Faridabad project not on forest land: Govt tells green tribunal
The Union ministry of environment on Tuesday said that the contentious housing project coming up on a 52-acre plot in Faridabad, where over 7,000 trees were felled in 2017 for it, was not on forest land.
The Union ministry of environment on Tuesday said that the contentious housing project coming up on a 52-acre plot in Faridabad, where over 7,000 trees were felled in 2017 for it, was not on forest land.
Arguing before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), the ministry also said it agreed with the Haryana government which had directed its forest department to clear the project being developed by Bharti Land Limited in Sarai Khwaja village.
The petitioner in the case, Lt Col (retd) Sarvadaman Singh Oberoi, had contended that the clearance for the project was in violation of earlier Supreme Court orders. He submitted Google Maps images that he claimed were of 2016, to show the vegetation cover in the village.
On February 22, HT had reported that the environment ministry, in its affidavit to NGT last month, contradicted the ministry’s regional office’s inquiry report of 2017. It had concluded that the area was a “deemed forest” area with dense to moderate vegetation.
“We completely agree with Haryana government that the land in question is not a forest and hence the forest conservation act doesn’t apply here. The area is not recorded as forest in Haryana government or our (ministry’s) records,” said KK Singh, advocate representing the environment ministry.
The ministry’s affidavit read: “It has been confirmed that this land is neither part of Aravalli Plantation Project nor of Aravalli notification…the ministry agrees with the averment of the state government that the land measuring 52.85 acres is not a “forest land” for the purpose of the Forest Conservation Act (1980).”
Oberoi’s advocate Ritwick Dutta, however, contended that ministry’s analysis was premature.
“The process of identifying deemed forests in Haryana as per Supreme Court orders are not complete,” he argued. “Even before its completion, both environment ministry and Haryana government have contended that the area is not a forest. The environment ministry has even contradicted its regional office’s inquiry report which concluded that the land is a forest.” Haryana has 3.59% forest cover, lowest in the country. Environmental activists have been demanding that forests be recognised as per dictionary meaning to provide a legal protection to the sparse forest cover left in the state.
The Supreme Court, the petitioner had contended, had said that irrespective of whether an area is a forest as per revenue records, it will be covered by the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and the area cannot be used for any non-forestry activity without the Centre’s permission if it meets the dictionary meaning of the word ‘forest’.
The six member NGT bench which was hearing the arguments reserved its judgment.
“NGT heard all sides. The bench wanted to know if this case has any relationship with the issue of Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA) amendment matter being heard in SC. But this case has no relationship with the PLPA matter,” said senior advocate Pinaki Misra representing Bharti Land Limited.
SK Sayal, CEO of Bharti Realty said “We are expecting a favorable judgment.”