southern zone, chennai application no. 365...
TRANSCRIPT
1
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
APPLICATION No. 365 of 2013 (SZ) ( suo motu)
In the matter of: suo motu taken from the News Item of ‘The Hindu’ dated 21.11.2013 about the plan for a Cricket Stadium at Tirupathi Andhra Pradesh
AND
1. The Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests
Govt. of India
Paryavaran Bhavan
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road
New Delhi - 110 003
2. The Chief Secretary to Government
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Hyderabad
3. The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh
Environment, Forests, Science and Technology
Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Hyderabad.
4. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Aranya Bhavan, Saifabad,
Opp: R.B.I, Hyderabad-500 004
5. The Chairman,
Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board
Paryavarana Bhavan, A-3,IE, Sanathnagar
Hyderabad-18
2
6. The Chairman, Board of Trustees
Thirupathi Thirumala Devasthanam
K.T. Road,
Thirupathi-517 501
7. The Executive Officer, Thirumala
Thirupathi Devasthanam, K.T. Road
Thirupathi-517 501
8. The President, Andhra Pradesh
Cricket Association, NH-5, Gunadala Road
Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh
9. The Registrar
Sri Venkateswara University
Thirupathi .. Respondents
Counsel appearing: Respondents : Shrimathi C. Sangamithirai, Advocate for respondent
No. 1; Sri T. Sai Krishnan, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 to 5; M/s. D. Gopinath and Chithirai Selvan, Advocates for respondent No. 6; Shri K. Ravindranath, Advocate for respondent No. 6 and 7 and M/s. P. Balaram and M. Vasudevarao, Advocates for respondent No. 9
ORDER Present:
1. Hon’ble Shri Justice M. Chockalingam Judicial Member
2. Hon’ble Prof. Dr. R. Nagendran Expert Member
3
_________________________________________________________
Dated, 30th January, 2015 _________________________________________________________ (Hon’ble Shri Justice M. Chockalingam)
A news item in the “The Hindu” dated 21.11.2013 under the
caption “Plan for stadium at Thirupathi raises eyebrows” read as below:
“Plan for Stadium at Tirupati raises eyebrow”
“The international cricket stadium coming up at the foot
of Tirumala hills, for which the Chief Minister N. Kiran
Kumar Reddy laid the foundation stone on Wednesday,
has raised eyebrow on both ecological and security angles.
A major facility which is all set to kindle enthusiasm in
sports enthusiasts of Rayalaseema region, it is considered
a major boon to budding sports persons. A 30 acre site of
Sri Venkateswara University has been identified on which
the Andhra Cricket Association will construct the stadium.
The stadium is coming on a site where there are
around 4 lakh fully-grown trees, including the precious and
endemic red sanders. The region is a rich catchment area
for water flowing down the hills and is adjacent to the zoo.
Forest officials, on condition of anonymity admit that it is
4
home to several endangered and herbivorous animals,
which frequently stray on to Alipiri- Cherlopalle bypass
road. Even leopards have strayed on to the road in the
past, indicating the growing man-animal conflict.
It is ecologically disastrous to disturb the forest.
Tirupati definitely needs an international stadium, but not at
the cost of its rich biodiversity conservation. Instead, waste
and barren lands available in the Renigunta belt can be
used,” says K. Srinivasa Reddy, president of Intellectual
Forum and himself a soil scientist.
Alipiri bustles with one lakh pilgrims everyday and
this stadium adds 30, 000 more people, causing strain on
infrastructure. The TTD declined alienation of its land to its
employees here, indicating that it should be used to
facilitate ‘natural expansion’ in future. “The establishment
of a stadium in the little-known Gachibowli area in
Hyderabad spurred development,” Dr. Reddy said. At a
time when Triumala already faces security threat, the
stadium allows people to move much closer to the base of
the Tirumala hills which is increasingly becoming porous
with the construction of such structures”.
5
2. Taking cognizance of the above news item in the interest of
protection of environment and ecology, the Tribunal thought it fit to take
suo motu proceedings and notices were served to the respondent Nos. 1
to 8 to file their reply with regard to the news item. The 9th respondent,
namely, the Registrar, Sri Venkateswara Univeristy (University), was
added a party respondent to the above proceedings as the land in which
the stadium is to come up belongs to the University.
3. The first respondent, namely the Ministry of Environment and
Forests (MoEF) filed the reply which states that as per the Notification
issued on 14.09.2006 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (E P
Act, 1986) construction of new projects or activities listed in the
Schedule to the said Notification entailing capacity addition with change
in the process and or technology shall be undertaken in any part of India
only after prior Environmental Clearance (EC) from the Central
Government, or as the case may be, by the State Level Environment
Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) duly constituted by the Central
Government under sub section (3) of section 3 of the said Act in
accordance with the procedures specified in the Notification. Under the
provisions of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification,
2006, the EC for building, construction, township and area development
projects is covered under items 8(a) and 8(b) of the Schedule to the
Notification. These are categorized as “B” projects which are appraised
6
by the State Level Expert Appraisal Committees (SEAC) and approved
by the SEIAA on the following criterion factors:
a. If the built up area is greater than 20,000 m2 and less than
1,50,000 m2 for building and construction projects.
b. If coverage area is more than 50 ha and or built up area is
greater than 1,50,000 m2 for township and area development
projects.
4. The 4th respondent, namely, the Principal Chief Conservator of
Forests states in reply that the area in which the proposed international
cricket stadium is to be constructed is in an extent of 30.01 acres
comprised in Sy.No. 588/A of Ullipatteda Village of Thirupathi Mandal
and the said land belongs to the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam (TTD).
