of the project land allocated by the state government might be regarded as wetland, contrary to an earlier panel report that the 750 acres of grasslands were barren and not fit for agriculture.

The same expert panel, which visited East Coast Energy’s 2,640 Mw thermal project near Kakarapalli village in Srikakulam during the same time, found the state government had ignored reports on the ecological value of low lying areas of the well recognised Naupada swamps wetland and migratory bird breeding in nearby Telineelapuram of Srikakulam.

"This amounts to suppression/distortion of facts," the panel said.

A nearby project – that of JSW’s 1.4 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) alumina refinery and a co-generation plant – is also being reviewed by the ministry.

… On June 28, the ministry directed the formation of a supervisory committee to monitor the influence of toxic effluents from JSW Energy’s 1,200 Mw thermal power plant at Jaigad in Maharashtra, following apprehensions that effluents could affect the quality of Alphonso mangoes and cashew orchards in the region.

… Ten days before that, Jindal Power Limited drew the wrath of the ministry for commencing construction of a 2,400 Mw power project at Tamnar in Chhattisgarh,  without obtaining prior environment clearance.

The ministry has directed the state government to stop work and initiate action against the Naveen Jindal-promoted company.

Some of the other high-profile projects that have been halted include the Maheshwar Hydroelectric project on the Narmada river in Madhya Pradesh on grounds that the conditions of the statutory environmental clearance were not complied with and the resettlement and rehabilitation of the project-affected families was less than satisfactory – charges denied by the state chief minister and the company.

… Also, many say the minister has involved himself in much-publicised wars of words with Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel over the environment ministry’s reluctance to clear the Navi Mumbai international airport, citing destruction of mangroves, razing of a hill and diversion of two rivers; with Road Transport Minister Kamal Nath, who openly accused him of blocking projects;

… But, even his sharpest critics agree on one thing: Ramesh has made sure that no one can treat the environment ministry lightly any longer.

… "This is probably the first time that an environmentalist has become a minister. He is almost single-handedly bringing about a paradigm shift within the government about how to view progress and development," says Pandey.

I agree with the sentence in the red. Earlier companies and state governments were not taking the environment ministry that seriously. Ramesh’s actions will make sure that everyone take the environment ministry seriously. That is a good thing and kudos to Mr. Ramesh for that.

However, as far as Odisha is concerned Jairam Ramesh seems to have something against it. We say that for the following reasons.

• When Odisha was trying for an IIT Jairam Ramesh insulted Odisha with his comments. See http://www.orissalinks.com/archives/286.
• Recently, Hindustan Times (see http://www.hindustantimes.com/Environment-Ministry-puts-on-hold-Vedanta-University-in-Orissa/Article1-542363.aspx) reported the following: "The Union Environment Ministry on Tuesday put on hold the controversial Rs.150 billion Vedanta University project in Orissa following complaints of alleged irregularities by its promoter Anil Agarwal Foundation. The direction to keep the project in abeyance has come within a month of the Ministry granting conditional environmental clearance to the Foundation which is building the university." Now stopping a mine or a factory or an airport for environmental reasons may make sense, but a university?? That too, just because some one complained. No investigation! Just people complained and he stopped the project, when the project was about to construct a medical college!!
• Jairam Ramesh and his ministry recently granted environmental permission to construct the Polavurum dam in Andhra Pradesh against the objections of the Orissa and Chhatisgrah government. See http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Environment-ministry-clears-Andhra-project/articleshow/6233874.cms . Times of India was surprised with this. It wrote: "Oddly, while the ministry had set up separate committees to investigate the settlement of rights under the Forest Rights Act in other high profile cases such as Vedanta and Posco which propose to displace far lesser people, in the Polavaram case the ministry has decided to accept the state government’s compliance report on face value.  The mega-project is expected to submerge 276 villages displacing upwards of two lakh people by some estimates. "   

In summary, while Jairam Ramesh deserves kudos for putting his foot down on environment laws and making sure everyone takes them seriously, people of Odisha need to be very careful of him as he seems to be against Odisha; he has stopped projects clearly beneficial to Odisha (namely, Vedanta University) by using his environment stick, and at the same time has allowed projects clearly harmful to Odisha  (namely, the polavurum dam) even after the Odisha government and Odisha chief minister have vehemently objected to it. This does not at all gel with the actions they took against Vedanta University. There the project was ordered to stop because some people complained. Here the project was given green signal despite the state of Odisha and its chief minister complaining and that too reportedly without any enquiry.