Team Herald
Panjim: Carrying on from where we left off yesterday, we expose further how Deputy Conservator of Forests M V Karkhanis initiated his efforts to manipulate a very crucial ground level study on the canopy density at the exact survey numbers at Tiracol village which were vital to the Tiracol Golf Course and Leading Hotels project.
In our Thursday edition, we highlighted how Karkhanis constantly gave observations contrary to that of the State Level Experts Committee to establish that the land of the project did not belong to private forests. In this edition we present two documents we held back, to show how he, sitting on his desk, changed his own report of the canopy density of survey numbers 5/3, 5/6 and 6/2 from 20% to less than 10%*(see box on canopy density). This was done in a matter of three days with absolutely no change in the material circumstances or without any other field visit or study. This was nothing but a blatant attempt to declare the land needed by Leading Hotels to build their Golf Course and villas, as non-private forests to facilitate the conversion of agricultural land to non agricultural.
Here’s how. On April 16 2013, the Deputy Conservator of Forests, M V Karkhanis wrote to the Deputy Collector (Revenue) with the subject as : Conversion of use of agricultural land to non-agricultural purpose in survey nos 4/1, 4/2, 5/3,5/5-6-7-8/, 6/2-5-8-10, 7/ 1-3, 8/2-23, 9/2-5, 11/4 and 13/2 of Tiracol FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES
In this report Karkhanis mentions the survey numbers, their area and the canopy density of each. Of these the canopy density of three (5/3, 5/6 and 6/2) were stated as 20%, (read as 0.2) while the rest were stated as 10% (read as 0.1) Now the criteria for measuring private forests (see box) states that any area with a canopy density of more than 10% is marked as private forests. Since three of the 19 survey numbers had canopy density of 20%, it would be impossible to get a conversion from agricultural to non-agricultural land. The Deputy Collector North vide letter number RB/CNV/PER/COLL/04/2011 dated 19.04.2013 sought a clarification along the same grounds.
Sensing that there would be a stumbling block, Karkhanis responded to that letter on the same day (which was a Friday, the last working day of the week). And what did he do. He coolly, stated that the canopy density, “of the actual areas in which the applicant (Leading Hotels) has made plots and requested for conversion of those plot areas” in those survey numbers, is below 10% (or read as 0.1)
Look at the shocker. In just 72 hours, the DCF North dropped the canopy density of three plots from 20% to less than 10% with the stroke of a his pen. We ask a) Why did he do it b)How did he do it with no further field inspection c) What was the change in material circumstances between 16/04/2013 and 19/04 2013 which led to him reducing the canopy density of three crucial survey numbers and d) His letter of April 19 states that the “Canopy density of the actual areas in which the applicant has made plots” of survey numbers 5/3, 5/6 and 6/2 is below 10% (read as 0.1). Can he state under what section of any pertaining to forest protection is canopy density measured only as per the specific area of construction and not the entire survey number? And if so why didn’t he state as much in his first letter to the Deputy Collector Revenue on 16/04/2013.
Therefore it is clear that the there are flaws in the very conversion of the land from agricultural to non-agricultural for commercial purposes. With the fundamentals of the conversion completely flawed, the letter of April 19 sent by M V Karkhanis (DCF North) changing the canopy density to suit the interests of Leading Hotels, has to be examined on the touchstone of legality and fact. Each of the questions Herald has raised above need answers. Answers which any of the three need to give 1) M V Karkhanis 2) Minister of Forests and Environment Alina Saldanha and 3) Chief Minister Laxmikant Parsekar.
