1

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI

APPLICATION No. 365 of 2013 (SZ) ( suo motu)

In the matter of: suo motu taken from the News Item of ‘The Hindu’ dated 21.11.2013 about the plan for a Cricket Stadium at Tirupathi Andhra Pradesh

AND

1. The Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests

Govt. of India

Paryavaran Bhavan

CGO Complex, Lodhi Road

New Delhi - 110 003

2. The Chief Secretary to Government

Government of Andhra Pradesh

Hyderabad

3. The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh

Environment, Forests, Science and Technology

Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Hyderabad.

4. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

Government of Andhra Pradesh

Aranya Bhavan, Saifabad,

Opp: R.B.I, Hyderabad-500 004

5. The Chairman,

Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Paryavarana Bhavan, A-3,IE, Sanathnagar

Hyderabad-18

2

6. The Chairman, Board of Trustees

Thirupathi Thirumala Devasthanam

K.T. Road,

Thirupathi-517 501

7. The Executive Officer, Thirumala

Thirupathi Devasthanam, K.T. Road

Thirupathi-517 501

8. The President, Andhra Pradesh

Cricket Association, NH-5, Gunadala Road

Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh

9. The Registrar

Sri Venkateswara University

Thirupathi .. Respondents

Counsel appearing: Respondents : Shrimathi C. Sangamithirai, Advocate for respondent

No. 1; Sri T. Sai Krishnan, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 to 5; M/s. D. Gopinath and Chithirai Selvan, Advocates for respondent No. 6; Shri K. Ravindranath, Advocate for respondent No. 6 and 7 and M/s. P. Balaram and M. Vasudevarao, Advocates for respondent No. 9

ORDER Present:

1. Hon’ble Shri Justice M. Chockalingam Judicial Member

2. Hon’ble Prof. Dr. R. Nagendran Expert Member

3

_________________________________________________________

Dated, 30th January, 2015 _________________________________________________________ (Hon’ble Shri Justice M. Chockalingam)

A news item in the “The Hindu” dated 21.11.2013 under the

caption “Plan for stadium at Thirupathi raises eyebrows” read as below:

“Plan for Stadium at Tirupati raises eyebrow”

“The international cricket stadium coming up at the foot

of Tirumala hills, for which the Chief Minister N. Kiran

Kumar Reddy laid the foundation stone on Wednesday,

has raised eyebrow on both ecological and security angles.

A major facility which is all set to kindle enthusiasm in

sports enthusiasts of Rayalaseema region, it is considered

a major boon to budding sports persons. A 30 acre site of

Sri Venkateswara University has been identified on which

the Andhra Cricket Association will construct the stadium.

The stadium is coming on a site where there are

around 4 lakh fully-grown trees, including the precious and

endemic red sanders. The region is a rich catchment area

for water flowing down the hills and is adjacent to the zoo.

Forest officials, on condition of anonymity admit that it is

4

home to several endangered and herbivorous animals,

which frequently stray on to Alipiri- Cherlopalle bypass

road. Even leopards have strayed on to the road in the

past, indicating the growing man-animal conflict.

It is ecologically disastrous to disturb the forest.

Tirupati definitely needs an international stadium, but not at

the cost of its rich biodiversity conservation. Instead, waste

and barren lands available in the Renigunta belt can be

used,” says K. Srinivasa Reddy, president of Intellectual

Forum and himself a soil scientist.

Alipiri bustles with one lakh pilgrims everyday and

this stadium adds 30, 000 more people, causing strain on

infrastructure. The TTD declined alienation of its land to its

employees here, indicating that it should be used to

facilitate ‘natural expansion’ in future. “The establishment

of a stadium in the little-known Gachibowli area in

Hyderabad spurred development,” Dr. Reddy said. At a

time when Triumala already faces security threat, the

stadium allows people to move much closer to the base of

the Tirumala hills which is increasingly becoming porous

with the construction of such structures”.

5

2. Taking cognizance of the above news item in the interest of

protection of environment and ecology, the Tribunal thought it fit to take

suo motu proceedings and notices were served to the respondent Nos. 1

to 8 to file their reply with regard to the news item. The 9th respondent,

namely, the Registrar, Sri Venkateswara Univeristy (University), was

added a party respondent to the above proceedings as the land in which

the stadium is to come up belongs to the University.

