Majority Report of the Committee Constituted to ... - Forest Rights Act

More documents

Recommendations

Info

B. Status of Rehabilitation and Resettlement Implementation 17. The rehabilitation and resettlement program has yet to take off fully. As on date only 11.85 acres of government / forest land has been taken from 96 betel vine growers. Ex-gratia compensation was paid as per the RPDAC package. The committee feels that mere land compensation however big it may be, will not compensate the loss of sustainable livelihoods and the best way would be to genuinely give equivalent land for land compensation so that they continue eking a sustainable livelihood. Of course this means the whole process should involve all PAFs and their people’s representatives in a transparent, inclusive and just negotiation. If the people feel it is a better option than what they already have, they will be willing to give it a chance. There have been more failures than successes in R&R in the past. People are displaced in a hurry even before the resettlement or rehabilitation process is in place. Many times the promises to the people are not kept and displaced people live in greater destitution than before displacement. The whole process of R&R implementation should also look at improving the lives of women and older people and provide them with suitable livelihood options. 18. It appears that a large number of fishing communities depend on fishing in the Jatadharmohan creek area in which the project is located. They have old and recognized customary rights of fishing in the area which have been overlooked and left out of the R &R scheme. The State Government needs to examine the rights of such communities and ensure that their livelihood rights are protected while covering them in the R & R scheme. 19. Landless agricultural and other labourers have not been included in the list of affected persons and no benefits have been given to them (except for those working in betel vine cultivation and those compensated for their homesteads on government land). Since landless workers constitute economically the most vulnerable social section, they need to be included in R & R scheme and compensated for their loss of livelihood. 20. Finally, as the socio economic survey of XIMB mentions, ‘displacement amounts to uprooting them from their soil that belonged to them for generations, which can be psychologically a traumatic event’. This requires a lot of empathy while handling the process of shifting and relocation. We would like the State Government to bear this in mind and engage organizations (reputed NGOs) who
have worked with people, to help in the process of relocation, so as to make the relocation less traumatic. 21. Recommendation - Though the R & R scheme has not yet started fully, the Committee feels that the rehabilitation package should take into account the loss of livelihoods, provide for land for land compensation, account for vulnerable sections including women, labourers and old people and decided upon through a transparent and democratic process. C. Environmental Clearance of Steel Plant and captive Port 22. It is important to stress that the EIA process is governed by the EIA Notification (first issued in 1994 and subsequently revised and issued anew in 2006) which has statutory status under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, the main legislation governing EIAs. Thus any infringement of the prescribed standards amount to a statutory violation. Central to the EIA process is therefore the quality of the data and information collected, presented and analysed in the EIA which are the essential substratum for the decision makers to decide over whether to grant environmental clearance to the project or not. 23. Considering the scale of the project (12 MTPY) which is almost equal to combined production capacity of 6 steel plants of India (Bhilai, Bokaro, Durgapur, Rourkela, Burnpur and Salem put together) there was a critical necessity of having a comprehensive environment impact analysis (EIA) for both the steel plant as well as the captive port. The MoEF ought to have insisted on a comprehensive EIA by collecting full year data which was also pointed out by various state agencies and the Regional Office of MoEF. 24. The MoEF should not have granted environment clearance on the basis of rapid EIA for port which was based on one season data. Even in case of the port, the data was collected during September to November 2005, which is the monsoon period. It should be noted that data collection during monsoon period is prohibited by EIA Notification. 25. The entire POSCO project is an integrated project encompassing different components like the township, pipeline, road and transportation etc. which have
Page 1 and 2: Majority Report of the Committee Co
Page 3 and 4: governments were asked to provide c
Page 5: for claims after constitution of FR
Page 9 and 10: 29. Concerns regarding the impact o
