NEW DELHI: Supreme Court Thursday directed setting up of a high-powered committee of the Cabinet secretary, secretaries of ministries of jal shakti, power and environment & forests along with chief secretary of Uttrakhand to reconsider the expert panel’s report recommending approval for 28 hydro power projects.
It questioned Centre’s decision not to accept the report, and to allow only seven of the projects without giving any reason.“You have to show the decision-making process is rational,” it said.
What forced you to only allow 7 hydel projects: SC to Centre
A bench of Justices B R Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra and K V Viswanathan said the expert panel comprised members from various fields and govt did not give any reason for not accepting the report. The bench said it cannot question the decision but can certainly examine the decision-making process.
“You have to satisfy that the report was duly considered and reasons were given to accept or reject the report. What compelled you to only allow seven projects? When an expert committee was appointed on the direction of the court then you have to show reasons for not accepting it,” the bench told additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati, who was appearing for the Centre.
Bhati told the bench there were differences of opinion among different ministries — power and environment & forests on one side and jal shakti on the other — and there was consensus on only seven projects due to which they were approved. Besides, she added, these projects were at an advanced stage of construction.
The hydro power projects in the state came under judicial scrutiny after the 2013 floods. Taking suo motu cognisance, SC had banned further construction of all such projects. Taking into account the huge investments made by companies in seven projects, SC had asked the Centre to appoint an expert committee to study the environmental and ecological impact of the projects. The seven projects were Tehri Stage II (on Bhagirathi river), Tapovan Vishnugad (Dhauligangan river), Vishnugad Pipalkoti (Alaknanda), Singoli Bhatwari and Phata Buyong (Mandakini), Madhyamaheswar (Madhmaheshwar Ganga) and Kaliganga II (Kaliganga).
Opposing the findings of the report, it was submitted by advocate Prashant Bhushan that members of the expert committee which approved the projects were also involved in clearing the projects before the flood disaster. He said that another panel headed by veteran environmentalist Ravi Chopra had blamed dams for exacerbating the 2013 disaster and the court should not give credence to expert panel recommendations for approving the projects, which would further damage the environment.
The court asked the panel of secretaries to consider all aspects and give a hearing to all stakeholders and take a decision within six months. It directed the committee to file minutes of its meeting before the court.
It questioned Centre’s decision not to accept the report, and to allow only seven of the projects without giving any reason.“You have to show the decision-making process is rational,” it said.
What forced you to only allow 7 hydel projects: SC to Centre
A bench of Justices B R Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra and K V Viswanathan said the expert panel comprised members from various fields and govt did not give any reason for not accepting the report. The bench said it cannot question the decision but can certainly examine the decision-making process.
“You have to satisfy that the report was duly considered and reasons were given to accept or reject the report. What compelled you to only allow seven projects? When an expert committee was appointed on the direction of the court then you have to show reasons for not accepting it,” the bench told additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati, who was appearing for the Centre.
Bhati told the bench there were differences of opinion among different ministries — power and environment & forests on one side and jal shakti on the other — and there was consensus on only seven projects due to which they were approved. Besides, she added, these projects were at an advanced stage of construction.
The hydro power projects in the state came under judicial scrutiny after the 2013 floods. Taking suo motu cognisance, SC had banned further construction of all such projects. Taking into account the huge investments made by companies in seven projects, SC had asked the Centre to appoint an expert committee to study the environmental and ecological impact of the projects. The seven projects were Tehri Stage II (on Bhagirathi river), Tapovan Vishnugad (Dhauligangan river), Vishnugad Pipalkoti (Alaknanda), Singoli Bhatwari and Phata Buyong (Mandakini), Madhyamaheswar (Madhmaheshwar Ganga) and Kaliganga II (Kaliganga).
Opposing the findings of the report, it was submitted by advocate Prashant Bhushan that members of the expert committee which approved the projects were also involved in clearing the projects before the flood disaster. He said that another panel headed by veteran environmentalist Ravi Chopra had blamed dams for exacerbating the 2013 disaster and the court should not give credence to expert panel recommendations for approving the projects, which would further damage the environment.
The court asked the panel of secretaries to consider all aspects and give a hearing to all stakeholders and take a decision within six months. It directed the committee to file minutes of its meeting before the court.