3. The first respondent, namely the Ministry of Environment and

Forests (MoEF) filed the reply which states that as per the Notification

issued on 14.09.2006 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (E P

Act, 1986) construction of new projects or activities listed in the

Schedule to the said Notification entailing capacity addition with change

in the process and or technology shall be undertaken in any part of India

only after prior Environmental Clearance (EC) from the Central

Government, or as the case may be, by the State Level Environment

Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) duly constituted by the Central

Government under sub section (3) of section 3 of the said Act in

accordance with the procedures specified in the Notification. Under the

provisions of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification,

2006, the EC for building, construction, township and area development

projects is covered under items 8(a) and 8(b) of the Schedule to the

Notification. These are categorized as “B” projects which are appraised

6

by the State Level Expert Appraisal Committees (SEAC) and approved

by the SEIAA on the following criterion factors:

a. If the built up area is greater than 20,000 m2 and less than

1,50,000 m2 for building and construction projects.

b. If coverage area is more than 50 ha and or built up area is

greater than 1,50,000 m2 for township and area development

projects.

4. The 4th respondent, namely, the Principal Chief Conservator of

Forests states in reply that the area in which the proposed international

cricket stadium is to be constructed is in an extent of 30.01 acres

comprised in Sy.No. 588/A of Ullipatteda Village of Thirupathi Mandal

and the said land belongs to the Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam (TTD).

The TTD has given an extent of 924.08 acres on long lease for 99 years

to the University in the year 1962. The extent of 807 acres out of the

total extent of 924.08 acres lies in Sy.No. 588/A and 30.01 acres from

this 807 acres is leased out to the Andhra Cricket Association by the

University for a term of 30 years. At the time of survey of the land for the

cricket stadium, the Forest Department officials objected to the lease as

the land where the cricket stadium is to come forms a part of forest land

and after a joint inspection carried out by all the authorities and the

officials concerned and the extent of land in Sy.No. 588/A is confirmed to

be owned by the TTD.

7

5. The University requested permission from the Divisional Forest

Officer, Wildlife Management Division, Tirupathi by a letter dated

29.05.2013 to clear the jungle growth in 30.01 acres in Sy.No.588/A and

on reference to the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Tirupathi seeking

his concurrence, it was found that the land is covered with thorny bushes

and red sander trees and it was not possible to count the red sander

trees without removing the thorny bushes and the DFO issued

instructions to the University by letter dated 19.10.2013 for removal of

thorny bushes in Sy.No. 588/A for the limited purpose of enumerating

the red sander and other tree species located in that area. It was also

informed to the TTD that the proposed area for construction of cricket

stadium is having a good forest growth with red sanders and was further

requested to follow the rules under the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and

Trees Act, 2002, Environmental Rules and the norms of the Pollution

Control Board (APPCB) for clearing the existing forest growth. During

the field inspection conducted by the DFO on 29.11.2013, it was noticed

that all the standing trees excepting red sanders, neem, tamarind, usiri

and few other species of trees were removed by machine along with the

thorny bushes without any permission from the competent authorities in

an extent of 25 acres in the land leased out to Andhra Pradesh Cricket

Association. When a reference was made out to the University by the

DFO regarding the felling of trees without approval of the competent

8

authority in violation of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act,

2002, the University replied that as the extent of 30.01 acres was leased

out to the Andhra Pradesh Cricket Association, it is the lessee’s

obligation to obtain the clearances and it is responsible for the same. A

case has also been registered against the University and the Contractor

of the Andhra Pradesh Cricket Association for the offences under

section 29(1) and section 35(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and

Trees Act, 2002 by the Forest Range Officer, Sri Venkateswara National

Park, Tirupathi Range.

6. In pursuance of the order dated 21.11.2013 of this Zonal Bench

of the NGT, strict instructions were given to all the concerned Forest

Department Officials to ensure that no further felling of trees is done by

anyone in that area and no further felling of trees were done.

7. The 5th respondent, namely, the APPCB, would submit in reply

that as per the Memorandum of Understanding between the 8th and 9th

respondents, the extent of 30.01 acres is as follows:

East to West (on the northern side) .. 411.60 m

East to West (on the southern side) .. 312.60 m

North to South (on the eastern side) .. 361.60 m

North to South (on the western side) .. 443.60 m

8. The seating capacity of the proposed stadium is around 20,000.

The activities of the stadium includes regular cricket practice for all age

9

groups, conduct matches of different levels, i.e., Inter-District, Inter-

Zonal and Inter-State matches of various age groups including first class

matches and to organize international matches. The main source of

water for the stadium would be the groundwater. The effluent treatment

and disposal options from the effluent generated at the stadium will be

regulated as per the guidelines of APPCB. The solid waste treatment

and disposal shall be as per the guidelines of the APPCB. The air and

noise pollution due to installation of DG sets would be mitigated by

installing high quality mufflers and the latest DG sets which produce less

noise and smoke below the permissible limits.