The TTD has given an extent of 924.08 acres on long lease for 99 years
to the University in the year 1962. The extent of 807 acres out of the
total extent of 924.08 acres lies in Sy.No. 588/A and 30.01 acres from
this 807 acres is leased out to the Andhra Cricket Association by the
University for a term of 30 years. At the time of survey of the land for the
cricket stadium, the Forest Department officials objected to the lease as
the land where the cricket stadium is to come forms a part of forest land
and after a joint inspection carried out by all the authorities and the
officials concerned and the extent of land in Sy.No. 588/A is confirmed to
be owned by the TTD.
7
5. The University requested permission from the Divisional Forest
Officer, Wildlife Management Division, Tirupathi by a letter dated
29.05.2013 to clear the jungle growth in 30.01 acres in Sy.No.588/A and
on reference to the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Tirupathi seeking
his concurrence, it was found that the land is covered with thorny bushes
and red sander trees and it was not possible to count the red sander
trees without removing the thorny bushes and the DFO issued
instructions to the University by letter dated 19.10.2013 for removal of
thorny bushes in Sy.No. 588/A for the limited purpose of enumerating
the red sander and other tree species located in that area. It was also
informed to the TTD that the proposed area for construction of cricket
stadium is having a good forest growth with red sanders and was further
requested to follow the rules under the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and
Trees Act, 2002, Environmental Rules and the norms of the Pollution
Control Board (APPCB) for clearing the existing forest growth. During
the field inspection conducted by the DFO on 29.11.2013, it was noticed
that all the standing trees excepting red sanders, neem, tamarind, usiri
and few other species of trees were removed by machine along with the
thorny bushes without any permission from the competent authorities in
an extent of 25 acres in the land leased out to Andhra Pradesh Cricket
Association. When a reference was made out to the University by the
DFO regarding the felling of trees without approval of the competent
8
authority in violation of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act,
2002, the University replied that as the extent of 30.01 acres was leased
out to the Andhra Pradesh Cricket Association, it is the lessee’s
obligation to obtain the clearances and it is responsible for the same. A
case has also been registered against the University and the Contractor
of the Andhra Pradesh Cricket Association for the offences under
section 29(1) and section 35(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and
Trees Act, 2002 by the Forest Range Officer, Sri Venkateswara National
Park, Tirupathi Range.
6. In pursuance of the order dated 21.11.2013 of this Zonal Bench
of the NGT, strict instructions were given to all the concerned Forest
Department Officials to ensure that no further felling of trees is done by
anyone in that area and no further felling of trees were done.
7. The 5th respondent, namely, the APPCB, would submit in reply
that as per the Memorandum of Understanding between the 8th and 9th
respondents, the extent of 30.01 acres is as follows:
East to West (on the northern side) .. 411.60 m
East to West (on the southern side) .. 312.60 m
North to South (on the eastern side) .. 361.60 m
North to South (on the western side) .. 443.60 m
8. The seating capacity of the proposed stadium is around 20,000.
The activities of the stadium includes regular cricket practice for all age
9
groups, conduct matches of different levels, i.e., Inter-District, Inter-
Zonal and Inter-State matches of various age groups including first class
matches and to organize international matches. The main source of
water for the stadium would be the groundwater. The effluent treatment
and disposal options from the effluent generated at the stadium will be
regulated as per the guidelines of APPCB. The solid waste treatment
and disposal shall be as per the guidelines of the APPCB. The air and
noise pollution due to installation of DG sets would be mitigated by
installing high quality mufflers and the latest DG sets which produce less
noise and smoke below the permissible limits.
9. The entire play field within the stadium will be maintained with
grass plantation and regular watering. The area beyond the stadium and
within the compound walls will be maintained with natural turf and eco-
friendly trees all around the compound walls which will not disturb the
environment. The solid waste, sewerage and effluent are to be treated
and disposed of with latest gadgets available in the international market
under the supervision of the qualified technical staff and with the
guidelines provided by the APPCB.
10. As per the EIA Notification, 2006, any construction activity
beyond 20,000 m2 requires obtaining of prior EC before commencement
of the activity or preparation of the land. However, the Project Proponent
has informed the APPCB that the built up area of the stadium is still
10
under planning and not yet finalized. The APPCB has, therefore,
directed the 8th respondent to approach the APPCB after finalizing the
plan of the proposed stadium and the 5th respondent would take
appropriate action on the basis of the same.
11. The 6th and 7th respondents, namely, the TTD would state in
reply that the land in Sy.No.588/A stands in the name of TTD and an
extent of 924.08 acres in the above Sy.No. was granted on long term
lease of 99 years to the University in the year 1962. There is no bar to
sub lease the land as per the lease agreement terms and the University
has leased out an extent of 30.01 acres to the Andhra Pradesh Cricket
Association by way of registered lease agreement dated 25.03.2013.
The said sub lease was not ratified by the Andhra Pradesh Government
and no proposals were submitted to Government in this regard. The suo
motu proceedings taken by the Tribunal embraces a wide spectrum of
environmental issues by putting up a stadium which may cause
destruction of forest in which the TTD has no part or involvement. The
Forest Department of Andhra Pradesh Government and other concerned
are to take appropriate steps against the illegal felling of tress and the
TTD will abide by such directions as may be issued by the Tribunal.
