The Union Environment Ministry has issued a show cause notice to a senior Assam official for allegedly diverting forest land without the requisite clearance to construct a police commando battalion camp.
According to documents reviewed by the Hindustan Times, MK Yadava, Special Additional Chief Secretary of Assam, is accused of illegally diverting approximately 44 hectares within the Inner Line Reserve Forest in Hailakandi district. The notice, sent by the ministry’s regional office in Shillong on May 14, charges Yadava with violating the Forest Conservation Amendment Act 2023. He has been given 60 days to respond and justify why legal proceedings should not be initiated against him. The notice warns that failure to provide a satisfactory explanation will result in legal action.
The Forest Conservation Act, particularly Section 2, prohibits the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes without proper clearance. Section 3A of the Act prescribes penalties, including up to 15 days of simple imprisonment for violations. Moreover, Section 3B (1) holds the head of any government department or authority directly responsible for any infractions committed by the department. Rule 15(3) of the Van (Samrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Rules 2023 empowers the central government to authorise an Assistant Inspector General or a higher-ranking officer to initiate legal proceedings against violators.
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) launched an investigation following news reports on the unauthorised use of forest land. According to the documents, Yadava sanctioned the construction of the commando battalion camp in September 2023, asserting it qualified as a forest conservation activity under the Forest Conservation Act. However, a site visit by the ministry in March 2024 revealed extensive permanent constructions covering 11.5 hectares (28 acres), which did not conform to permissible conservation activities. The NGT registered a suo moto application based on these news reports, prompting further scrutiny. The ministry’s letter indicated that, despite Yadava’s claim that the camp’s establishment was a conservation activity, the on-ground reality contradicted this assertion. The large-scale constructions observed were inconsistent with any activities related to forest conservation.
This development underscores the ongoing challenges in balancing developmental needs with environmental conservation. The case of the unauthorised diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes highlights the necessity for stringent compliance with environmental regulations and vigilant oversight by authorities. As the situation unfolds, the focus remains on ensuring accountability and adherence to the Forest Conservation Act. The preservation of forest land is crucial not only for environmental sustainability but also for maintaining the ecological balance and protecting biodiversity. The outcome of this case will likely set a significant precedent for future actions concerning forest land management and conservation efforts in India.
