Suppression of material facts like nearby water bodies and hazards in Form-1 vitiates Environmental Clearance; outdated DSR and procedural lapses require SEIAA re-examination, keeping EC in abeyance pending reassessment.

JUDGMENT

Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member

1. The residents of Eruvatty area in Kannur District, Kerala have approached this Tribunal through the appellants challenging the Environmental Clearance granted in favour of the 5^th respondent dated 02.08.2022 for granite building stone quarry. The project area covers an extent of 0.9936 ha., in Re SF. No. 5 of Thimiri Village, Taliparamba Taluk, Kannur District.

2. According to the appellants, they are residing in the Munnoorkulam hillock area, which is part of the ecological sensitive Western Ghats. The impugned Environmental Clearance is assailed by the appellants on various grounds:

2.1 Deliberate suppression of material facts:-

2.1.1. The 5^th respondent submitted an application for TOR on 14.12.2019 along with Appendix-I application, prefeasibility report and mining plan to the 2^nd respondent. It was considered by the 3^rd respondent who directed the 5^th respondent to submit 5 particulars viz., Revised Project Cost with details, Show OB dumping site in the map, Recent Cluster Certificate, Revised CER/CSR and the prescribed Form-1M application.

2.1.2. It is stated that Form-I is a fundamental document in EIA process. The environmental sensitivity is provided in Form-I which requires particulars of an area of 15 km surrounding to the project site to be fully furnished by the project proponent.

2.1.3. It is a specific case of the appellant that the natural stream/river, namely, Munnoorkkulam Thodu which is very close to the project site is not mentioned in the column provided. This is deliberately concealed in Form-1M application. Several such data entered in Form-2 application by the project proponent is also false and misleading. Though the project proponent has specifically stated that there is no forest, archaeological sites, corridors, wildlife corridors, ESA’s, ESZ’s within 15 km of the project site, the Talacauvery Wildlife Sanctuary is within 15km from the project site. Panthrandamchal Bird Sanctuary is within 02 m from the proposed quarry site.

2.1.4. The project proponent had deliberately suppressed and has not provided the information about the ecological sensitivity within the 10 km of the project area. The appellants pointed out that Eruvatty Public Library and Eruvatty Anganwadi which are situated within 01 km of the project site were proposed for benefiting the CER fund. But the said institutions are not mentioned in the Form-1 application. The risk assessment report prepared by the 5^th respondent is also not done by proper scientific method for reducing the risk of the project. The regional geology described in the pre-feasibility report is an exact reproduction from the Kannur District Survey Report and without any proper study.

2.1.5. Similarly, it is also alleged that the water and hydrogeology environment of the area described in the pre-feasibility report is also lifted from the Kannur District Survey Report prepared by the Department of Mining and Geology in 2016.

2.1.6. It is further pointed out that locality within 100m from the north boundary is actually a marshy place and streams are originating from that portion. Now defunct Munnoorkulam Pico Hydro Electrical project, which is located close to the quarry site, relied on streams originating in the vici