12. The 8th respondent, namely, the Andhra Pradesh Cricket
Association would state in reply that in the interest of supporting and
promoting activities of sports, particularly cricket, the Andhra Pradesh
11
Cricket Association sent a requisition by a letter dated 12.01.2009 to the
office of the Chief Minister, Andhra Pradesh for allotment of 50 acres of
vacant land out of the total extent in Sy.No.588 of Alipiri Village,
Tirupathi Mandal which is under the control of TTD for construction of a
cricket stadium. After identification of 30.01 acres in Sy.No.588 in the
total extent leased out to University by the TTD, a lease was made to the
Association on 25.03.2013 for the construction of a cricket stadium in the
above portion of the land.
13. The Andhra Cricket Association was under the impression that
as the land belongs to the University, no permission from the Forest
Department is required and only after the information from the DFO to
remove the bushes, the Association made removal of bushes which
could not be made without felling the trees in some places. The felling of
the trees was not done wantonly or intentionally and the trees which
were felled down were negligible in numbers. The Association submitted
that its regrets for the confusion that arose in this matter and further
assures that it will abide by all the rules and regulations and take all the
necessary permissions from the authorities concerned such as EC,
building plan and other statutory permissions.
14. The 9th respondent, namely, the Registrar, Sri Venkateswara
University, Tirupathi states inter alia after briefing the history of the land
leased out to the University by TTD and sub lease entered into between
12
the University and the Andhra Cricket Association for the establishment
of cricket stadium that during the removal of the thorny bushes on the
subject land it was reported by DFO that small trees like Adavi Nimma,
Thumma, Chigara etc., were uprooted with machine along with the
bushes violating the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002
and Forest Conservation Act, 1980. He would further state that by the
time orders of stop work was received the bushes had been removed in
an extent of 25 acres and further works in the remaining extent of 5
acres were stopped as soon as the order was received. The Andhra
Cricket Association has given an undertaking to plant as many trees as
possible to maintain the greenery and ecological balance to compensate
for the trees felled down. However, as the land is undulated, the removal
of bushes and trees may be necessary for levelling the land. The Forest
Department of the Andhra Pradesh and other concerned authorities
have taken appropriate steps against the illegal felling of the trees and
the 9th respondent would abide by such directions as may be issued by
the Tribunal and to allow the construction of the cricket stadium.
15. As seen above, the matter was taken cognizance by this
Bench pursuant to a news item in ‘The Hindu’ pertaining to the
construction of an International Cricket Stadium (Stadium) at the foot of
the Tirumala Hills. On notice, the 1st to 8th respondents entered
appearance through their counsel. It was felt necessary that the 9th
13
respondent should be added as a party and accordingly, he was added.
The 9th respondent also entered appearance through his counsel. All the
respondents filed their respective replies.
16. In pursuance of a requisition dated 12.01.2009 by the General
Secretary/President, Andhra Cricket Association (Association) to the
office of the Chief Minister, Andhra Pradesh for allotment of vacant land
to an extent of 50 acres in Sy.No.588/A of Alipiri Village of Tirupathi for
construction of a stadium, the Government of Andhra Pradesh in its
letter dated 01.02.2013 requested the 9th respondent University herein to
examine the proposal to lease out an extent of 30 acres for the
construction of the stadium and other complexes with the funds of the
Association and also requested the University to place a proposal with
full details before the Executive Council of the University. Accordingly,
the proposal along with the draft lease agreement were prepared and
placed before the Executive Council which approved the proposal with
terms and conditions mentioned in the draft lease agreement to allot an
extent of 30.01 acres in Sy.No.588/A of Alipiri Village in Tirupathi with
specific boundaries for a period of 30 years. A lease agreement was
entered into between the University and the Association, the 8th
respondent herein, on 25.03.2013 as found in Document No.7 (pages
25-50) filed by the 9th respondent. At this juncture, it becomes necessary
to mention that this piece of land measuring 30.01 acres, the subject
14
matter of the above lease agreement formed part of the total extent of
1281.52 acres in Sy.No.588/A was originally classified as inam dry and
subsequently the ryotwari patta was granted in favour of TTD in the
year 1961 and continues to stand in the name of TTD even today. Out of
the said extent of 1281.52 acres of land in Sy.No.588/A, a long term
lease for 99 years was given in favour of the University in the year 1962.
The extent of 30.01 acres covered under the lease agreement dated
25.03.2013 between the 8th and 9th respondents referred to above
formed part of the total extent of 924.68 acres which has been in the
possession of the University from the time of long term lease as referred
to above. It is specifically averred by the Chairman of the Board of
Trustees and Executive Officer of TTD shown as 6th and 7th respondents
herein that there is no bar for the 9th respondent University to execute
sub lease. But, it is also averred that the sub lease has not yet been
ratified by the Government. The Tribunal need not examine the rights,
duties and obligations of the parties to the lease agreement since it is
outside the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Since the concern of the present
proceedings is only on the environmental issues it becomes necessary
to consider the role and liabilities of each of the respondents in so far as
the environmental issues are concerned.
17. Advancing the arguments on behalf of the 8th
respondent/Association, the learned counsel would submit that Tirupathi
15
has grown as a big city and Sri Venkateswara University is situate at
Tirupathi. The stadium at Visakhapatnam could not be claimed to be of
international standards after the carving out of Telengana State from the
unified erstwhile Andhra Pradesh. The State of Andhra Pradesh after
bifurcation needs a stadium of international standards for the
encouragement of the sports, particularly cricket. The setting up of the
cricket stadium of international standards at Tirupathi is considered most
ideal as the game of cricket is the soul of millions of people in the world
including India as said by our Hon’ble Prime Minister of India recently at
Australia. The main activity at the Stadium is to conduct regular cricket
practice for all age groups, conduct matches at different levels i.e., inter-
district, inter-zonal and inter-state matches for various age groups
including first class matches and to organize international matches as
allotted by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and as per the
decision of the Andhra Cricket Association.