9. The entire play field within the stadium will be maintained with

grass plantation and regular watering. The area beyond the stadium and

within the compound walls will be maintained with natural turf and eco-

friendly trees all around the compound walls which will not disturb the

environment. The solid waste, sewerage and effluent are to be treated

and disposed of with latest gadgets available in the international market

under the supervision of the qualified technical staff and with the

guidelines provided by the APPCB.

10. As per the EIA Notification, 2006, any construction activity

beyond 20,000 m2 requires obtaining of prior EC before commencement

of the activity or preparation of the land. However, the Project Proponent

has informed the APPCB that the built up area of the stadium is still

10

under planning and not yet finalized. The APPCB has, therefore,

directed the 8th respondent to approach the APPCB after finalizing the

plan of the proposed stadium and the 5th respondent would take

appropriate action on the basis of the same.

11. The 6th and 7th respondents, namely, the TTD would state in

reply that the land in Sy.No.588/A stands in the name of TTD and an

extent of 924.08 acres in the above Sy.No. was granted on long term

lease of 99 years to the University in the year 1962. There is no bar to

sub lease the land as per the lease agreement terms and the University

has leased out an extent of 30.01 acres to the Andhra Pradesh Cricket

Association by way of registered lease agreement dated 25.03.2013.

The said sub lease was not ratified by the Andhra Pradesh Government

and no proposals were submitted to Government in this regard. The suo

motu proceedings taken by the Tribunal embraces a wide spectrum of

environmental issues by putting up a stadium which may cause

destruction of forest in which the TTD has no part or involvement. The

Forest Department of Andhra Pradesh Government and other concerned

are to take appropriate steps against the illegal felling of tress and the

TTD will abide by such directions as may be issued by the Tribunal.

12. The 8th respondent, namely, the Andhra Pradesh Cricket

Association would state in reply that in the interest of supporting and

promoting activities of sports, particularly cricket, the Andhra Pradesh

11

Cricket Association sent a requisition by a letter dated 12.01.2009 to the

office of the Chief Minister, Andhra Pradesh for allotment of 50 acres of

vacant land out of the total extent in Sy.No.588 of Alipiri Village,

Tirupathi Mandal which is under the control of TTD for construction of a

cricket stadium. After identification of 30.01 acres in Sy.No.588 in the

total extent leased out to University by the TTD, a lease was made to the

Association on 25.03.2013 for the construction of a cricket stadium in the

above portion of the land.

13. The Andhra Cricket Association was under the impression that

as the land belongs to the University, no permission from the Forest

Department is required and only after the information from the DFO to

remove the bushes, the Association made removal of bushes which

could not be made without felling the trees in some places. The felling of

the trees was not done wantonly or intentionally and the trees which

were felled down were negligible in numbers. The Association submitted

that its regrets for the confusion that arose in this matter and further

assures that it will abide by all the rules and regulations and take all the

necessary permissions from the authorities concerned such as EC,

building plan and other statutory permissions.

14. The 9th respondent, namely, the Registrar, Sri Venkateswara

University, Tirupathi states inter alia after briefing the history of the land

leased out to the University by TTD and sub lease entered into between

12

the University and the Andhra Cricket Association for the establishment

of cricket stadium that during the removal of the thorny bushes on the

subject land it was reported by DFO that small trees like Adavi Nimma,

Thumma, Chigara etc., were uprooted with machine along with the

bushes violating the Andhra Pradesh Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002

and Forest Conservation Act, 1980. He would further state that by the

time orders of stop work was received the bushes had been removed in

an extent of 25 acres and further works in the remaining extent of 5

acres were stopped as soon as the order was received. The Andhra

Cricket Association has given an undertaking to plant as many trees as

possible to maintain the greenery and ecological balance to compensate

for the trees felled down. However, as the land is undulated, the removal

of bushes and trees may be necessary for levelling the land. The Forest

Department of the Andhra Pradesh and other concerned authorities

have taken appropriate steps against the illegal felling of the trees and

the 9th respondent would abide by such directions as may be issued by

the Tribunal and to allow the construction of the cricket stadium.

15. As seen above, the matter was taken cognizance by this

Bench pursuant to a news item in ‘The Hindu’ pertaining to the

construction of an International Cricket Stadium (Stadium) at the foot of

the Tirumala Hills. On notice, the 1st to 8th respondents entered

appearance through their counsel. It was felt necessary that the 9th

13

respondent should be added as a party and accordingly, he was added.

