IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
W.P.NO.1571 OF 2006
BETWEEN
“DHIMSA”, a society registered under
A.P. Societies Registration Act 2001 (No.938 of 2003)
Having its office at D.No.9-22, Lochaliputtu colony
Near Degree College, Paderu, Visakhapatnam District
Rep., by its President, K.Krishna Rao and another
.. PETITIONERS
AND
Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its
Principal Secretary to Government
Industries and Commerce (Mines) Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad and others
.. RESPONDENTS
COUNTER AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS No. 2.
I, Janaki R. Kondapi, D/o. Sri R.S. Krishnamurti age 55 years working as Principal Secretary to Government, Environment Forests Science and Technology Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad do solemnly and sincerely affirm as follows:
1. I am the second Respondent herein and as such I am well acquainted with the facts of the case. I have gone through the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition and I submit that the said allegations are neither true nor tenable and the Petitioner is put to strict proof of all those allegations, which are specifically admitted herein.
2. In reply to para 4, it is submitted that it is true that Andhra Pradesh is endowed with rich Bauxite deposits occurring in 2 groups viz. Araku and Chintapalli Group. These deposits are located in Visakhapatnam and East Godavari Districts. These are part of East Coast Bauxite deposits positioned on the peaks of Eastern ghats, covering Chintapalli and Araku groups area spread over a distance of 165 Km and 85 Km. respectively from Visakhapatnam. As per the proposals submitted by the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation, Hyderabad these deposits are extensively surveyed by Geological Survey of India, MECL and State Directorate of Mines & Geology.
3. In reply to para 5, it is respectfully submitted that it is true that the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and its amendments are applicable for mining in forest area and the approval of the Central Government is required for the grant of renewal or mining lease. The Vice Chairman & Managing Direcor, Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation vide Ref. APMDC/MMI, Dt. 02.07.05/BAUXITE/2005/1934, Dt. 29.09.05, has informed the principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad that Government has entered an
:2:
MOU with M/s. Jindal South West Holding Limited for supply of Bauxite through Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation.
It is true that the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation submitted proposals under the provision of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, for diversion of Forest Land for mining Bauxite in the following areas.
SL.No. / Name of the Mandal / Name of the area / Name of the R.F / Extent of forest area in Ha.1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5
1 / Ananthagiri / Raktakonda / Ananthagiri-II / 54.657 Ha.
2 / Arakuvalley / Gallkonda / Sunkarametta / 97.486 Ha.
3 / Arakuvalley / Chitamgondi / Muligalugu / 153.665 Ha.
Total / 305.808 Ha.
4. It is submitted that, it is true that the Forest Department officials along with the Officials of the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation proceeded to the above areas on 18.10.2005, 19.10.2005, 20.10.2005 and 21.10.2005 for enumeration of tree growth where the local tribals objected for the enumeration of the trees situated in the above areas.
5. In this connection, it is relevant to bring to the kind notice of this Hon’ble Court that in pursuance of reserving the Bauxite deposits available in Visakhapatnam and East Godavari Districts exclusively for exploitation by the public sector undertaking vide G.O.Ms.No.999, Industries & Commerce (M) Department dated 25-10-1975, the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation among a number of applications for different areas as earmarked by the Geological Survey of India, have filed three applicatrions for diversion of forest land for Bauxite mining in respect of Chittamgondi, Galikonda and Raktakonda of Araku Group. As the forest blocks on priority basis were suggested by the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation in so far as the applications for the above (3) areas are concerned, the survey relating to the enumeration of tree growth was taken up during the year 1999.
6. It is submitted that, the proposal for diversion of forest land for the above said (3) areas submitted to the Government of India previously during 1999 had been rejected vide Government of India letter No.8-19/2000-FC/1240/R dated 03-05-2001 with the following reasons:-
· The local people/NGOs are against the mining in the area.
· The proposed area lies in the ‘notified agency area’.
The forest area is rich in flora and fauna and even the Chief Wild
Life Warden of the State has not recommended the proposal
· The proposal is premature vis-à-vis the opinion of the Committee
:3:
as mentioned above.