18. By a letter dated 25.12.2013, the 8th respondent sent a
communication stating about measures proposed to be taken for the
protection of environment and ecology in reply to the notice dated
21.12.2013 of 5th respondent/APPCB. The need for the Stadium cannot
be underestimated. The environmental degradation due to the
establishment of the Stadium has to be balanced judiciously on the
principle of Sustainable Development. While the Association has set
16
apart around Rs.40 Crores for the construction of stadium, it is aware
that and there would be loss to the greeneries due to by deforestation.
The Association would compensate more than sufficiently by whatever
conditions that may be imposed by the Tribunal and also by developing
more greenery in the neighbourhood. The proposal for the setting up of
the Stadium should not be denied due to clearing of the shrubs, small
plants and trees for construction of stadium under the guise of
environmental degradation ignoring the Sustainable Development. By
stating all the above, the learned counsel for the 8th
respondent/Association would conclude that what is proposed in the
land is only for a good cause which would not lead to any environmental
degradation or cause detrimental effect on ecology. Therefore, the
Association must be permitted to proceed with the work.
19. The learned counsel appearing for the 6th and 7th respondents
would submit that pursuant to the lease agreement entered into in1962
between the TTD and University, the TTD had parted with and put the
University in possession in respect of 924.68 acres of land comprised in
Sy.No.588/A on long lease. In so far as the proposal for the construction
of the stadium, the lease deed entered into between the University and
the Association or the alleged cutting and felling of trees, the TTD has
no role to play at all and hence, the 6th and 7th respondents are not liable
to answer to any one of the allegations made on the issues of the
17
alleged environmental degradation. It is not the case of any one of the
other respondents that the 6th and 7th respondents representing TTD had
committed any act which is complained of. It is also seen that the TTD
had no role to play either in the proposal for construction of stadium or
lease agreement entered into between the 8th and 9th respondents
therefor or any activity connected therewith and hence, it has got to be
recorded that the 6th and 7th respondents representing the TTD are not
liable to answer in respect of environmental issue in question.
20. Arguing for the 9th respondent/ University, the learned counsel
would submit that in so far as the unauthorized cutting and felling of
trees by the 8th respondent, the 9th respondent University should not be
made responsible. In order to strengthen his contention, the learned
counsel relied on a clause in the terms and conditions stipulated in the
lease agreement entered into between the 8th and 9th respondents. The
clauses pertaining to the conditions imposed in the agreement including
the dispute and liabilities arising out of non-compliance to statutory
norms during the effective period of the lease in the lease agreement
read as follows:
Work on the construction of the proposed
infrastructure shall be initiated within one year from
the date of this lease agreement coming into force
and shall be completed within five years with the
18
clearances and approval of all the Government
Departments.
The Tribunal is able to see force in the contention putforth by the 9th
respondent and it has to be accepted and it is held so.
21. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent, MoEF
would submit that under the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006, the
EC for the building, construction, township and area development
projects were covered under item 8(a) and 8(b) of the Schedule to the
Notification. The B category projects are appraised by the SEAC and
approved by the SEIAA. As on today EC is not required.
22. It is true that the 8th respondent/Association entered into a
lease agreement with the 9th respondent/University and took possession
of 30.01 acres of land for the construction of the cricket stadium. Under
the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006, construction of new projects
or activities or expansion or modernization of the existing projects or
activities listed in the Schedule to the said Notification entailing capacity
additions with change in process and/or technology should be
undertaken only after prior EC from the Central Government or from the
SEIAA as the case may be in accordance with the procedure specified in
the Notification. The Notification speaks about the A category projects
requiring EC from the Central Government and B category projects
which are to be appraised by SEAC and approved by SEIAA. It is
19
pertinent to point out that the proposed project by the Association is an
International Cricket Stadium. It is true that the construction part in
setting up the stadium will not cover the area of 30.01 acres. It is well
admitted by the 8th respondent/Association that the seating capacity of
the stadium is around 20,000 and the built up area is under planning.
But, when the construction activities of the said project require prior EC
from the Central Government or fall under B category for which approval
by the SEIAA is required, there is no option for the 8th respondent but to
apply for and obtain EC or the approval as the case may be as
mandated by the EIA Notification, 2006. Hence, a direction is issued to
the 8th respondent to apply and obtain EC from the MoEF or approval
from SEIAA procedurally if warranted.
23. Concededly, the 8th respondent has not approached by filing
any application for any consent from the 5th respondent/APPCB since it
has taken a stand that either the activity during construction of the
stadium and thereafter will not have any impact on environment. After
the initiation of the present proceedings, the 5th respondent served a
notice dated 21.12.2013 on the 8th respondent/Association calling for
particulars in respect of the proposed stadium as found in Annexure-R1
filed by the 5th respondent. In reply, the 8th respondent sent a
communication to the 8th respondent dated 25.12.2013 which reads as
follows:
20
“With reference to your notice No. G-
224/PCB/RO/TPT/2013-2437 dated 21.12.2013, we
respectfully submit the following information for your kind
consideration and perusal.
(a) The Memorandum of Understanding between the
Andhra Cricket Association and Sri Venkateswara
University is for an extent of Ac.30.01 cents and
measuring
East to West (on Northern side) .. 411.60 m
East to West (on Southern side) .. 312.60 m
North to South (on Eastern side) ..361.60 m
North to South (on Western side) .. 443.80 m
land for the construction of International Cricket
Stadium at Tirupati. The built up area of the stadium
is under planning.
