Ram Awadh Singh (75), a resident of Dadri Khurd, told this correspondent that, after clearing the vegetation, the Adani Group has constructed a boundary wall around the project site.

‘Most of the vegetation has been cleared, including large trees such as mango and tamarind,’ Singh said. ‘This boundary wall is not very far from local streams, including a waterfall.

‘Local communities of many nearby villages and hamlets have been dependent on the resources of this forest for generations. It serves as a grazing ground for our livestock. We also collect firewood from the forest for our kitchens.’

Modi government’s stance in Parliament

On 1 August 2024, the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (‘the ministry’) informed the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of India’s Parliament, that the project does not involve any ‘forest land’, though it added that a separate patch of forest land will be cleared for ancillary works.

‘As per the proposal [for the power plant] submitted to the Ministry, total project area is 365.19 ha and no forest land is involved,’ said the ministry’s statement. ‘Further, there is an involvement of 8.35 ha forest land (water pipeline: 5.8162 ha and approach road: 2.5419 ha) which falls outside the project area and the project proponent has applied … for obtaining Stage-I Forest Clearance.’  (Minister of state Kirti Vardhan Singh in a written reply to the upper house, unstarred question no. 1158, 1 August 2024 in response to a question by Mausam Noor, an upper house member belonging to Trinamool Congress, a regional political party from the east Indian state of West Bengal.)

The approval for diversion of clearing 8.35 hectares of forest has yet to be granted. Singh, however, did not respond to other important queries raised by Noor. These included a question on how the central government plans to protect the area’s unique flora and fauna, including sloth bears which are listed as a protected species under India’s wildlife protection laws and have been observed in the area in which the power plant is proposed.

‘The EIA/EMP [Environment Impact Assessment/Environment Management Plan] report which is prepared on the basis of ToRs [terms of reference] evaluates the environmental impacts of the project including impacts on flora and fauna for which the corresponding Environmental Management Plan (EMP) is prepared,’ Singh added in his reply.

Presence of rare and/or threatened flora and fauna

The presence of a wide variety of wildlife in the area has not only been reported in surveys but is also revealed in internal communications between officials of the Uttar Pradesh forest department.

A survey conducted between 2016 and 2018 by a voluntary research group in partnership with Uttar Pradesh’s forest department documented several species of animal in the landscape in which the project has been proposed. Based on the findings of this group, the Vindhyan Ecology & Natural History Foundation, the Mirzapur Division of Uttar Pradesh’s forest department proposed a ‘Sloth Bear Conservation Reserve’ in 2019. The proposed bear reserve was to straddle at least three ranges of Mirzapur Forest Division, including the Marihan Range in which the project has been proposed.

The report said: ‘The region has exceptional diversity in medicinal plants, fossils and rock paintings, many of which are yet to be explored and discovered. There are also reports of tiger movements as reported by local media for many years, which shows there is active movement of tigers from nearby Tiger Reserves.’

The survey documented and recorded at least 24 terrestrial animals which are listed as ‘protected’ species under Schedule I of India’s Wildlife Protection Act 1972 in this region. It included animals such as the sloth bear, leopard, Bengal fox, striped hyena, Asiatic wild cat, rusty spotted cat, sambar, chinkara, blackbuck and mugger crocodile. The report also said that the region is a haven for birds, with grassland species such as the Indian courser, yellow-wattled lapwing, sandgrouse, savannah nightjar and Indian nightjar. It also reported the presence of raptors such as the red-headed vulture, griffon vulture, Egyptian vulture, Indian eagle owl, mottled wood owl, short-eared owl, brown fish owl, common kestrel, lesser kestrel and short-toed snake eagle. It also listed the presence of several other species including some that are endemic, threatened and/or migratory.

According to a letter issued by the Mirzapur forest division on 15 January 2020, the region where the power plant has been proposed is environmentally very sensitive. This information was shared by the Divisional Forest Officer of Mirzapur with his immediate superior, the division’s Chief Conservator of Forests. The letter notes that the area occurs within the catchments of several tributaries of the River Ganga. The officer also stated that the site was in proximity to natural features such as waterfalls which have great tourism potential. The letter also explained how the proposed coal-power plant will affect water resources, archaeological sites and the ecological integrity of the forest. Concern was expressed about the potential of the project to exacerbate human-wildlife conflicts.

Case by National Green Tribunal

On 23 July 2024, the green tribunal took suo motu (on its own initiative) cognisance of a news report which highlighted allegations that large-scale clearing of vegetation by heavy machinery was taking place in the forest adjoining the Dadri Khurd village which falls in the Marihan Range of the Mirzapur Forest Division of Uttar Pradesh. The tribunal issued notices to the ministry and the Uttar Pradesh state government after a case was registered. The tribunal has involved the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and the Chief Wildlife Warden of Uttar Pradesh in the case, as well as the District Magistrate of Mirzapur. The regional office of the ministry in Lucknow, the state capital of Uttar Pradesh, has also been asked to join the case which will be heard again on 25 October 2024.

Earlier environmental approval of a power plant quashed

On 21 August 2014, Welspun Energy UP Private Limited obtained environmental clearance for setting up a greenfield thermal power plant with two units of 660 MW each. The project had been recommended for approval by a government committee when the erstwhile Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government headed by former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh was in power. However, in December 2016, the tribunal quashed the environmental approval. The tribunal directed that the site be restored to its original condition. The tribunal took this action in response to a petition filed by a group of conservationists and academics of the Vindhyan Ecology & Natural History Foundation, led by conservationist Debadityo Sinha. The objective of the petition was to preserve the forests and wildlife of the region.