7. It is submitted that, as the enumeration of tree growth proposed to be taken up during October 2005 was objected to by the tribals, the forest officials could not complete checking / enumeration and as such the enumeration done during 1999 was taken into consideration. In so far as the contention of the petitioners that the respondents have been acting against the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and also various laws benefiting the local tribals, it is respectfully submitted that it is only in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 that this department has acted. Therefore, the contention of the petitioners that the respondents have been actively pursuing the leasing activity in favour of 7th respondent through 6th respondent in order to either circumvent the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court or to disregard the various laws benefiting the local the local tribals and environment, is far from truth.
8. In reply to para 6, it is submitted that, it is true that the above said area, which they applied for diversification, falls within Machkund catchment of Sileru Machkund river basins. As per the All India Soil and Land survey reports, this area is categorized as very high priority Watersheds, critical and susceptible for erosion.
9. It is respectfully submitted that as explained, the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation has furnished three proposals for diversion of forest land for Bauxite in the areas of Galikonda, Raktakonda and Chittamgondi. The dates of receipt of proposals, which were subsequently forwarded to the Divisional Forests Officer / Conservator of Forests for scrutiny under Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 are as follow
Mining proposal of Chittamgondi:
Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation has furnished this proposal on 13-7-2005, which was returned due to the inconsistencies vide Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad lr. No.34162/2005-F1 dt.1-8-2005. The Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation has resubmitted the proposal on 17-8-2005, which has been forwarded to the Divisional Forests Officer, Paderu vide Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad lr. dated 1-9-2005. The Conservator of Forests Vishakhapatnam has resubmitted the proposal duly scrutinized vide his Rc.No.9214/96/TO dated 18-12-2005. This proposal has been forwarded to the principal Secretary to Government, EFS&T Department vide PCCF Rc. No. 34162/2005-F1 dt. 22-02-2006.
Mining proposal of Galikonda
Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation has furnished this proposal on 13-7-2005, which has been forwarded to the Divisional Forest Officer, Paderu vide PCCF lr. No. 34163/2005-F1 dt. 1-8-2005. The Conservator of Forests Vishakhapatnam has resubmitted the proposal duly scrutinized vide his Rc. No. 9214/96/TO dated 18-12-2005. This proposal has been forwarded to the principal
:4:
Secretary to Government, EFS&T Department vide PCCF Rc.No. 34163/2005-F1 dt. 22-02-2006.
Mining proposal of Raktakonda
Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation has furnished this proposal on 13-7-2005, which has been forwarded to the Divisional Forests Officer Vishakhapatnam vide PCCF lr No. 34164/2005-F1 dt. 1-8-2005. The Conservator of Forests Vishakhapatnam has resubmitted the proposal duly scrutinized vide his Rc.No. 9214/96/TO dated 18-12-2005. This proposal has been forwarded to the principal Secretary to Government, EFS&T Department vide PCCF Rc.No. 34164/2005-F1 dt. 22-2-2006.
The types of vegetation, flora and fauna present in the proposed areas are as follows.
A. Chittamgondi Bauxite Mining Area – (153.665 Ha) :
1. The area of 153.665 Ha falls in Compartment No. 6, 7 & 8 in
Muliagalugu RF.
2. The density of growth is 0.4. There is profuse growth of phoenix humilis, leaves of which are being collected by local tribals. The other species are Terminalia chebula, Emblica officinalis, Semicarpus anacardium, Mango, Syzygium cumini and Buchnania lanzan etc.
3. Arakuvalley receives an annual Rainfall of 1400 mm and Temperature in winter comes down to 5-6 0 C and even in summer also it is not more than 25 0 C. Arakuvalley is called the Ooty of Andhra Pradesh and A.P. Tourism Development Corporation promoted Tourism here in a big way and constructed tourist resorts in order to attract more tourism.
4. The concerned area does not form part of National Park, Wildlife sanctuary etc. The proposed area of forests form habitat for highly endangered fauna (Blewitt owl) and other species viz, Tiger, Panther, Bear, Barking deer, Wild bear, Rabbits, Leopard cat and Rhesus monkey and birds like Emerald doves, Green Pigeons, Butterflies etc., which has been specifically mentioned in the proposal.
5. There are Coffee plantations raised by villagers in the adjoining area.
6. Estimated Environmental loss to the tune of Rs. 8850 lacs, has been calculated and mentioned in the proposal.
B. Galikonda Bauxite Mining Area – (97.486 Ha):
1. The area of 73.4 Ha falls in Paderu and 23.886 Ha in Visakhapatnam
Divisions.