(b) The capacity of the proposed stadium is around 20,000
(c) The main activity of the stadium is to conduct
cricketing activity which includes regular practice for
all age groups, conduct of matches of different levels
i.e., Inter-District, Inter-Zonal and Interstate matches
of various age groups including first class matches
and to organize international matches allotted by
Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and as per
the decision of the Executive Committee of the
Andhra Cricket Association.
(d) The main source of water is from underground.
(e) The sewage and effluents that are expected are bare
minimum and the Andhra Cricket Association shall
follow the guidelines of Pollution Control Board in this
aspect.
(f) The effluent treatment and disposal options proposed
for the effluent generation at the stadium will be
21
regulated as per the guidelines of the Pollution
Control Board.
(g) The solid waste generated and their collection,
treatment and disposal shall be under the guidelines
of Pollution Control Board.
(h) the air and noise pollution due to installation of DG
sets and the mitigation measures proposed are
installation of high quality mufflers and the latest
generation DG sets which produce noise and smoke
below the air and noise permissible limits.
(i) the copy of the Memorandum of Understanding
between Sri Venkateswara University and the Andhra
Cricket Association is enclosed herewith.
(j) Any other factor.
We declare that by way of construction of stadium, there
will not be any impact on the environment because:
A) The entire play field within the stadium is always
maintained with grass plantation and regular watering.
B) The area beyond the stadium and within the
compound walls is well maintained with natural turf
and eco-friendly trees all around the compound walls
which will not disturb the environment.
C) The solid waste, sewage and effluent are treated and
disposed of with the latest gadgets available in the
international market under the supervision of our
qualified technical staff with the guidelines provided
by the Pollution Control Board.
D) Besides maintaining the ecology, the Andhra Cricket
Association by way of construction of the stadium will
generate employment to many of the local eligible
22
people and create a sporting atmosphere for the
youth of the district and surroundings and for
observing quality cricket for the cricket loving public.
We are sure that the above information satisfies the
queries raised through your letter.
24. The very reading of the reply would indicate that the statement
made by the Association that there would not be any impact on the
environment has got to be termed as “only to satisfy itself”, but not to
comply with any procedural mandates or the legal requisites. Taking into
consideration the activity at the stadium in the conduct of matches of
different age groups where a large number of persons would gather the
impact on the environment has to be taken as inevitable. The questions
on source of water, treatment and disposal of sewage and effluent, solid
waste treatment and disposal, air and noise pollution are to be
addressed for evolving and employing proper preventive and protective
measures in order to control the pollution which is likely to be caused.
Hence, the contention putforth by the Association that the activities
during construction and thereafter of the stadium would not have any
impact on environment has got to be rejected. It becomes necessary to
issue a direction to the 8th respondent Association to approach the 5th
respondent APPCB after finalization of all the details of the proposed
stadium for the grant of Consent to Establish and the Consent to
Operate. The 5th respondent APPCB is directed to consider the
23
application as and when made and pass appropriate order thereon, in
accordance with law.
25. In the present case, it would be apt and appropriate to refer to
the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in M.C. Mehta Vs. Kamalnath
and others reported in (1997) 1 SCC 388 wherein the duty to preserve
the natural resources in pristine purity is highlighted as follows:
“We are fully aware that the issues presented in this
case illustrate the classic struggle between those
members of the public who would preserve our rivers,
forests, parks and open lands in their pristine purity and
those charged with administrative responsibilities who,
under the pressures of the changing needs of an
increasingly complex society, find it necessary to
encroach to some extent upon open lands heretofore
considered inviolate to change. The resolution of this
conflict in any given case is for the legislature and not
the courts. If there is a law made by the Parliament or
the State Legislatures, the courts can serve as an
instrument of determining legislative intent in the
exercise of its powers of judicial review under the
Constitution. But in the absence of any legislation, the
executive acting under the doctrine if public trust cannot
abdicate the natural resources and convert them into
private ownership or for a commercial use. The aesthetic
use and the pristine glory of the natural resources, the
environment and the ecosystems of our country cannot
be permitted to be eroded for private, commercial or any
24
other use unless the courts find it necessary, in good
faith, for the public good and in public interest to
encroach upon the said resources”.
26. After making a thorough examination of all the aspects in the
backdrop of various legislations, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that if
the Project Proponent uses the forest land for non-forest purposes, the
Project Proponent has necessarily to pay Net Present Value (NPV) to
protect the ecology and bio-diversity by applying the public trust
doctrine. It remains to be stated at this juncture that the project in the
instant case, namely, establishment of International Cricket Stadium, no
doubt, a revenue earning project on commercial basis. It cannot claim
any exemption which can be made available to Government hospitals,
dispensaries, non-commercial Government ventures like schools, rain
water harvesting tanks, sewer lines, village roads etc., which are
projects solely meant for public welfare and have no adverse impact on
environment as such.
27. The role of games and sports in enhancing the quality of life,
especially in the context of developing countries is a well debated aspect
of all policy and practice regimes. The well known proverb—”All work
and no play makes Jack a dull boy” tells all in a nutshell. Games and
sports are important for success in every walk of our life. History reveals
that sports formed the principal part of education in ancient Greece. This
25
is true of the modern day curricula in most of the economically
developed countries. Games and sports are:
good exercises which help build fine and strong physique and develop mental alertness
best teachers who help us to cope with difficult situations and overcome even medical exigencies such as nervousness and restore self confidence
good diversions for both the players and the spectators alike
forces that foster competitive and team spirit among the participants and make them disciplined.
