<p>The Maruthi Power Gen (India) Private Limited which is setting up a mini hydel project near Hongadahalla in Sakaleshpur has tried to mislead the High Court on the extent of the project site, according to a report of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The High Court on June 18 directed the Forest Department to take a decision on cancelling the land lease of the private agency for alleged violation of green norms. <br /><br />In a report dated July 17, 2012, submitted to the Principal Secretary, Department of Forests, Ecology and Environment (also submitted to the High Court), a copy of which is with Deccan Herald, the PCCF says that the implementation of the Hongadahalli mini hydel project (HMP) cannot be restricted to only 4.18 hectares as proposed by the user agency - Maruthi Power Gen.<br /><br />The report quotes a survey report of Chief Conservator of Forest (CCF) Hassan Circle and a report of Joint Inspection by Union Ministry for Environment and Forests, officials from Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Limited (KREDL) and maps submitted by the power company. <br /><br />Quoting the report of CCF, Hassan, the PCCF has stated that the comparative statement of area sought for by the user agency vis-a-vis area required/utilised on ground clearly indicates that an area of approximately 9.6097 ha is actually required/utilised by the user agency as compared to 4.1735 ha area sought for by the user agency.<br /><br />The area actually required excludes about 1.08 ha additionally required for power evacuation from power house to the KPTCL grid. Thus, the total area of 10.6897 ha is actually required/utilised by the user agency for implementation of the 18.90 MW minhydel project, according to the report.<br /><br />“The user agency is trying to mislead the court by stating that the Hongadahalla Mini Hydel Power (MHP) Project of 18.90 MW covers just an area of 4.1735 ha,” the report says.<br /><br />The Chief Conservator of Forests, Hassan Circle, conducted a joint inspection of the project site on April 11, 2012 with the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Hassan Division, Assistant Conservator of Forests, Sakaleshpur sub-division and the Range Forest Officer of Sakaleshpur. According to the inspection report, the implementation of the MHP cannot be restricted to only 4.18 ha as proposed by the project proponent.<br /><br />Deviation from plan<br /><br />The joint inspection report also points out to deviation from the original plan in executing the work. The PCCF report says there is a complete realignment of the tunnel as compared to the approved original proposal. The diversion weir (barrier across the river to alter the flow characteristics) proposed to be constructed is not as per the original proposal.<br /><br /> In original drawings, a new road of 1,500 metres was proposed to be formed from the end of the coupe road up to diversion weir. As against this, the project proponent has formed only 486 metres of new road which touches the present diversion weir point. “This clearly indicates shifting of weir position from original proposal.”<br /><br />Mentioning that the firm has unauthorisedly changed the location of weir as stated in the joint inspection report, the PCCF says that this has been deliberately done so that it can utilise the additional water available from various connected streams of Hongadahalla.<br /><br />Referring to the company’s submission requesting for another 0.462 ha to lay approach road from power house to surge shaft, the report says that it was not a part of earlier approved proposal. <br /><br />“This confirms that the hydel power projects were intentionally divided into two projects to obtain clearance from authorities, since the area of project would have otherwise exceeded five hectares and required clearance from the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests.”<br /><br />The report also says that the user agency had encroached forest land by unauthorisedly utilising the forest land for which approval was not given and thus has violated Forest Conservation Act 1980, Karnataka Forest Act 1983 and Karnataka Forest Rules.<br /><br /></p>
<p>The Maruthi Power Gen (India) Private Limited which is setting up a mini hydel project near Hongadahalla in Sakaleshpur has tried to mislead the High Court on the extent of the project site, according to a report of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests.<br /><br /></p>.<p>The High Court on June 18 directed the Forest Department to take a decision on cancelling the land lease of the private agency for alleged violation of green norms. <br /><br />In a report dated July 17, 2012, submitted to the Principal Secretary, Department of Forests, Ecology and Environment (also submitted to the High Court), a copy of which is with Deccan Herald, the PCCF says that the implementation of the Hongadahalli mini hydel project (HMP) cannot be restricted to only 4.18 hectares as proposed by the user agency - Maruthi Power Gen.<br /><br />The report quotes a survey report of Chief Conservator of Forest (CCF) Hassan Circle and a report of Joint Inspection by Union Ministry for Environment and Forests, officials from Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Limited (KREDL) and maps submitted by the power company. <br /><br />Quoting the report of CCF, Hassan, the PCCF has stated that the comparative statement of area sought for by the user agency vis-a-vis area required/utilised on ground clearly indicates that an area of approximately 9.6097 ha is actually required/utilised by the user agency as compared to 4.1735 ha area sought for by the user agency.<br /><br />The area actually required excludes about 1.08 ha additionally required for power evacuation from power house to the KPTCL grid. Thus, the total area of 10.6897 ha is actually required/utilised by the user agency for implementation of the 18.90 MW minhydel project, according to the report.<br /><br />“The user agency is trying to mislead the court by stating that the Hongadahalla Mini Hydel Power (MHP) Project of 18.90 MW covers just an area of 4.1735 ha,” the report says.<br /><br />The Chief Conservator of Forests, Hassan Circle, conducted a joint inspection of the project site on April 11, 2012 with the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Hassan Division, Assistant Conservator of Forests, Sakaleshpur sub-division and the Range Forest Officer of Sakaleshpur. According to the inspection report, the implementation of the MHP cannot be restricted to only 4.18 ha as proposed by the project proponent.<br /><br />Deviation from plan<br /><br />The joint inspection report also points out to deviation from the original plan in executing the work. The PCCF report says there is a complete realignment of the tunnel as compared to the approved original proposal. The diversion weir (barrier across the river to alter the flow characteristics) proposed to be constructed is not as per the original proposal.<br /><br /> In original drawings, a new road of 1,500 metres was proposed to be formed from the end of the coupe road up to diversion weir. As against this, the project proponent has formed only 486 metres of new road which touches the present diversion weir point. “This clearly indicates shifting of weir position from original proposal.”<br /><br />Mentioning that the firm has unauthorisedly changed the location of weir as stated in the joint inspection report, the PCCF says that this has been deliberately done so that it can utilise the additional water available from various connected streams of Hongadahalla.<br /><br />Referring to the company’s submission requesting for another 0.462 ha to lay approach road from power house to surge shaft, the report says that it was not a part of earlier approved proposal. <br /><br />“This confirms that the hydel power projects were intentionally divided into two projects to obtain clearance from authorities, since the area of project would have otherwise exceeded five hectares and required clearance from the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests.”<br /><br />The report also says that the user agency had encroached forest land by unauthorisedly utilising the forest land for which approval was not given and thus has violated Forest Conservation Act 1980, Karnataka Forest Act 1983 and Karnataka Forest Rules.<br /><br /></p>
