Adani’s subsidiary, Mirzapur Thermal Energy (UP) Private Ltd (MTEPL), has gained access to its controversial power plant site through a forest department road – without obtaining the required forest clearance that would precede such arrangements.
This was revealed in an affidavit submitted to the National Green Tribunal by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) on March 20.
Meanwhile, the 1,600-megawatt power project exists in a regulatory limbo. It awaits both forest and environmental clearances, yet the Uttar Pradesh forest department has permitted the company to use approximately 1.5 to 2 kilometers of forest land – twice charging fees totaling Rs 16,650 for usage. The first payment of Rs 5,000 was made on August 16, 2024, followed by Rs 11,650 on December 30, 2024. This access road falls in the 8.35 hectares of forest land for which the MTEPL awaits MoEFCC approval.
The forest ministry affidavit acknowledges that the “status of the forest diversion proposal for 8.3581 ha is pending” with its regional office.
“The project land is not connected with the main road; only one connectivity has been found through forest land,” states the ministry’s affidavit filed on March 20, following their site inspection in February. The affidavit does not specify any legal provision which could make such an arrangement possible.
Newslaundry reached out to Adani Group spokesperson, MoEFCC, and Uttar Pradesh principal chief conservator of forests Sunil Choudhary for comment. This report will be updated if they respond.
Can forest department allow firms to use its roads?
Speaking to Newslaundry, Mirzapur District Forest Officer, Arvind Raj Mishra, said MTEPL had applied for permission to use the road in question for “aane-jaane ke liye (commuting)” and that it was “usual” for the forest department to let people and companies use its designated roads after charging them a fee.
“If someone uses a forest road without our permission, they are penalised for trespassing,” he said, adding that section 26 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 allows anyone to use forest department’s roads for a fee. Besides listing prohibited activities in the forest, the section mandates that an act is deemed legal if it is undertaken with the forest officer’s permission.
However, experts told Newslaundry that such an arrangement does not enjoy any legal sanctity.
Prakriti Srivastava, a former Indian Forest Officer, said allowing a company to use the forest road was “downright illegal”. “If companies can use forest department’s roads, what’s the point of applying for forest clearance?” She referred to section 10(10) of the 2023 Forest Conservation Amendment Act.
She said even the section is “detrimental” to forest conservation. According to this section, a state or union territory, “after obtaining the ‘in-principle’ approval of linear proposal and deposition of compensatory levies” may grant working permission for the commencement of project work before final approval.
Srivastava said: “While Rule 10(10) is patently wrong and the FCAA (Forest Conservation Amendment Act) 2023 along with its rules have been challenged in the court, it leads to a fait accompli of granting final forest clearance permission. What happens if an offense is committed? Fine and allow? That’s an unacceptable proposition and highly detrimental to forest conservation."
Signs of preparation despite hurdles
Meanwhile, at the project site itself, signs of substantial preparation are evident despite regulatory hurdles. Ministry inspectors documented a boundary wall constructed with pre-cast pillars, security facilities, portable air-conditioned cabins, and even ready-made electricity poles nearby – all visible manifestations of what the ministry characterises as permissible “pre-construction activities”.
The ministry’s position relies on a 2022 office memorandum allowing certain preparatory work while awaiting environmental clearance. Yet this same document explicitly prohibits any pre-construction activities on forest land until final (Stage 2) forest clearance is obtained from the central government – a permission MTEPL is yet to secure.
The project was challenged in the NGT last year for allegedly undertaking construction activities without getting mandatory environmental clearance first. Petitioners alleged that MTEPL had engaged in “unauthorized land levelling, boundary wall construction, and other preparatory activities”. Newslaundry reported the details of the ongoing case here.
Petitioners have claimed that the project site (also part of a proposed Sloth Bear Conservation Reserve) is forest land and a critical wildlife habitat. However, in its report the MoEFCC has said that no forest land existed on the site.
The inspection report said that the site was “barren “and “undulated in nature”. “A very limited number of trees/shrubs has been found on the site,” the MoEFCC report added.
If you’re reading this story, you’re not seeing a single advertisement. That’s because Newslaundry powers ad-free journalism that’s truly in public interest. Support our work and subscribe today.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