28. Realizing the multiple benefits of games and sports, all the
States in the country are giving utmost importance to promote the
regional and national sports in a big way and the same has to be viewed
in proper perspective and welcomed in the context of nation-building.
29. Following the trends of the Western countries, the sports and
games in India too are getting commercialized and encouraging players
to take up sports as a ‘profession’ and not just a ‘healthy pastime’.
Needless to state, sports have great potential to offer career
opportunities. The steep growth trajectory and economic potential of
sport industry in India has resulted in huge demand in respect of
Infrastructural needs and also the safety and facilities for national and
international players, spectators and game administrators.
26
30. Topping the list of Infrastructural needs in the fast growing
sports industry in India is the construction and management of STADIA
with international quality and standards. The urgency is felt the most
when it comes to CRICKET, which is undoubtedly the numero-uno
sport in India. The passion and sentiment with which the game of cricket
is treated in India is almost akin to the importance given to religion and
life. Understandably, facilities and requirements for the game of cricket
are being developed not only in major cities but also in rural and semi-
urban areas. The proposed construction of the Cricket stadium which is
the subject matter of the instant case is a shining example for the public
patronage given to this sport.
31. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA),
Switzerland in its publication titled “Stadium Safety and Security
Regulations (2012)” has dealt with the definition of the term Stadium. It
is pertinent to reproduce the same for the sake of clarity and inclusivity
as has been done below:
32. Stadium: Any stadium at which a match is played. This
includes the entire premises (to the extent that an accreditation card is
required in order to gain access) of the stadium facility inside the outer
perimeter fence and (on match days and on any day on which any
official team training session takes place within the stadium) the aerial
space above such stadium premises. “Stadium” shall also include all
27
parking facilities, VIP/VVIP and hospitality areas, media zones,
concession areas, commercial display areas, buildings, the field of play,
the pitch area, the broadcast compound, the stadium media centre, the
stands and the areas beneath the stands.
33. Application of the above definition to the case on hand makes
it abundantly clear that Cricket Stadium proposed by the proponent in
the instant case is a complex engineering entity involving a multitude of
activities both on the ‘match days’ and also on ‘off play days’ during
which training and practice related activities will go on. Needless to state
that a variety of activities that go on in such a facility inevitably have a
variety of impacts on the environment. Notwithstanding the health and
economic benefits that accrue to the society from the proposed facility,
the promoters of the game, the law enforcing authorities and other
related agencies shall not turn a blind eye to the possible environmental
impacts of the stadium both during the construction and operation of the
same. It is a well settled principle that developmental projects should not
take environmental considerations ‘for granted’. The same is engrained
in the concept of ‘Sustainable Development’ as well. We therefore direct
the concerned agencies that grant Environmental Clearance and the
Consent to Establish/Operate as the case may be, to give special and
focussed attention to the following aspects/parameters as detailed in
FIFA Regulations cited in para No. 31 supra. These may not come under
28
the direct technical ambit of “ENVIRONMENT” but have a functional link
and bearing on the safety of the players, spectators and others and thus
on the “ENVIRONMENT” as a whole in an implicit manner, though not
physically defined. Of course, these are in addition to the routine
parameters that are generally covered under the Air, Water and other
applicable Acts:
Spectator safety and security policy document
Stadium Risk Assessments: (e.g., Fire, Chemicals, fuels whether in containers or within fuel tanks and machinery, fertilisers, weed killers, paints or gas cylinders used for medical purposes)
Stadium Contingency Plans: In respect of fire, gas leak or hazardous materials incident, buildings and services, safety and security communication systems, adverse weather conditions such as lightning strikes, flash floods, high winds, hurricanes etc.
Temporary demountable structures
Safety signs
Staff awareness and training
34. The concerned authorities are directed to consult documents
such as International Guidelines, Manuals and Standard Operating
Practices (SOP) issued by International Organizations governing the
game of cricket (and also other sports if and as applicable) and get
familiarized with all the pertinent issues at the time of appraisal and
decision making.
29
35. It is noticed that the permission was granted only for the
purpose of clearing the thorny bushes for counting the trees. On the
contrary, without any permission from the competent authorities, all
grown up trees of different species except red sander were cut and
felled down in the guise of removal of thorny bushes in an extent of 25
acres of land out of 30.01 acres leased out for the construction of the
Stadium. It is pertinent to point out that all those trees cut and felled
down were removed and no explanation is tendered as to what
happened to those trees since all the trees according to the Forest
Department were removed using machines. A direction at this stage to
the Forest Department to make a survey of those trees which existed,
their age, growth and value would be a futile exercise. A perusal of
Annexure-R 9 filed by the 4th respondent would evidence that the Forest
Department undertook an exercise of ascertaining the type of trees in
the area adjacent to that where trees were felled. Five sample plots of
0.04 ha in Sy.No.589 were considered for estimating the number of
trees cut over an area of 25 acres in Sy.No.588/A. As per the valuation
report under Annexure-R 9 dated 05.01.2014, the value of vegetations
missed/removed in the said 25 acres of land in terms of value and cost
on the basis of the study of sample plots including the NPV was
Rs.96.40 lakhs and total number of trees cut were approximately 1150.
In the considered opinion of the Tribunal, the valuation report as found in
30
Annexure-R 9 has to be accepted since it is the figure arrived at after
taking into consideration all the necessary aspects and after making the
calculation based on samples and applying the NPV theory.
36. In the present case, it would be apt and appropriate to refer to
the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in M.C. Mehta Vs. Kamalnath
and others reported in (1997) 1 SCC 388 wherein the duty to preserve
the natural resources in pristine purity is highlighted in para 25 above.