In its order of 21 December 2016, the principal bench of the tribunal in New Delhi said ‘… the entire process of consideration and appraisal of the proposal to grant EC [environmental clearance] is found tainted so as to render it less creditworthy than the one expected by law and as such makes it even more difficult to suggest the safeguards in order to render the project a sustainable one.’

The tribunal also accepted that there were issues pertaining to forest land and wildlife habitat, as raised in the petition. A review petition filed by the project proponent in the tribunal was dismissed.

While disposing of the review petition, however, the tribunal directed that the project proponent could amend the defects in the environmental clearance and subsequently request a new approval from the ministry:

 ‘ … the Project Proponent is at liberty to approach the MoEF&CC [the ministry] or any other competent authority for processing of the application for grant of EC [environmental clearance] upon making up for/rectifying the defects and deficiencies pointed out in the judgement,’ the tribunal said.

The project proponent also filed an appeal against the tribunal’s judgment in the apex court of India, the Supreme Court, but withdrew it in 2017. Subsequently, a new proposal seeking environmental clearance was filed with the ministry.

‘According to information I have obtained,’ Sinha told this correspondent, ‘the project proponents consistently tried to create a false interpretation of the green tribunal’s judgment in order to persuade the local administration and the ministry to allow the project to proceed, despite the invalid environmental clearance.

‘I have personally written several times to the government to prevent any misinformation as and when it came to my knowledge.’

The project proponent thereafter submitted revised documents and studies as recommended by the ministry for revisiting the quashed environmental approval. These documents were examined by the ministry’s Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC), which assesses the impacts of power projects on the environment, in the period between July 2017 and February 2019. On 22 February 2019, the EAC recommended that the ministry amend the environmental clearance of the project. However, this amendment could not proceed because the proponent had yet to obtain approval from the state government for clearing forests on the construction site.

Meanwhile, the Welspun Group had changed the name of its relevant subsidiary to Mirzapur Thermal Energy UP Private Limited.

The Adani Group and the Mirzapur coal-power project

In the first week of June 2024, it was reported that the Adani Group had acquired ownership of Mirzapur Thermal Energy UP Private Limited subsequent to the allocation of 99.8 per cent of equity shares of the firm to Adani Power Limited. It then emerged that the EAC had, in a meeting held on 28 June 2024, granted a set of terms of reference to the company to conduct an environment impact assessment with the goal of obtaining a new environmental approval.

In its application to the ministry, the Adani Group asserted that construction work on the power plant had not commenced, but that planning and ‘pre-construction activities’ had already been completed. Presumably, these ‘pre-construction activities’ pertain to the bulldozing of vegetation on the construction site. According to its application, Adani has allocated 85.80 hectares to the power plant while 49.37 hectares have been allocated for the establishment of a pond where fly ash generated after combustion of coal will be collected as a slurry. More than 10,000 tons of fly ash are expected to be generated per day.

The project proponent has also disclosed that it will use 64.14 hectares for construction of a railway siding for transportation of coal while 11.57 hectares will be used for constructing a township for employees of the proposed power plant.

‘The land required for proposed project is already under possession except Govt. & Forest like area (Jhari [bushes]),’ the project proponent has stated in its application.

For its part, the Adani Group has claimed in its proposal that the land that it has identified for the project is free from encumbrances and does not involve any forest. It claims that the major portion of the 365.19 hectares is ‘barren land’ already in its possession, of which 333.19 ha have been zoned ‘industrial’ since 2012. The Adani Group says that 31.38 hectares belong to the category of ‘government land’. It has submitted applications to the Uttar Pradesh government in March and May 2024 seeking allotment of this land. It also says that 0.62 hectares of the site is ‘forest-like area’. It claims that though it had applied for diversion of this land, an inspection conducted jointly by the forest and the revenue departments of Mirzapur on 3 April 2024 revealed that the area was not forested.

On the basis of these claims, the EAC has recommended as follows: ‘The Committee is of the view that although [the project proponent] has submitted a copy of a joint inspection report but for more clarity [the project proponent] shall obtain a letter in this regard from the concerned forest department clearly mentioning the extent of forest land involved within and outside (other activities related to plant) the plant area.’

The EAC further suggested that Adani should ‘optimise’ its requirement to divert forest land, and that if further studies show that there is more forest involved than currently claimed, an amended set of terms of references from the ministry will apply.

Two reserved forests – the Mirzapur Reserve Forest and the Danti Reserve Forest – are adjacent to the site of proposed plant. The plant will require 28 million cubic meters of water per day which will be obtained from the River Ganga through a 32.6-km-long pipeline from the Upper Khajuri dam. The Adani Group has claimed that Welspun received a no-objection certificate from the Uttar Pradesh government in October 2011 for withdrawing water from the Ganga.

The Adani Group has also said that the project will improve the state’s power supply, improve the state’s economy, and result in a ‘trickledown effect’ of benefits to the local populace. Roughly 300 people will get direct and indirect employment from the project, the application states.

Status of the land

As per a Gazette notification issued by the Uttar Pradesh government on 18 October 1952 (Gazette No. 617/XIV – Forest Department), a parcel of land measuring 665 hectares in Dadri Khurd was allotted to the state’s forest department. Documents accessed by activists indicate that only 106 hectares of land in this parcel were ever notified as a forest in accordance with provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. The remaining land is yet to be notified as ‘forest’ under the Act.

However, the petitioners have argued that diversion of this parcel of land for the power project needs approval from the central government in accordance with a landmark order of the Supreme Court pertaining to conservation of forest lands. On 12 December 1996, the court ordered that any land that has been recorded as ‘forest’ in any government record would be subject to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. It barred state governments and other authorities from diversion of forest lands from any non-forest purpose without prior approval of the central government.