The 9th respondent also entered appearance through his counsel. All the

respondents filed their respective replies.

16. In pursuance of a requisition dated 12.01.2009 by the General

Secretary/President, Andhra Cricket Association (Association) to the

office of the Chief Minister, Andhra Pradesh for allotment of vacant land

to an extent of 50 acres in Sy.No.588/A of Alipiri Village of Tirupathi for

construction of a stadium, the Government of Andhra Pradesh in its

letter dated 01.02.2013 requested the 9th respondent University herein to

examine the proposal to lease out an extent of 30 acres for the

construction of the stadium and other complexes with the funds of the

Association and also requested the University to place a proposal with

full details before the Executive Council of the University. Accordingly,

the proposal along with the draft lease agreement were prepared and

placed before the Executive Council which approved the proposal with

terms and conditions mentioned in the draft lease agreement to allot an

extent of 30.01 acres in Sy.No.588/A of Alipiri Village in Tirupathi with

specific boundaries for a period of 30 years. A lease agreement was

entered into between the University and the Association, the 8th

respondent herein, on 25.03.2013 as found in Document No.7 (pages

25-50) filed by the 9th respondent. At this juncture, it becomes necessary

to mention that this piece of land measuring 30.01 acres, the subject

14

matter of the above lease agreement formed part of the total extent of

1281.52 acres in Sy.No.588/A was originally classified as inam dry and

subsequently the ryotwari patta was granted in favour of TTD in the

year 1961 and continues to stand in the name of TTD even today. Out of

the said extent of 1281.52 acres of land in Sy.No.588/A, a long term

lease for 99 years was given in favour of the University in the year 1962.

The extent of 30.01 acres covered under the lease agreement dated

25.03.2013 between the 8th and 9th respondents referred to above

formed part of the total extent of 924.68 acres which has been in the

possession of the University from the time of long term lease as referred

to above. It is specifically averred by the Chairman of the Board of

Trustees and Executive Officer of TTD shown as 6th and 7th respondents

herein that there is no bar for the 9th respondent University to execute

sub lease. But, it is also averred that the sub lease has not yet been

ratified by the Government. The Tribunal need not examine the rights,

duties and obligations of the parties to the lease agreement since it is

outside the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Since the concern of the present

proceedings is only on the environmental issues it becomes necessary

to consider the role and liabilities of each of the respondents in so far as

the environmental issues are concerned.

17. Advancing the arguments on behalf of the 8th

respondent/Association, the learned counsel would submit that Tirupathi

15

has grown as a big city and Sri Venkateswara University is situate at

Tirupathi. The stadium at Visakhapatnam could not be claimed to be of

international standards after the carving out of Telengana State from the

unified erstwhile Andhra Pradesh. The State of Andhra Pradesh after

bifurcation needs a stadium of international standards for the

encouragement of the sports, particularly cricket. The setting up of the

cricket stadium of international standards at Tirupathi is considered most

ideal as the game of cricket is the soul of millions of people in the world

including India as said by our Hon’ble Prime Minister of India recently at

Australia. The main activity at the Stadium is to conduct regular cricket

practice for all age groups, conduct matches at different levels i.e., inter-

district, inter-zonal and inter-state matches for various age groups

including first class matches and to organize international matches as

allotted by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and as per the

decision of the Andhra Cricket Association.

18. By a letter dated 25.12.2013, the 8th respondent sent a

communication stating about measures proposed to be taken for the

protection of environment and ecology in reply to the notice dated

21.12.2013 of 5th respondent/APPCB. The need for the Stadium cannot

be underestimated. The environmental degradation due to the

establishment of the Stadium has to be balanced judiciously on the

principle of Sustainable Development. While the Association has set

16

apart around Rs.40 Crores for the construction of stadium, it is aware

that and there would be loss to the greeneries due to by deforestation.

The Association would compensate more than sufficiently by whatever

conditions that may be imposed by the Tribunal and also by developing

more greenery in the neighbourhood. The proposal for the setting up of

the Stadium should not be denied due to clearing of the shrubs, small

plants and trees for construction of stadium under the guise of

environmental degradation ignoring the Sustainable Development. By

stating all the above, the learned counsel for the 8th

respondent/Association would conclude that what is proposed in the

land is only for a good cause which would not lead to any environmental

degradation or cause detrimental effect on ecology. Therefore, the

Association must be permitted to proceed with the work.