37. When forest land is used for non-forest purposes, in order to
prevent degradation to environment and ecological systems what
measures are required to be taken to compensate the loss of forest land
and to compensate the effect on ecology came up for consideration
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in T.N. Godhavarman
Tirumalpad Vs. Union of India and others reported in AIR 2005 SCC
4256 wherein Their Lordships have held as follows:
“Forests are vital component to sustain the life support
system on the earth. Forests in India have been dwindling
over the years for a number of reasons, one of it being the
need to use forest area for developmental activities
including economic development. Undoubtedly, in any
nation development is also necessary but it has to be
consistent with protection of environment and not at the
cost of degradation of environment. Any programme,
policy or vision for overall development has to evolve a
systematic approach so as to balance economic
31
development and environmental protection. Both have to
go hand in hand. In ultimate analysis, economic
development at the cost of degradation of environment
and depletion of forest cover would not be long lasting.
Such development would be counterproductive.
Therefore, there is an absolute need to take all
precautionary measures when forest lands are sought to
be directed for non-forest use.
The point in issue is whether before diversion of forest
land for non-forest purposes and consequential loss of
benefits accruing from the forests should not the user
agency of such land be required to compensate for the
diversion. If so, should not the user agency be required to
make payment of Net Present Value (NPV) of such
diverted land so as to utilize the amount so received for
getting back in long run benefits which are lost by such
diversion? What guidelines should be issued for
determination of NPV? Should guidelines apply uniformly
to all? How to calculate NPV? Should some projects be
exempted from NPV? These are the main aspects which
require examination and determination in the back drop of
various legislations which we would presently notice”.
38. After making a thorough examination of all the aspects in the
backdrop of various legislations, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that if
the Project Proponent uses the forest land for non-forest purposes, the
Project Proponent has necessarily to pay NPV to protect the ecology
and bio-diversity by applying the public trust doctrine. It remains to be
32
stated at this juncture that the project in the instant case, namely,
establishment of International Cricket Stadium, no doubt, is a revenue
earning project on commercial basis. It cannot claim any exemption
which can be made available to Government hospitals, dispensaries,
non-commercial Government ventures like schools, rain water
harvesting tanks, sewer lines, village roads etc., which are projects
solely meant for public welfare and have no adverse impact on the
environment as such. Hence, the Association cannot be permitted to do
any act concerning with the Stadium at the cost of environment. No
doubt, as stated above, we have to agree that the stadium has its own
importance and economic significance. But, the importance of
environmental interest must also be taken into account. Hence, it
becomes necessary to strike a balance by applying the Doctrine of
Sustainable Development.
39. On receipt of a letter from the 9th respondent/University dated
29.05.2013 requesting permission to fell and remove the trees in the
afore stated 30.01 acres of land, the subject matter lease between the
8th and 9th respondents for earmarking the construction of the cricket
stadium, the DFO addressed a letter to the RDO/Tirupathi seeking
consent for the request made by the University as found in Annexure-R
1 filed by the 6th respondent. The RDO issued a reply on 29.07.2013
stating that as per the report of the Tahsildar, Tirupathi, the land was
33
covered by thorny bushes and red sander trees and it was not possible
for counting the red sander trees. The RDO made a request for clearing
the thorny bushes in the land and to report for further action as found in
Annexure-R 2 of the documents filed by the 4th respondent. In turn, the
DFO sent a communication dated 19.10.2013 as found in Annexure-R 3
filed by the 4th respondent to the 9th respondent Registrar of the
University to make arrangements for the limited purpose of enumerating
the red sander trees. In the meanwhile, the Forest Department raised
objection stating that the proposed land for the stadium is in Sy.No.589
which forms part of the forest land. After a joint inspection was made,
the RDO, Tirupathi reported to the District Collector, Chittoor that the
Forest Department cannot claim any right over the land in Sy.No.588/A
as found in Annexure-R 4. Revised orders were issued in the
Proceedings dated 19.11.2013 and thus as per the revenue records the
land in Sy.No.588/A stood in the name of TTD.
40. When an inspection was conducted by the DFO, Tirupathi on
29.11.2013, it was noticed that in an extent of 25 acres out of 30.01
acres of the land allotted to the 8th respondent, all standing trees lying
with the entire shrub growth such as neem, tamarind, usiri and few other
species except red sanders have been removed by machine along with
thorny bushes without any permission from the competent authority. It is
pertinent to point out that while a communication was addressed by the
34
DFO, Tirupathi under Annexure-R 3 referred to above for removal of
thorny bushes for the purpose of counting the trees, it was found that not
only the shrub growth was removed, but also all kind of trees except the
red sanders by machine.
41. An affidavit filed by the 8th respondent/Association on
18.01.2015 reads as follows:
“4. Pursuant to permission granted by the concerned
authorities, this respondent took upon the exercise of
clearing the grass, thorny bushes, shrubs, wild plantations
and forest growths, vegetation and other small plants and
this respondent had completed the same in an extent of 25
acres. While doing so and in that process, some dead wood
and small forest trees of varieties like adavi nimma
(kattukkaruvai trees) etc., numbering not more than about 30
or 35 situate within the cluster of shrubs and bushes would
have been cleared without the knowledge of this respondent.
It is respectfully submitted that the report of the fourth
respondent as if large number of trees were removed or
missing is not correct and the same is statistical guess work.
The value alleged is also hypothetical, exaggerated and
imaginary which is not true and correct”.
