In a move of dubious legality, the Modi government has intervened to approve an Adani-developed coal mine previously ruled invalid by India’s environmental court. In January 2024, the National Green Tribunal said that government officials had colluded with the project proponent to deny entry to large numbers of people attempting to attend the ‘public’ meeting to voice their concerns. The tribunal ruled that affected people had been deprived of a ‘fair, impartial, unbiased and valid public hearing’ regarding the impacts of the Gare Pelma II coal project. The homes and livelihoods of thousands of tribal people in 14 villages will be significantly impacted if the mine proceeds. Opponents of the project are assessing their options for tackling the government’s decision in the courts.
Key details of the project:
- Name: Gare Pelma II
- Owned by: Mahagenco
- Adani subsidiary (mine developer and operator): Gare Pelma II Collieries Private Limited
- Location: Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, India
- Coal reserves: 1059.29 million tonnes
- Planned output per annum: 23.6 million tonnes per annum
- Area of lease: 48 ha
- Mining method: over 90% open-cast
- Cost: US $902 million
- Current status: Environmental approval re-validated
- Area of impact: 14 villages, farmland, forest, water resources and up to 2245 families
The Modi government has reinstated environmental approval of the Gare Pelma II coal project, despite India’s top environmental court having previously invalidated the approval due to flaws in the public-consultation process. Documents indicate that instead of conducting fresh public hearings, the central government relied on proceedings of group discussions with local communities conducted by a not-for-profit organisation.
The revalidated environmental clearance of the project was issued on 13 August 2024 by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change (‘the ministry’). The project is proposed by the Adani Group in Raigarh district in the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh. On 15 January 2024, the central-zone bench of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) quashed the project’s environmental approval, citing a host of shortcomings, including the fact that the ‘public hearing [had] not been conducted in accordance with law’.
‘The NGT’s judgement clearly stated that the public hearing was invalid because it was not conducted in accordance with the rules,’ Rinchin, an activist, who was amongst the four petitioners to the tribunal, told this correspondent. ‘If the ministry has deemed that public hearing as valid, it is a contempt of the NGT’s order. The ministry was never asked to adjudicate on an issue that was already deemed invalid by the tribunal.’
Other shortcomings in the environmental assessment process were pointed out in the tribunal’s judgment. These included the lack of a proper health assessment, the potential impact of the proposed project on water resources, and the need for a carrying-capacity study to consider whether the region could withstand the environmental impacts of yet another coal development. Petitioners say that these issues should have been included in the environmental impact assessment.
Local communities protest
Local communities in Raigarh have begun protesting at having been bypassed during the project’s approval process.
The coal block has total coal reserves of 1050.29 million tons (MT) and will affect at least 14 villages of the Raigarh district, many of which are largely populated by tribal communities. Local people interviewed by this correspondent during a visit to the area in November 2023 expressed extreme resentment over the manner in which Chhattisgarh’s erstwhile Congress government had rushed through the project’s public hearing. An Adani Group subsidiary, Gare Pelma II Collieries Private Limited, is the project’s MDO (mine developer and operator). The coal block belongs to Mahagenco, a public-sector power company belonging to the government of the western Indian state of Maharashtra.
‘Around mid-August, the project proponent began circulating copies of a letter in project-affected villages saying that is has obtained environmental approval from the ministry. This is how local communities came to know about the approval,’ Raigarh-based environmental campaigner Rajesh Tripathy told this correspondent.
A copy of the letter dated 16 August 2024 has been obtained by AdaniWatch. Local communities claim that the project proponent has not attached copies of the environmental approval with this letter.
‘This environmental approval is null and void, in the first place, because prior consent of local project-affected communities has not been obtained. Prior consent for diversion of land for any project is mandatory under law in all tribal-dominated areas in India,’ said Tripathi.
‘In fact, local communities conducted their own community meetings in which they rejected the coal-mining proposal. The minutes of the meeting and its resolution were duly notified to the state government.’
