Public hearing for proposed N-plant at Mithi Virdi held amidst protest by villagers

Farmers protest against the public hearing for Mithi Virdi N-plant

By A Representative

In a statement, the Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti (PSS) has said that the illegal public hearing was held on March 5, 2013 at 10-30 a.m. at Navagam (Nana) for the proposed Mithi Virdi Nuclear Power Plant “in violation of Environmental Laws and the Constitution of India.” It added, “Around 4,500 people of 28 villages boycotted the environmental public hearing following, breach of promise by government officials.” The statement has also been signed by veteran Gandhian Chunibhai Vaidya of the Gujarat Lok Samiti, and local social activist Bharatbhai Jambucha from Paniyali village, Bhavnagar district.
The statement alleged that the Bhavnagar district collector, who chaired the hearing for the 6,000 MW nuclear power plant, to be set up by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), and A V Shah, regional officer of the Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB), made “vital procedural lapses” during the hearing. “When villagers wearing black bands to protest the hearing being held with incomplete Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report entered the venue, they were first prevented, with officials demanding that the black protest ribbons be removed. It is only when the villagers insisted that they were allowed in.”
Interestingly, the statement said, the officials “did not allow” the villagers to make representation about procedural issues of the hearing and instead continued the proceedings with incomplete EIA report prepared by the unaccredited consultants, Engineers India Ltd, as a result “rendering the hearing illegal and in violation of the environment rules and the Constitution of India.”
It further said, Shah, the GPCB official, even promised two activists Rohit Prajapati and Swati Desai just before the proceedings were to start on March 5 that Shaktisinh Gohil, sarpanch of Jasapara would be allowed and representations about procedural lapses can be made by villagers. “But when Gohil rose to make procedural points about the lapses in the EPH, he was prevented from doing so.”
Gohil wished to highlight some major lapses:
1. The EIA report for NPCIL has been prepared by the consultants. According to the consultants’ own admission, the report does not have the requisite ministry of environment and forests accreditation to undertake the Environmental Impact Assessment. The EIA Report is therefore illegal.
2. The consultants’ report is incomplete and the hearing was being held on the basis of incomplete EIA report rendering it illegal as was pointed out earlier to officials repeatedly.
3. There are several instances of incomplete details and TOR (Terms of Reference) in the consultants' report, which was not furnished during the illegal hearing.
4. Only limited villages were be allowed to make oral representation.

Villagers at the public hearing site

5. The Bhavnagar district collector decided not to allow the rest of 128 villages and other environmental experts to make oral representations and instead directed that they make their case only in writing. This is in clear violation of the Delhi High Court order in the case of Samarth Trust and Other v Union of India & Others W.P.(C) 9317 of 2009, where it has opined that “….prima facie, that so far as a public hearing is concerned, its scope is limited and confined to those locally affected persons residing in the close proximity of the project site. However, in our opinion, the Notification does not preclude or prohibit persons not living in the close proximity of the project site from participating in the public hearing – they too are permitted to participate and express their views for or against the project.”
The statement charges, "The authorities without allowing the villagers to raise points on procedural lapses directed the company officials to represent the incomplete EIA report. Around 4,500 villagers of 29 villages as a result walked out of the illegal hearing’s proceedings as they did not want to become party to illegal proceedings. The officials stopped the EIA report presentation halfway asking the villagers to stay back, but they refused on grounds of it being illegal and procedural illegalities."
In this framework, the statement said, “The villagers are now contemplating legal action against the authorities for organizing the hearing even when several lapses were pointed out well in advance as well as during the hearing proceedings.”
Meanwhile, the NGO said, the consultants have managed to receive a purported letter allowing them to do an EIA, but it has "no legal basis". “Since the EIA was prepared before the letter was received, the EIA would still be invalid, especially because no such letter was published in the EIA report”.
The procedural issues in writing were also handed over to the authorities by the sarpanches of 10 villages from Bhavnagar district – Shaktisinh Gohil of Jasapara, Amuben Dabhi of Mithi Virdi, Lagdirsinh Gohil of Paniyali, Pruthvirajsinh Gohil of Khadarpar, Vilasba Dharmendrasinh Gohil of Mandva, Bhagvatsinh Gohil, of Sosiya, Ramubha Gohil of Navagam (Nana), Liliben Zinabhai of Goriyali, Gobarbhai Solanki of Rampar (Garibpura), and Dakshaben Makwana of Bharapara.

