© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
A western zone bench of the National Green Tribunal has quashed two environmental clearance (EC) certificates granted by the Gujarat State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) in 2020 to Ultratech Cement Limited and its subsidiary Narmada Cement Company (NCC) Limited for limestone mining at Babarkot village in Amreli’s Jafrabad.
Noting that the area in question was more than 50 hectares, the tribunal ruled that it requires clearance from the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and not SEIAA. “…the area being more than 50 hectares has to be treated as category ‘A’ project, requiring appraisal only by MoEF&CC. Even if the two are taken as separate, it is expansion of an existing project in which case also it has to be appraised by MoEF&CC, even if it is less than 50 hectares,” the bench stated.
Of the two mines, one has an area of 49.84 hectares and the other 14.20 hectares.
The appeal also stated that environmental clearance was granted without following the due process of law in an eco-sensitive area, also a habitat of Asiatic lions, with no Wildlife Conservation Plan. The appraisal of the projects “should have been as a ‘cluster’ instead of standalone mines”, the appeal further stated.
The tribunal had, in June 30, 2021, appointed an eight-member joint fact-finding committee, comprising three nominees of MoEFCC, a nominee of chairman SEIAA Gujarat, nominees of CPCB, GPCB, chief wildlife warden of Gujarat and Amreli district magistrate, to undertake a visit to the site and interact with stakeholders, and furnish a factual and action-taken report in the matter. Ultratech Cement and NCC had opposed this saying no such committee inspection was required as the environmental clearance in question was valid.
The tribunal, in its order, also relied on the fact-finding committee’s submission that while the two mines were separated by a 600-metre stretch, the existing mine and the 49.84 hectare mine were sharing a common boundary.
Hence, the NGT bench concluded that “the mining area in question is an integral part of the total mining area, which is more than 50 hectares” and hence, the “two mining leases together are of more than 50 hectares and cannot be treated as standalone for purposes of EIA (Environment Impact Assessment).”
The five-member bench, in its order dated February 21, also noted that the ministry should specify the norms on “appraisal of mining clusters in respect of major minerals, as the guidelines laid down in the notification dated 14.08.2018 are confined to minor minerals”. This, the court said, would help define the clusters in terms of the distance between the two mines. “The guidelines may also address the grievance that project proponents split up the mining projects to defeat the mandate of law, so as to avoid appraisal in the manner laid down in the EIA Notification. The guidelines may also provide for the role of SEIAA and the district mining authorities in safeguarding this aspect in the discharge of their functions.”