19. The learned counsel appearing for the 6th and 7th respondents

would submit that pursuant to the lease agreement entered into in1962

between the TTD and University, the TTD had parted with and put the

University in possession in respect of 924.68 acres of land comprised in

Sy.No.588/A on long lease. In so far as the proposal for the construction

of the stadium, the lease deed entered into between the University and

the Association or the alleged cutting and felling of trees, the TTD has

no role to play at all and hence, the 6th and 7th respondents are not liable

to answer to any one of the allegations made on the issues of the

17

alleged environmental degradation. It is not the case of any one of the

other respondents that the 6th and 7th respondents representing TTD had

committed any act which is complained of. It is also seen that the TTD

had no role to play either in the proposal for construction of stadium or

lease agreement entered into between the 8th and 9th respondents

therefor or any activity connected therewith and hence, it has got to be

recorded that the 6th and 7th respondents representing the TTD are not

liable to answer in respect of environmental issue in question.

20. Arguing for the 9th respondent/ University, the learned counsel

would submit that in so far as the unauthorized cutting and felling of

trees by the 8th respondent, the 9th respondent University should not be

made responsible. In order to strengthen his contention, the learned

counsel relied on a clause in the terms and conditions stipulated in the

lease agreement entered into between the 8th and 9th respondents. The

clauses pertaining to the conditions imposed in the agreement including

the dispute and liabilities arising out of non-compliance to statutory

norms during the effective period of the lease in the lease agreement

read as follows:

Work on the construction of the proposed

infrastructure shall be initiated within one year from

the date of this lease agreement coming into force

and shall be completed within five years with the

18

clearances and approval of all the Government

Departments.

The Tribunal is able to see force in the contention putforth by the 9th

respondent and it has to be accepted and it is held so.

21. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent, MoEF

would submit that under the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006, the

EC for the building, construction, township and area development

projects were covered under item 8(a) and 8(b) of the Schedule to the

Notification. The B category projects are appraised by the SEAC and

approved by the SEIAA. As on today EC is not required.

22. It is true that the 8th respondent/Association entered into a

lease agreement with the 9th respondent/University and took possession

of 30.01 acres of land for the construction of the cricket stadium. Under

the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006, construction of new projects

or activities or expansion or modernization of the existing projects or

activities listed in the Schedule to the said Notification entailing capacity

additions with change in process and/or technology should be

undertaken only after prior EC from the Central Government or from the

SEIAA as the case may be in accordance with the procedure specified in

the Notification. The Notification speaks about the A category projects

requiring EC from the Central Government and B category projects

which are to be appraised by SEAC and approved by SEIAA. It is

19

pertinent to point out that the proposed project by the Association is an

International Cricket Stadium. It is true that the construction part in

setting up the stadium will not cover the area of 30.01 acres. It is well

admitted by the 8th respondent/Association that the seating capacity of

the stadium is around 20,000 and the built up area is under planning.

But, when the construction activities of the said project require prior EC

from the Central Government or fall under B category for which approval

by the SEIAA is required, there is no option for the 8th respondent but to

apply for and obtain EC or the approval as the case may be as

mandated by the EIA Notification, 2006. Hence, a direction is issued to

the 8th respondent to apply and obtain EC from the MoEF or approval

from SEIAA procedurally if warranted.

23. Concededly, the 8th respondent has not approached by filing

any application for any consent from the 5th respondent/APPCB since it

has taken a stand that either the activity during construction of the

stadium and thereafter will not have any impact on environment. After

the initiation of the present proceedings, the 5th respondent served a

notice dated 21.12.2013 on the 8th respondent/Association calling for

particulars in respect of the proposed stadium as found in Annexure-R1

filed by the 5th respondent. In reply, the 8th respondent sent a

communication to the 8th respondent dated 25.12.2013 which reads as

follows:

20

“With reference to your notice No. G-

224/PCB/RO/TPT/2013-2437 dated 21.12.2013, we

respectfully submit the following information for your kind

consideration and perusal.

(a) The Memorandum of Understanding between the

Andhra Cricket Association and Sri Venkateswara

University is for an extent of Ac.30.01 cents and

measuring

East to West (on Northern side) .. 411.60 m

East to West (on Southern side) .. 312.60 m

North to South (on Eastern side) ..361.60 m

North to South (on Western side) .. 443.80 m

land for the construction of International Cricket

Stadium at Tirupati. The built up area of the stadium

is under planning.

(b) The capacity of the proposed stadium is around 20,000

(c) The main activity of the stadium is to conduct

cricketing activity which includes regular practice for

all age groups, conduct of matches of different levels

i.e., Inter-District, Inter-Zonal and Interstate matches

of various age groups including first class matches

and to organize international matches allotted by

Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and as per

the decision of the Executive Committee of the

Andhra Cricket Association.