:5:
2. The density of growth is 0.4. There is profuse growth of phoenix humilis leaves of which are being collected by local tribals. The other species are Terminalia chebula, Emblica officinalis, Semicarpus anacardium, Mango, Syzgium cumini, and Buchnania lanzan etc.
3. Arakuvalley receives an annual Rainfall of 1400 mm and Temperature in winter comes down to 5-6 0 C and even in summer also it is not more than25 0 C. Arakuvalley is called Ooty of Andhra Pradesh. A.P. Tourism Development Corporation promoted Tourism in a big way and constructed Jungle bells and Punnami Tourism resorts in order to attract more tourism.
4. Area does not form part of National Park, Wildlife sanctuary etc. The proposed area of forests form habitat for highly endangered fauna (Blewitt owl) and other species viz, Tiger, Panther, Bear, Barking deer, Wild bear, Rabbits, Leopard cat and Rhesus monkey and birds like Emerald doves, Green Pigeons, Butterflies etc., which has been specifically mentioned in the proposal.
5. There are Coffee Plantations (34 Ha) raised by APFDC in the adjoining area.
6. Estimated Environmental loss to the tune of Rs. 4280 lakhs has been mentioned in the proposal.
C. Raktakonda Bauxite Mining Area – (54.657 Ha):
1. The area of 54.657 Ha falls in Anantagiri RF in Visakhapatnam Divisions.
2. The density of growth is 0.5. The enumeration list of trees furnished by the staff could not be verified because of opposition from local people.
3. The area is moderately vulnerable to soil erosion.
4. Area does not form part of National Park, Wildlife sanctuary etc. The proposed area of forests contains endangered fauna viz, Panther, Cobra (Naja-Naja) etc., which has been specifically mentioned in the proposal.
5. Estimated Environmental loss to the tune of Rs. 3830 lakhs has been mentioned in the proposal.
All the above three proposals have been forwarded by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to the Principal Secretary to Government, EFS&T Department, subject to the following conditions.
:6:
1. It has been reported that in general local tribals surrounding the proposed areas of mining are opposing the project.
2. The user agency shall prepare a comprehensive mining plan as being done by the Singareni Colleries, a Government undertaking and get approval from the Indian Bureau of Mines for taking up mining in an eco-friendly manner.
3. The user agency should also get the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) carried out by a competent independent agency covering various socio, economic and ecological aspects and based on the EIA a detailed Environment Management Plan (EMP) should be prepared and implemented to mitigate the adverse impact of mining on surrounding environment.
4. In addition to above a detailed catchment area treatment plan shall also be prepared to protect and conserve the eco fragile catchment of the area.
5. The Divisional Forest Officer, Paderu has also reported the existence of the highly endangered bird namely “Blewitts Owl” (Athene blewitts) in Araku areas extending from Araku to Sileru. The proposed mining areas in Paderu division form part of habitat of this endangered bird. The Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun may be requested by the Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation to take up study of the habitat of “Blewitts Owl” and suggest measures for the protection and conservation of the habitat and the bird from any adverse Impacts due to the mining. The user agency shall bear the cost of such protection and conservation measures as decided by Wild Life Institute of India, Dehradun.
6. The user agency shall also earmark sufficient funds to develop the affected tribal villages for providing them basic amenities such as drinking water, health, sanitation, electricity, employment, education etc.
10. In reply to para – 8, it is subm,itted that in view of the Ministry of Environment and Forest letter No. F.No. 2-1/2003-FC (F.C Division), Dt. 20-10-2003 for submission of proposals for diversion of Forest land for developmental projects in tribal areas, specific guidelines were finalized.
Para (vi) of guidelines states “While formulating a project in tribal areas, the user agency shall earmark 5% of the total project cost for the development of indigenous skill of tribals and basic Amenities like Education, Health, Sanitation & Sports facilities for Children / youth etc.,. However, these guidelines were subsequently kept in abeyance vide GOI, MoEF, New Delhi Lr. No. 2-1/2003-FC dt. 15-04-2005.
11. In reply to para – 10, it is respectfully submitted that, as per Section 2.7 (chapter-2 of the guidelines stipulated for submission of proposal), if the project involves displacement of people, a detailed Rehabilitation Plan shall be submitted along with the proposal for diversion of Forest land. The Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste population should be separately considered, and plan for their rehabilitation should be