Comments

Gram sabha as reformer: Mandla’s quiet challenge to the liquor economy

By Raj Kumar Sinha* This year, the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj is organising a two-day PESA Mahotsav in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, on 23–24 December 2025. The event marks the passage of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA), enacted by Parliament on 24 December 1996 to establish self-governance in Fifth Schedule areas. Scheduled Areas are those notified by the President of India under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for a distinct framework of governance recognising the autonomy of tribal regions. At present, Fifth Schedule areas exist in ten states: Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Telangana. The PESA Act, 1996 empowers Gram Sabhas—the village assemblies—as the foundation of self-rule in these areas. Among the many powers devolved to them is the authority to take decisions on local matters, including the regulation...

MG-NREGA: A global model still waiting to be fully implemented

By Bharat Dogra When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MG-NREGA) was introduced in India nearly two decades ago, it drew worldwide attention. The reason was evident. At a time when states across much of the world were retreating from responsibility for livelihoods and welfare, the world’s second most populous country—with nearly two-thirds of its people living in rural or semi-rural areas—committed itself to guaranteeing 100 days of employment a year to its rural population.

Policy changes in rural employment scheme and the politics of nomenclature

By N.S. Venkataraman* The Government of India has introduced a revised rural employment programme by fine-tuning the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which has been in operation for nearly two decades. The MGNREGA scheme guarantees 100 days of employment annually to rural households and has primarily benefited populations in rural areas. The revised programme has been named VB-G RAM–G (Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin). The government has stated that the revised scheme incorporates several structural changes, including an increase in guaranteed employment from 100 to 125 days, modifications in the financing pattern, provisions to strengthen unemployment allowances, and penalties for delays in wage payments. Given the extent of these changes, the government has argued that a new name is required to distinguish the revised programme from the existing MGNREGA framework. As has been witnessed in recent years, the introdu...

Rollback of right to work? VB–GRAM G Bill 'dilutes' statutory employment guarantee

By A Representative The Right to Food Campaign has strongly condemned the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–GRAM G) Bill, 2025, describing it as a major rollback of workers’ rights and a fundamental dilution of the statutory Right to Work guaranteed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). In a statement, the Campaign termed the repeal of MGNREGA a “dark day for workers’ rights” and accused the government of converting a legally enforceable, demand-based employment guarantee into a centralised, discretionary welfare scheme.

A comrade in culture and controversy: Yao Wenyuan’s revolutionary legacy

By Harsh Thakor* This year marks two important anniversaries in Chinese revolutionary history—the 20th death anniversary of Yao Wenyuan, and the 50th anniversary of his seminal essay "On the Social Basis of the Lin Biao Anti-Party Clique". These milestones invite reflection on the man whose pen ignited the first sparks of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and whose sharp ideological interventions left an indelible imprint on the political and cultural landscape of socialist China.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Making rigid distinctions between Indian and foreign 'historically untenable'

By A Representative Oral historian, filmmaker and cultural conservationist Sohail Hashmi has said that everyday practices related to attire, food and architecture in India reflect long histories of interaction and adaptation rather than rigid or exclusionary ideas of identity. He was speaking at a webinar organised by the Indian History Forum (IHF).

India’s Halal economy 'faces an uncertain future' under the new food Bill

By Syed Ali Mujtaba* The proposed Food Safety and Standards (Amendment) Bill, 2025 marks a decisive shift in India’s food regulation landscape by seeking to place Halal certification exclusively under government control while criminalising all private Halal certification bodies. Although the Bill claims to promote “transparency” and “standardisation,” its structure and implications raise serious concerns about religious freedom, economic marginalisation, and the systematic dismantling of a long-established, Muslim-led Halal ecosystem in India.

From jobless to ‘job-loss’ growth: Experts critique gig economy and fintech risks

By A Representative Leading economists and social activists gathered in the capital on Friday to launch the third edition of the State of Finance in India Report 2024-25 , issuing a stark warning that the rapid digitalization of the Indian economy is eroding welfare systems and entrenching "digital dystopia."

Search This Blog