Perhaps for the first time in his tenure as the environment minister, Jairam Ramesh has met with a spirited fight back from one of his victims -- embattled Lavasa Corporationen nod.
The company, the subsidiary of construction giant Hindustan Construction Company (HCC) that has been blamed for not seeking the mandatory environmental clearance for its hill township near Pune, contested the basic position of the environment ministry that it needed a nod.
The core of the company's defence lay in its interpretation that the Lavasa township was not a construction project, but a tourism project. Jairam Ramesh had, in his show-cause notice, pointed out that the company had not sought permission under a 2004 notification requiring all initial stage "construction projects" to seek environmental clearance.
"Our client's stand, right from the beginning and still is tht the 1994 notification, as amended in 2004, does not require them to take environmental clearance," Agarwal Law Associates, a Delhi-based firm representing Lavasa, pointed out.
The environment ministry, in its show-cause notice, had claimed that the township came under the definition of a "construction project" and was covered by the 2004 amendment which required nods for construction projects. The company, however, claimed that the township is a "tourism project" and not a construction project. If it is considered a tourism project, it can no longer by covered under the section for construction projects, it argued.
"Entry 18 [applicable to tourism projects] is the only relevant entry. The notification does not contemplate any given project can be covered by more than one entry.. Entry 18 and 31 [for construction projects] are mutually exclusive.. It is the entry 18 which is relevant.. application of Entry 31 stands excluded," it pointed out.
The company also challenged the ministry to prove its allegation that the township came under a 2006 law that was applicable to modification or expansion of existing projects. The third line of defense was on jurisdiction. The company, in short, pointed out that the central government had no right to issue any show cause notice as the necessary environmental clearances are to be given by the state government.
"Once this power is delegated to the state authority, your ministry has no jurisdiction or authority to issue the show cause notice and issue any direction," the law firm pointed out, adding that the environmentalists who campaigned against the project were unreliable.
Lavasa also pointed out that some of the state and Pune level government officials had previously agreed with the company's stance that it did not attract the provisions applicable to "construction" sector. The response, in fact, attached a letter from the Maharashtra State Pollution Control Board which apparently absolved the company of such a need.
It also pointed out that more than a year has passed since the company submitted in writing to the state government that it did not need any environmental clearance for the 2000 hectare project, but only if it expanded beyond the original limit of 2000 acres. "Our application for clearance for our further and future expansion beyond 2000 hectares was filed in August 2009.. Our clients have been been shocked to receive a drastic show cause notice from you.." the firm pointed out, adding that it suspected 'mala-fide' intent over the timing of the notice. Lavasa was to hit the stock market to raise funds by end of November, the firm pointed out.
Press Trust of India reported Jairam Ramesh as saying that the company's reply seemed to have loopholes and the ministry will soon reply to the response. "There are some loopholes in Lavasa Corporation's reply," it quoted the minister, adding that he is "studying it further and a response will be given within the stipulated time."
