The Union ministry of environment, forests and climate change (MoEFCC) has “reclassified” the list of permissible, regulated activities in the Dahanu taluka eco-sensitive zone (ESZ), to allow the construction of ports and harbours. The ministry issued an office memorandum (OM) in this regard on May 26.
Environmentalists and local communities, however, have alleged that this move is a “backdoor attempt” to revive the currently stalled, ₹65,000 crore Wadhavan Port project at Rewas.
The Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Authority (DTEPA) had in 1998 prohibited work on the Wadhavan Port project. But in April 2020, the Central Pollution Control Board declassified ports, harbours, and jetties as “industrial activities”. Two months later, the MoEFCC issued a clarification stating that these activities may be permitted in eco-sensitive areas, including the Dahanu ESZ, which was notified in 1991.
This move drew the ire of local communities and environmentalists, eventually leading to a National Green Tribunal (NGT) order in June 2021, staying any further work on the port’s planning and construction. The green court also directed the MoEFCC to form an expert committee to reconsider the issue of whether ports and harbours could be permitted as non-industrial activities within the ecologically fragile areas.
The order has been challenged in the Supreme Court by the National Fishworkers’ Forum, the original applicant in the matter, and Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT), which is administering the Wadhavan project.
Meanwhile, the committee appointed by the ministry recommended the appointment of the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM), Chennai, to carry out an “assessment and evaluation of impact of setting up the port on the overall ecology of the Dahanu taluka ecologically fragile area”.
The NCSCM’s final recommendations were considered by the expert committee in a meeting on April 28 this year, in which the latter opined that “construction of ports and harbours… can be considered non-industrial activities that can be taken up under Dahanu Taluka Ecologically Fragile Area Notification, 1991,” subject to clearance from the DTEPA.
The NCSM report on Wadhavan Port is not publicly available. It has not been submitted either before the NGT (where hearing has concluded), or the SC which has not heard the matter in several months.
Environmentalists have criticised the MoEFCC for passing the direction while the matter is sub judice. “This OM is an attempt to negate the NGT’s stay on the port’s construction, but the DTEPA’s original 1998 order clearly prohibits the port on ecological grounds. That order has not been challenged by any party before any court, and that stands final,” said Debi Goenka, executive trustee, Conservation Action Trust, and an invitee of the DTEPA.
Bhushan Bhoir, a Palghar-based fisherman and professor of marine biology who has been tracking the project, said, “This port project will cause immense damage to the intertidal marine ecosystem, a fact which has not been taken into consideration by the NGT. It has viewed the issue only from the perspective of industries and impact on the landward side of the Dahanu coast. The NGT did, however, recommend that the expert committee consult with local communities to understand the project’s impact on the livelihood. But not a single official fishworkers’ organisation was approached for its inputs. The NCSCM, too, did not reach out to any local organisation for its assessment.”
A senior official from JNPT, seeking anonymity, said, “We would not like to comment on the merits of the MoEFCC’s decision. They are the experts. If the ministry is saying the port is permissible, then for us that is final. It should be noted that the MoEFCC has emphasised the need for compliance with the coastal regulatory zone and environment impact assessment rules.”
Despite attempts, HT was unable to contact Veenu Joon, a scientist at MoEFCC’s ESZ division, who signed the OM.