(d) The main source of water is from underground.

(e) The sewage and effluents that are expected are bare

minimum and the Andhra Cricket Association shall

follow the guidelines of Pollution Control Board in this

aspect.

(f) The effluent treatment and disposal options proposed

for the effluent generation at the stadium will be

21

regulated as per the guidelines of the Pollution

Control Board.

(g) The solid waste generated and their collection,

treatment and disposal shall be under the guidelines

of Pollution Control Board.

(h) the air and noise pollution due to installation of DG

sets and the mitigation measures proposed are

installation of high quality mufflers and the latest

generation DG sets which produce noise and smoke

below the air and noise permissible limits.

(i) the copy of the Memorandum of Understanding

between Sri Venkateswara University and the Andhra

Cricket Association is enclosed herewith.

(j) Any other factor.

We declare that by way of construction of stadium, there

will not be any impact on the environment because:

A) The entire play field within the stadium is always

maintained with grass plantation and regular watering.

B) The area beyond the stadium and within the

compound walls is well maintained with natural turf

and eco-friendly trees all around the compound walls

which will not disturb the environment.

C) The solid waste, sewage and effluent are treated and

disposed of with the latest gadgets available in the

international market under the supervision of our

qualified technical staff with the guidelines provided

by the Pollution Control Board.

D) Besides maintaining the ecology, the Andhra Cricket

Association by way of construction of the stadium will

generate employment to many of the local eligible

22

people and create a sporting atmosphere for the

youth of the district and surroundings and for

observing quality cricket for the cricket loving public.

We are sure that the above information satisfies the

queries raised through your letter.

24. The very reading of the reply would indicate that the statement

made by the Association that there would not be any impact on the

environment has got to be termed as “only to satisfy itself”, but not to

comply with any procedural mandates or the legal requisites. Taking into

consideration the activity at the stadium in the conduct of matches of

different age groups where a large number of persons would gather the

impact on the environment has to be taken as inevitable. The questions

on source of water, treatment and disposal of sewage and effluent, solid

waste treatment and disposal, air and noise pollution are to be

addressed for evolving and employing proper preventive and protective

measures in order to control the pollution which is likely to be caused.

Hence, the contention putforth by the Association that the activities

during construction and thereafter of the stadium would not have any

impact on environment has got to be rejected. It becomes necessary to

issue a direction to the 8th respondent Association to approach the 5th

respondent APPCB after finalization of all the details of the proposed

stadium for the grant of Consent to Establish and the Consent to

Operate. The 5th respondent APPCB is directed to consider the

23

application as and when made and pass appropriate order thereon, in

accordance with law.

25. In the present case, it would be apt and appropriate to refer to

the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in M.C. Mehta Vs. Kamalnath

and others reported in (1997) 1 SCC 388 wherein the duty to preserve

the natural resources in pristine purity is highlighted as follows:

“We are fully aware that the issues presented in this

case illustrate the classic struggle between those

members of the public who would preserve our rivers,

forests, parks and open lands in their pristine purity and

those charged with administrative responsibilities who,

under the pressures of the changing needs of an

increasingly complex society, find it necessary to

encroach to some extent upon open lands heretofore

considered inviolate to change. The resolution of this

conflict in any given case is for the legislature and not

the courts. If there is a law made by the Parliament or

the State Legislatures, the courts can serve as an

instrument of determining legislative intent in the

exercise of its powers of judicial review under the

Constitution. But in the absence of any legislation, the

executive acting under the doctrine if public trust cannot

abdicate the natural resources and convert them into

private ownership or for a commercial use. The aesthetic

use and the pristine glory of the natural resources, the

environment and the ecosystems of our country cannot

be permitted to be eroded for private, commercial or any

24

other use unless the courts find it necessary, in good

faith, for the public good and in public interest to

encroach upon the said resources”.

26. After making a thorough examination of all the aspects in the

backdrop of various legislations, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that if

the Project Proponent uses the forest land for non-forest purposes, the

Project Proponent has necessarily to pay Net Present Value (NPV) to

protect the ecology and bio-diversity by applying the public trust

doctrine. It remains to be stated at this juncture that the project in the

instant case, namely, establishment of International Cricket Stadium, no

doubt, a revenue earning project on commercial basis. It cannot claim

any exemption which can be made available to Government hospitals,

dispensaries, non-commercial Government ventures like schools, rain

water harvesting tanks, sewer lines, village roads etc., which are

projects solely meant for public welfare and have no adverse impact on

environment as such.