Page 11 and 12: coordinates it would be impossible
Page 13 and 14: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PREFACE CONTENTS
Page 15 and 16: as a whole (as opposed to for the i
Page 17 and 18: INTRODUCTION- Time Line of Events P
Page 19 and 20: government to hear all the applicat
Page 21 and 22: II. Recommendations of the Central
Page 23 and 24: V. Forest clearance given without c
Page 25 and 26: These Palli Sabha proceedings only
Page 27 and 28: ii) Investigation and ascertainment
Page 29 and 30: The Sairat income of the estate was
Page 31 and 32: V. Rights of `encroachers’ not se
Page 33 and 34: in the Schedule annexed hereto whic
Page 35 and 36: 9. Karonj Pongamia glabra 10. Sanar
Page 37: subdivision is supplied with betel
Page 40 and 41: 5. Aquaculture Ponds 0.79 0.20 6. A
Page 42 and 43: are interpreted as the remnants of
Page 44 and 45: VI. Impact of loss of coastal mangr
Page 46 and 47: to keep them at a middle income cla
Page 48 and 49: 25. Another source of income is fro
Page 50 and 51: vi) Status of ownership showed that
Page 52 and 53: v) All families in these villages (
Page 54 and 55: SECTION 3 Forest Rights and the For
Page 56 and 57:
(4) He goes on to say that under su
Page 58 and 59:
one must note that this is not limi
Page 60 and 61:
proviso to section 29(3) and theref
Page 62 and 63:
20. It must first be noted that whe
Page 64 and 65:
obtained by the resident tenants at
Page 66 and 67:
of Polanga lies within the project
Page 68 and 69:
esolutions in the registers but onl
Page 70 and 71:
53. In light of the above, the Comm
Page 72 and 73:
(4) District Welfare Officer (5) Th
Page 74 and 75:
68. It is not clear if the resoluti
Page 76 and 77:
anywhere in the State after June 20
Page 78 and 79:
- Both points have certified by the
Page 80 and 81:
3) Finally, the certification of co
Page 82 and 83:
98. The Committee finds that, even
Page 84 and 85:
112. The Orissa government's takeov
Page 86 and 87:
extent to which the Orissa R & R Po
Page 88 and 89:
(wherever applicable) in the Commit
Page 90 and 91:
18. Approximately 32 villages, most
Page 92 and 93:
Majority Report of the POSCO Enquir
Page 94 and 95:
the minor port. It is against this
Page 96 and 97:
12. The tests for evaluating adequa
Page 98 and 99:
Paradeep port area in a region desc
Page 100 and 101:
26. The proposed project is to set
Page 102 and 103:
33. The Schedule to the 2006 Notifi
Page 104 and 105:
August 2006 (Annexure E - 3 ) as pe
Page 106 and 107:
een annexed to the main text.” On
Page 108 and 109:
54.The committee members are of the
Page 110 and 111:
fragile coastal area which has repe
Page 112 and 113:
Board should stipulate appropriate
Page 114 and 115:
67. In the Letter No. WP-IWS-135/07
Page 116 and 117:
ii) Coastal Regulation Zone map ind
Page 118 and 119:
78. As far as the impact on the Pra
Page 120 and 121:
from the site. Since mangrove veget
Page 122 and 123:
potential hazardous units in this r
Page 124 and 125:
photographs and voucher would be pr
Page 126 and 127:
a) The project is highly significan
Page 128 and 129:
have not been followed through by t
Page 130 and 131:
dispensed with in the peculiar fact
Page 132 and 133:
conduct of public hearings is elabo
Page 134 and 135:
n Impact Identificatio n Mitigation
Page 136 and 137:
hazards and affect their livelihood
Page 138 and 139:
ecause of other industries in the a
Page 140 and 141:
2 Dredging would affect Atharbanki
Page 142 and 143:
6 Dredging of sand dumping it in th
Page 144 and 145:
were accepted or negatived. Failure
Page 146 and 147:
118. As per the Interim Operational
Page 148 and 149:
Para 14.0 Para 15.0 Par a 15. 0 Par
Page 150 and 151:
Director, Department of Disinvestme
Page 152 and 153:
Officials has committed any mistake
Page 154 and 155:
For these amongst other reasons, th
Page 156 and 157:
Introduction Section 6 Compliance o
Page 158 and 159:
Some activities are permissible wit
Page 160 and 161:
provided by POSCO-India Pvt Ltd and
Page 162 and 163:
5th December, 1989; except transfer
Page 164 and 165:
Location of slag yard in CRZ area p
Page 166 and 167:
that any of these issues were discu
Page 168 and 169:
In view of the above observations t
Page 170 and 171:
Conclusions and Recommendations Par
Page 172 and 173:
9. Though the MoEF is not the nodal
Page 174 and 175:
concerned authorities to such poten
Page 176 and 177:
As this report has demonstrated, wh
Page 178 and 179:
A. Preparation of EIA. 1. EIA shoul
Page 180 and 181:
e available to members of public el
Page 182 and 183:
REFERENCES / ANNEXURES Annexure No.
Page 184 and 185:
2010 Report. A-26 July 27 th , U.N.
Page 186 and 187:
FRA and compliance. C-7 July, 2004
Page 188 and 189:
Ghauj Jungle, Plot Nos. 1293 & 1294
Page 190 and 191:
Members in Bhubaneshwar E - 18 4.10
Page 192 and 193:
Annexure - H : CRZ serious concerns
Page 194:
Finance Minister, GoO. Note : The c
show all

Majority Report of the Committee Constituted to ... - Forest Rights Act

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?