No Yettinahole work till officials are punished: Central panel

Bengaluru: In a blow to the Yettinahole project, the Forest Advisory Committee of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) deferred Karnataka’s request for diversion of 274.35 acres of forest in Hassan and Tumakuru districts.

The panel stated that the proposal will be considered only after action is taken against officials responsible for a string of violations.

Taking prior permission from the MoEF&CC is mandatory for taking up work in the forest. However, the committee noted that largescale violations had taken place even before getting clearance. Looking into the state government’s request submitted through the Visvesvaraya Jala Nigam Ltd (VJNL), the committee pointed to the site inspection report of MoEF’s regional officers, which pointed to destruction of the forests with impunity.

The report noted that of the 274.35 acres sought, 266.87 acres had already been used.

In February 2019, the Forest Department registered an FIR against VJNL executive engineer for the violations. At the time, VJNL officials stated that they were not aware of the land’s status as forest.

However, the report noted that the violations continued even after the FIR was lodged. “Scrutiny of the satellite imagery before and after 2/2/2019 (year of lodging FIR) revealed that majority of the violations happened after the forest offence case was booked,” the report said.

The Yettinahole project has already a costly affair. The state government recently revised the cost from Rs 23,251 crore to Rs 25,151 crore. Any failure to get early clearance from the Centre is likely to result in the further upward revisions of the cost.

The government, in its effort to divert 24.01 tmcft of water from west-flowing rivers, has taken up drilling and blasting in the ecologically sensitive area of the Western Ghats. The area is home to leopards, bears, peacocks, wild boar, spotted deer and other animals. Officials who inspected the spot had said that sufficient mitigation measures were not in place.

The committee pointed to the report by MoEF officers that it was not clear if Yettinahole work was a drinking water project or a combination of irrigation and drinking water project. Noting that the user agency in its justification mentions the filling of irrigation tanks also, the committee sought a clarification from the state government.

The state government had bypassed a comprehensive environment impact assessment study for the project by stating that Yettinahole work was a drinking water project.

Looking into the issues raised by the members and the reports submitted by its officers, the committee said, “The state government shall initiate disciplinary action against the officials concerned for not being able to prevent use of forest land for non-forestry purposes without prior approval of the Government of India and submit an action taken report.”

It said the above actions are a prerequisite for the committee to take up the matter further. “The committee deferred the proposal and sought clarification/information for further consideration in the matter,” it said, listing nine other matters along with action against officers.

A senior forest officer, requesting anonymity, told DH that allowing the government to decide on punishing officials may not work. “Considering that it was the government which was pressuring officials to adopt these tactics, a court-monitored inquiry should be held to fix responsibility,” he added.

To a question, Hassan Deputy Conservator of Forests Saurabh Kumar said he was yet to receive the official communication. “Once received, we will act as per the directions of the state government,” he said.