27. The role of games and sports in enhancing the quality of life,

especially in the context of developing countries is a well debated aspect

of all policy and practice regimes. The well known proverb—”All work

and no play makes Jack a dull boy” tells all in a nutshell. Games and

sports are important for success in every walk of our life. History reveals

that sports formed the principal part of education in ancient Greece. This

25

is true of the modern day curricula in most of the economically

developed countries. Games and sports are:

good exercises which help build fine and strong physique and develop mental alertness

best teachers who help us to cope with difficult situations and overcome even medical exigencies such as nervousness and restore self confidence

good diversions for both the players and the spectators alike

forces that foster competitive and team spirit among the participants and make them disciplined.

28. Realizing the multiple benefits of games and sports, all the

States in the country are giving utmost importance to promote the

regional and national sports in a big way and the same has to be viewed

in proper perspective and welcomed in the context of nation-building.

29. Following the trends of the Western countries, the sports and

games in India too are getting commercialized and encouraging players

to take up sports as a ‘profession’ and not just a ‘healthy pastime’.

Needless to state, sports have great potential to offer career

opportunities. The steep growth trajectory and economic potential of

sport industry in India has resulted in huge demand in respect of

Infrastructural needs and also the safety and facilities for national and

international players, spectators and game administrators.

26

30. Topping the list of Infrastructural needs in the fast growing

sports industry in India is the construction and management of STADIA

with international quality and standards. The urgency is felt the most

when it comes to CRICKET, which is undoubtedly the numero-uno

sport in India. The passion and sentiment with which the game of cricket

is treated in India is almost akin to the importance given to religion and

life. Understandably, facilities and requirements for the game of cricket

are being developed not only in major cities but also in rural and semi-

urban areas. The proposed construction of the Cricket stadium which is

the subject matter of the instant case is a shining example for the public

patronage given to this sport.

31. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA),

Switzerland in its publication titled “Stadium Safety and Security

Regulations (2012)” has dealt with the definition of the term Stadium. It

is pertinent to reproduce the same for the sake of clarity and inclusivity

as has been done below:

32. Stadium: Any stadium at which a match is played. This

includes the entire premises (to the extent that an accreditation card is

required in order to gain access) of the stadium facility inside the outer

perimeter fence and (on match days and on any day on which any

official team training session takes place within the stadium) the aerial

space above such stadium premises. “Stadium” shall also include all

27

parking facilities, VIP/VVIP and hospitality areas, media zones,

concession areas, commercial display areas, buildings, the field of play,

the pitch area, the broadcast compound, the stadium media centre, the

stands and the areas beneath the stands.

33. Application of the above definition to the case on hand makes

it abundantly clear that Cricket Stadium proposed by the proponent in

the instant case is a complex engineering entity involving a multitude of

activities both on the ‘match days’ and also on ‘off play days’ during

which training and practice related activities will go on. Needless to state

that a variety of activities that go on in such a facility inevitably have a

variety of impacts on the environment. Notwithstanding the health and

economic benefits that accrue to the society from the proposed facility,

the promoters of the game, the law enforcing authorities and other

related agencies shall not turn a blind eye to the possible environmental

impacts of the stadium both during the construction and operation of the

same. It is a well settled principle that developmental projects should not

take environmental considerations ‘for granted’. The same is engrained

in the concept of ‘Sustainable Development’ as well. We therefore direct

the concerned agencies that grant Environmental Clearance and the

Consent to Establish/Operate as the case may be, to give special and

focussed attention to the following aspects/parameters as detailed in

FIFA Regulations cited in para No. 31 supra. These may not come under

28

the direct technical ambit of “ENVIRONMENT” but have a functional link

and bearing on the safety of the players, spectators and others and thus

on the “ENVIRONMENT” as a whole in an implicit manner, though not

physically defined. Of course, these are in addition to the routine

parameters that are generally covered under the Air, Water and other

applicable Acts:

Spectator safety and security policy document

Stadium Risk Assessments: (e.g., Fire, Chemicals, fuels whether in containers or within fuel tanks and machinery, fertilisers, weed killers, paints or gas cylinders used for medical purposes)

Stadium Contingency Plans: In respect of fire, gas leak or hazardous materials incident, buildings and services, safety and security communication systems, adverse weather conditions such as lightning strikes, flash floods, high winds, hurricanes etc.

Temporary demountable structures

Safety signs

Staff awareness and training

34. The concerned authorities are directed to consult documents

such as International Guidelines, Manuals and Standard Operating

Practices (SOP) issued by International Organizations governing the

game of cricket (and also other sports if and as applicable) and get

familiarized with all the pertinent issues at the time of appraisal and

decision making.