42. The very reading of the above would be indicative of the fact
that the 8th respondent, while clearing the thorny bushes and shrubs has
cut and felled the trees of different species in the entire area of 25 acres
out of 30.01 acres. While the 8th respondent was permitted only to
35
remove the thorny bushes and shrubs, the act of the 8th respondent in
removing the trees was against the permission granted and also in
violation of the legal requirements. Admittedly, for removal of those
trees no permission was obtained as required by law. Pertaining to the
reply of the 4th respondent, namely, the DFO, Tirupathi, the learned
counsel for the 8th respondent Association that even in the reply the
forest department has well admitted that the red sander trees were not
removed and those trees which were removed were only neem,
tamarind, usiri and few other species. But, it cannot be disputed that
even for removal of those trees as pointed out by the DFO in his reply
that necessary permission should have been obtained from the forest
department. The contention putforth by the learned counsel for the 8th
respondent that the trees which were cut and felled down during the
process of removal of thorny bushes were about 30 to 35 in numbers
within the cluster of shrubs, bushes that too without the knowledge of the
8th respondent cannot be countenanced even for a moment. It should not
be forgotten that the shrubs and bushes were removed in the entire
extent of 25 acres out of the total extent of 30.01 acres covered under
the lease deed. In view of the interim orders of the Tribunal, the
Association could not proceed with the remaining 5 acres of land for
removal of shrubs and bushes and cutting and felling of trees.
36
43. In so far as the remaining 5 acres of land in respect of which
the interim injunction granted restraining the cutting and felling of trees is
in force, it is made clear that either the 8th respondent or any one on
behalf of the 8th respondent shall not cut or fell the trees either directly or
in the guise of removal of thorny bushes without obtaining necessary
permission from the Forest Department as required by law.
44. It is an admitted position that the extent of 30.01 acres covered
under the lease agreement between the 8th and 9th respondents and
meant for establishment of the cricket stadium formed part of the total
extent of 924.68 acres which was originally leased out to the University
by TTD. The University which took the extent of 924.68 acres of land on
lease from TTD has created a sub- lease in favour of the Association in
respect of 30.01 acres now earmarked for the Stadium. Thus, the
ownership of the land continues to remain with the TTD. It is true that
the Association has taken possession on the strength of the sub-lease
entered into between the University and the Association who are
respondents herein. Since the ownership continues to vest with the TTD
and in order to avoid avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, it would be fit
and proper to direct the 8th respondent Association to pay the entire
amount of Rs. 96.40 lakhs fixed as compensation.
45. Applying the Doctrine of Polluter Pays, the Andhra Cricket
Association shown as 8th respondent who was solely responsible for the
37
unauthorized cutting and felling of trees is absolutely liable to
compensate for the damaged caused. Hence, a direction is issued to the
8th respondent/Andhra Cricket Association to pay the said sum of Rs.
96.40 lakhs fixed as compensation above directly to TTD within a period
of 3 months herefrom.
46. In so far as the remaining 5 acres of land out of 30.01 acres
which was earmarked for construction of the Stadium is concerned, the
8th respondent shall remove the trees only after getting permission, from
the Forest Department as required under the law and while granting
permission, the Forest Department shall impose among other conditions
that the Association shall plant saplings numbering 4 times the different
species of trees in respect of which the permission is to be granted.
47. In the result, this suo motu application is disposed of with the
following directions in addition to the directions given in paragraphs 33
and 34 of this order:
1. A direction is issued to the 8th respondent/Andhra Cricket
Association to apply and obtain Environmental Clearance from the 1st
respondent/Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India or
38
from the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA),
procedurally if warranted after finalization of all the details of the
proposed International Cricket Stadium project.
2. The 8th respondent/Andhra Cricket Association is directed to
approach the 5th respondent/Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control
Board (APPCB) for Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate at
appropriate stages and the 5th respondent APPCB is also directed to
consider the application as and when made by the 8th respondent and
pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with the law.
3. The 8th respondent is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 96.40 lakhs
(Rupees ninety six lakh and forty thousand) only towards the
compensation for unauthorized cutting and felling of trees in 25 acres of
land in Sy.No.588/A, Alipiri Village, Tirupathi Taluk to the Tirumala-
Tirupathi Devasthanam (TTD), Tirupathi within a period of 3 months
herefrom and also the 8th respondent is further directed to plant 4000
saplings of different species as per the directions of the Forest
Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh within a period of six
months herefrom and the Forest Department, Government of Andhra
Pradesh is directed to monitor and verify the compliance of this direction.
39
4. In so far as the remaining 5 acres out of the total extent of 30.01
acres leased out to the 8th respondent/Andhra Cricket Association by the
9th respondent/Sri Venkateswara University (University), Tirupathi, the 8th
respondent is restrained by way of an order of injunction not to cut or fell
any tree in the said extent of 5 acres either directly or in the guise of
removal of thorny bushes without necessary permission from the Forest
Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh as required in law and while
granting such permission, the Forest Department, Government of Andhra
Pradesh is directed to impose among other conditions that the 8th
respondent/Andhra Cricket Association shall plant saplings 4 times of the
number of trees cut in respect of which permission is granted.
5. It is held that the 6th and 7th respondents representing the TTD
and the 9th respondent University are not liable in respect of the
environmental degradation or damage to the ecology caused by the
unauthorized cutting and felling of trees by the 8th respondent/Andhra
Cricket Association in 25 acres of land in Sy.No.588/A.
No cost.
(Justice M. Chockalingam)
Judicial Member
(Prof. Dr. R. Nagendran) Expert Member
Chennai, 30th January, 2015