Supreme Court panel flags off street in Rajaji Reserve, seeks clarification

0
50

The Supreme Court-appointed committee has questioned the relaxations given for upgradation of the 4.7-km-long street within the buffer zone of Rajaji Tiger Reserve and sought solutions from the Center and the Uttarakhand authorities.

The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) requested the state authorities and ADG (Wildlife) of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) why the size of an elevated street for animal motion was lowered from 1,410 meters to 400 meters. The suggestion was later made by an knowledgeable committee with members from the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) and the Wildlife Institute of India (WII).

The top of the route was additionally lowered from 8 meters to six metres.

State authorities and MoEFCC to reply to CEC’s queries inside 15 days

According to the minutes of a gathering held on September 16, “While NTCA has recommended an elevated road of 710M, a later report prepared jointly by NTCA and WIl has proposed a 1410M elevated road.” “The WII scientist present in the meeting said that as per the guidelines approved by NBWL, the length (permeability) of the freeway should be minimum 30% of the total length of the road, which works up to 1410 M.”

The minutes, printed on September 21, stated, “The reasons for the rejection of the recommendation of the Joint Committee for the construction of 1410 meter long elevated road by NBWL be given.”

The Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL), the apex company that approves tasks in and round protected areas, in its assembly on June 11, had given its approval to the Laldhang-Chillarkhal street together with mitigation measures.

The committee additionally needed to know why the elevated stretch has been lowered to solely 400 meters, whereas the complete 4.7 km needs to be raised as a part of the mitigation steps.

The panel objected to the revised width of bridges below building or constructed on the street. According to the minute “Assuming that the width of the road on the bridges under construction/construction has been kept at 7 meters while the road has been developed with a width of only 3 meters, does not make sense…”. The NBWL had given approval for a 3 meter huge street with 1.5 meter paved shoulders on each the perimeters.

The panel additionally questioned the NBWL for selecting the improper website for inspection earlier than approval.

State officers had been requested to state whether or not the mission required forest clearance below the Forest Conservation Act.

.
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS

Leave a reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here