MoEF's intervention and the order for demolition of the building proves many things:
- Ineffectiveness of the entire process of EIA / CRZ.
- Ineffectiveness of the system in which the CRZ / EC and EIA are operational.
- Looking back at current events particularly in Maharashtra we have three examples where the process has seen troubles Mumbai Airport, Adarsh and Lavassa City. This goes to prove that the procedure has not accounted certain things.
- It might be harsh to put in words but Maharashtra is either having troubles in implementation or the issues highlighted from other parts of the country are not seen so critically by media.
- One sided and personalized views of committee and its members.
The other discussion initiated by Dr Modak has also pointed at the same thing.
Dr Modak has been extremely liberal in views. The issues which have been highlighted to us in the recent past point the finger only at one thing - THE FUTILITY OF PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN PROPAGATED. THE ENTIRE PROCESS HAS TO BE REPLACED WITH A SET OF EMPS RELEVANT TO THE ASPECTS.
We see that only Government officials are at the root of the failures in most cases. This is due to the fact that procedures are stipulated in a manner where people who temper these procedures are not traced easily. The entire process of clearance since 2006 has been seen by project proponets as a hurdle and not as a tool owing to the results.
To put an example one PP got say 27 TORs from X consultant (PP may be a PSU), the other PP received 31 TORs from Y consultant (PP may be a SSI) considered that Y had hired cheapest consultant around. Efforts required to comply would be more or less the same.
Then where is the elite class of consultant required when the result is expected to be the same.
Reduction in procedural intricacies can reduce the fatigue to PP. We need to learn lessons on either sides of the process.