(Story continues below)
Raigarh has been classified as a Schedule V district in accordance with provisions contained in the Constitution of India, owing to the preponderance of tribal communities in it. Special provisions pertaining to governance and land acquisition are applicable. Mandatory consent of Gram Sabhas (village-level self-governing councils comprising the entire adult population) is required for the project under a landmark law enacted by a Congress government in 1996 to safeguard the land rights of tribal communities. Consent of Gram Sabhas is also mandatory for diversion of forest land in accordance with yet another landmark law enacted in 2006 by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) for safeguarding the rights of forest-dependent communities.
However, during a field visit to Raigarh conducted last year by this correspondent, local communities alleged that the project proponent had provided falsified documents purporting to demonstrate consent of Gram Sabhas for the coal project. They obtained information from the government under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, to buttress their allegations. Following the environmental approval, at least two project-affected villages resolved to reject the project proposal in fresh Gram Sabha meetings conducted on 22 August 2024 (Sarasmal) and 24 August 2024 (Mudagaon), respectively.
Land acquisition for the project is yet to be completed. As well as farms (2078 ha), forests (215 ha), government land (145 ha) and settlements (90 ha), numerous water bodies (56 ha) traditionally used by local communities for irrigation and fishing will be taken over for the mine. Initial estimates indicate that the project will displace 2245 families, many of whom belong to tribal communities.
Site-visit report of expert panel silent about fairness of public consultations
In accordance with the directions of the ministry, a five-member panel conducted a visit to the Gare Pelma II area from 17 to 19 May 2024. This visit was recommended by the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC), a review committee of the ministry that analyses the ecological impacts of coal-mining projects. The panel had nothing to say regarding the ‘fairness’ of the public consultation, though it stated in its report that its ‘objective was to garner first-hand information about conduct of public hearing activities and processes adopted at their behest for conducting PH [public hearing] proceedings for the Gare Pelma II mine’.
In its eight-page report, which was examined by AdaniWatch, the panel had the following observation to make about the public-consultation process.
‘Regarding Public Hearing, the EAC (Coal Mine) has already directed to CECB [Chhattisgarh Energy Conservation Board] to submit the details about the public hearing including the details from beginning of the public hearing advertisement up to the final public hearing event held on 27.09.2019. The Sub-Committee also gone (sic.) through the recorded video of Public hearing of 27.09.2019. The CECB also submitted the documents related to Public hearing, which they have already submitted to MoEF&CC [the ministry]. The CECB representative assured the Sub Committee that CECB will submit all the details required at the earliest to Member Secretary, EAC (Coal Mine), MoEF&CC.’
The state pollution control board submitted all details of the public hearing during the proceedings of the case in the green tribunal. Amongst other details, it stated: ‘ … public hearing was attended by about 1000 people and total 57 people signed attendance chart of public consultation; there is no provision for a specific quorum to be constituted in case of public hearing; representation and doubts expressed by members of public were duly considered and clarified during the course of public hearing on 27.09.2019 …’
Notwithstanding the efforts of the board to argue that the public hearing was fairly conducted, the NGT ruled against it in the judgment that was issued on 15 January 2024.
‘… we find that in the present case, public hearing has not been conducted in accordance with law, satisfying the words and spirit of the requirement of public consultation and proceedings are such so as to deprive the affected people fair, impartial, unbiased and valid public hearing/public consultation,’ said the tribunal in its 237-page judgment copy.
In an earlier article, AdaniWatch provided information about how large numbers of people who had gathered outside the venue for the public hearing venue were denied entry. The hearing was allegedly conducted while numerous people simultaneously protested against the coal project outside the meeting venue. The tribunal said in its judgment that it ‘appear[ed] that only those who were supporting the project were allowed to participate and their statements were made part of the proceedings … The officials responsible for conducting public hearing, in collusion with the officials of the proponent, managed to induct 50-60 people on the venue through an alternative entrance or early in the morning and public hearing proceedings were conducted, ignoring the other people gathered outside the venue and raising protest.’
