Narmada Bachao Andolan vs. Union of India - International ...

c) The catchment area treatment programme and rehabilitation plans be so drawn so as to be completedahead of reservoir filling.d) The department should be informed of progress on various works periodically.It was further submitted by the Government of Gujarat that none of these conditions were linked to any concretetime frame.a) The first condition casts a responsibility on the NCA to ensure that the environmental aspects are alwayskept in view. The best way to attain the first and the fourth condition – was to create an environment subgroupheaded by the Secretary in the Ministry of Environment and Forest.b) The second condition – the conducting of surveys by its very nature – could not be made time bound.The surveys related to various activities to undo any damage or threat to the environment not only by theexecution of the project but in the long term. Therefore, any delay in the conduct of surveys was notcritical. Besides, perusal of the latest status report on environment shows that a large number of surveyswere carried out right from 1983 and also after 1987.c) The third condition has already stood fully complied with as observed by the Environment Sub-group.d) The fourth condition again involved keeping the department informed.121. It was submitted that the concept of ‘lapsing’ is alien to such conditions. In other words, formal environmentaland forest clearances granted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India are not lapsed andare very much alive and subsisting.122. With regard to the lapsing of the clearance granted in 1987, it was contended by Shri Harish Salve that a letterdated 25 May 1992 was written by the secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India to theSecretary, Ministry of Water Resources stating, inter alia, that the conditions of clearance of the project were notyet met and, therefore, a formal request for extension of environmental clearance, as directed by Review Committeeof Narmada Control Authority, may be made and failing which, a formal notification may be issued revoking theearlier clearance. It is, however an admitted position that no formal notification has ever been issued revokingand/or cancelling the aforesaid two clearances at any point of time by the Ministry of Environment and Forests,Government of India. The Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests has continued to hold and chair themeetings of Environment Sub-group, Narmada Control Authority closely monitoring the execution of SSP forensuring that environmental safeguard measures are implemented pari passu with the progress of work. On 11August 1992, a letter was written by Narmada Control Authority to the Secretary, Ministry of Environment andForests sending action plan and status in respect of environmental safeguard measures taken and also statingamongst other details, the following:A number of letters were exchanged between the Ministry of Water Resources and MoEF and a greatdeal of discussion took place both in the Environment Sub-group and NCA as to whether an applicationfor extension of time as above is at all necessary. After a detailed discussion in the last NCA meeting on25 July 1992, it has been decided that NCA should clearly indicate the additional time required for thecompletion of the remaining studies like flora and fauna and some aspects of fisheries and a revisedaction plan thereon be also sent expeditiously.Keeping in view the fact and circumstances mentioned above, I request you to kindly agree to theschedule of the studies and the follow-up actions as presented here. A brief account of the action plantogether with bar charts are enclosed, presenting a pictorial view.On 15 December 1992, a letter was written to the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, more particularlystating as under, amongst other things:The Narmada Control Authority has already prepared an action plan and status on the environmentalmeasures of Sardar Sarovar Project and submitted to the Ministry of Environment and Forest vide theirletter No. NCA/EM/683 dated 11.8.1992 for concurrence. As may be seen from their report on action,so far there is no safeguard measures.25