Concluding that the public hearing was held in a prejudiced atmosphere in which a large number of local people were sidelined, the NGT ordered as follows: ‘… we find that prior EC [environmental clearance] granted in the case in hand is vitiated in law on account of observations made hereinabove, particularly, with regard to public consultation, non-consideration of ICMR report, Hydrological study and carrying capacity … EC dated 11.07.2022 granted to respondent 4 [Mahagenco] is quashed. MoEF&CC [the ministry] may re-examine the matter from the stage of conducting public consultation afresh ….’
The project proposes extracting 23.6 MT (of coal) per annum (MTPA). Underground mining would account for a small proportion of coal extraction – 1.6 MTPA (about 7%).
The mining lease covers 2583.48 ha – the equivalent of about 5000 football fields. Fourteen villages – Tihli Rampur, Kunjemura, Gare, Saraitola, Murogaon, Radopalli, Pata, Chitwali, Dholnara, Jhinka Bahal, Dolesara, Bhalumura, Sarasmal and Libra – will be affected by the project. Farmland, forests, water bodies, dwellings, schools and other public infrastructure are set to be destroyed because the chosen method of mining is overwhelmingly open-cast.
The NGT also came down heavily on the project proponent for citing varying figures regarding the number of families to be displaced by the project. In the approved mining plan, the figure was 1679 families and in the Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) Plan, it was 2245 families. The R&R Plan was approved by the previous Congress government of Chhattisgarh in February 2020. However, despite the huge impact that this project would cause upon local communities and the terse observations of the NGT, the ministry granted the approval without conducting a fresh and properly constituted public hearing.
Lack of fairness of public hearing not addressed
As per the minutes of the EAC meeting held over 1 and 2 July 2024, in which the project was recommended for environmental approval, it is mentioned that a comprehensive ‘socio-economic study’ was carried out in the Gare Pelma II area through the Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, a not-for-profit organisation that is supported by both the state government of Gujarat and certain public-sector and private-sector banks. This institute is based in Ahmedabad, the city which also serves as the headquarters of the Adani Group of companies. The minutes state that data for the study was compiled from 14 affected villages comprising a population of 13,567. The minutes also state that this organisation conducted ‘Focused Group Discussions’ held with various stakeholders of seven of the 14 affected villages. The minutes claim that in each of the seven villages, a common meeting was held with ‘prior information to the members of villages and key informants like Sarpanch [elected head of the local self-governing body], village head, Ward Member [elected representative of wards into which the local self-governing bodies are geographically divided], AWW [workers of Anganwadis or rural child care centers], teachers, farmers, SHG [self-help group] members, etc’.
The minutes state: ‘The Committee [EAC] enquired about willingness of the villagers for establishment of the industry. Prof. Piyush [Prof. Piyush Kumar Sinha, Chief Mentor, EDII, a member of the institute’s study group] informed that villagers largely support the project due to anticipated benefits in terms of financial compensation, improved livelihoods, and enhanced infrastructure and want the project to be started at the earliest.’ (Emphasis in the original).
The minutes go on to describe the methodology adopted in conducting the socio-economic study and its findings: ‘Many have already invested in their land, expecting greater returns once mining operations commence. He [Prof. Sinha] further informed that despite concerns about the potential loss of kinship and traditional ways of life, villagers are optimistic about the developmental opportunities that mining could bring. They anticipate better access to health and education services for their children, contributing to overall improvements in their quality of life.’
The study found that 45 religious places, 25 community halls, 11 Panchayat (village-level local self-government) buildings and six grazing grounds would be significantly impacted by the project.
The ministry was satisfied with studies done by the project proponent to address impacts on health and the environment. The project proponent engaged the Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research, a public-sector institute based in Dhanbad city in the eastern Indian state of Jharkhand to assess the anticipated health impacts and mitigation measures for villagers in and around the coal lease. Mahagenco engaged the Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), which is also based in Dhanbad, to carry out the hydrology study. It was also informed that a carrying capacity study of the Gare Pelma II region was conducted through one of the Indian Institutes of Technology based in Patna, the capital of the eastern Indian state of Bihar.
The environmental clearance letter that has been issued to the project proponent contains a condition that all recommendations made in the socio-economic and social-impact study should be adopted within a stringent timeframe and the timeline devised for it should be submitted to the District Magistrate of Raigarh for necessary action.