29

35. It is noticed that the permission was granted only for the

purpose of clearing the thorny bushes for counting the trees. On the

contrary, without any permission from the competent authorities, all

grown up trees of different species except red sander were cut and

felled down in the guise of removal of thorny bushes in an extent of 25

acres of land out of 30.01 acres leased out for the construction of the

Stadium. It is pertinent to point out that all those trees cut and felled

down were removed and no explanation is tendered as to what

happened to those trees since all the trees according to the Forest

Department were removed using machines. A direction at this stage to

the Forest Department to make a survey of those trees which existed,

their age, growth and value would be a futile exercise. A perusal of

Annexure-R 9 filed by the 4th respondent would evidence that the Forest

Department undertook an exercise of ascertaining the type of trees in

the area adjacent to that where trees were felled. Five sample plots of

0.04 ha in Sy.No.589 were considered for estimating the number of

trees cut over an area of 25 acres in Sy.No.588/A. As per the valuation

report under Annexure-R 9 dated 05.01.2014, the value of vegetations

missed/removed in the said 25 acres of land in terms of value and cost

on the basis of the study of sample plots including the NPV was

Rs.96.40 lakhs and total number of trees cut were approximately 1150.

In the considered opinion of the Tribunal, the valuation report as found in

30

Annexure-R 9 has to be accepted since it is the figure arrived at after

taking into consideration all the necessary aspects and after making the

calculation based on samples and applying the NPV theory.

36. In the present case, it would be apt and appropriate to refer to

the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in M.C. Mehta Vs. Kamalnath

and others reported in (1997) 1 SCC 388 wherein the duty to preserve

the natural resources in pristine purity is highlighted in para 25 above.

37. When forest land is used for non-forest purposes, in order to

prevent degradation to environment and ecological systems what

measures are required to be taken to compensate the loss of forest land

and to compensate the effect on ecology came up for consideration

before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in T.N. Godhavarman

Tirumalpad Vs. Union of India and others reported in AIR 2005 SCC

4256 wherein Their Lordships have held as follows:

“Forests are vital component to sustain the life support

system on the earth. Forests in India have been dwindling

over the years for a number of reasons, one of it being the

need to use forest area for developmental activities

including economic development. Undoubtedly, in any

nation development is also necessary but it has to be

consistent with protection of environment and not at the

cost of degradation of environment. Any programme,

policy or vision for overall development has to evolve a

systematic approach so as to balance economic

31

development and environmental protection. Both have to

go hand in hand. In ultimate analysis, economic

development at the cost of degradation of environment

and depletion of forest cover would not be long lasting.

Such development would be counterproductive.

Therefore, there is an absolute need to take all

precautionary measures when forest lands are sought to

be directed for non-forest use.

The point in issue is whether before diversion of forest

land for non-forest purposes and consequential loss of

benefits accruing from the forests should not the user

agency of such land be required to compensate for the

diversion. If so, should not the user agency be required to

make payment of Net Present Value (NPV) of such

diverted land so as to utilize the amount so received for

getting back in long run benefits which are lost by such

diversion? What guidelines should be issued for

determination of NPV? Should guidelines apply uniformly

to all? How to calculate NPV? Should some projects be

exempted from NPV? These are the main aspects which

require examination and determination in the back drop of

various legislations which we would presently notice”.

38. After making a thorough examination of all the aspects in the

backdrop of various legislations, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that if

the Project Proponent uses the forest land for non-forest purposes, the

Project Proponent has necessarily to pay NPV to protect the ecology

and bio-diversity by applying the public trust doctrine. It remains to be

32

stated at this juncture that the project in the instant case, namely,

establishment of International Cricket Stadium, no doubt, is a revenue

earning project on commercial basis. It cannot claim any exemption

which can be made available to Government hospitals, dispensaries,

non-commercial Government ventures like schools, rain water

harvesting tanks, sewer lines, village roads etc., which are projects

solely meant for public welfare and have no adverse impact on the

environment as such. Hence, the Association cannot be permitted to do

any act concerning with the Stadium at the cost of environment. No

doubt, as stated above, we have to agree that the stadium has its own

importance and economic significance. But, the importance of

environmental interest must also be taken into account. Hence, it

becomes necessary to strike a balance by applying the Doctrine of

Sustainable Development.

39. On receipt of a letter from the 9th respondent/University dated

29.05.2013 requesting permission to fell and remove the trees in the

afore stated 30.01 acres of land, the subject matter lease between the

8th and 9th respondents for earmarking the construction of the cricket

stadium, the DFO addressed a letter to the RDO/Tirupathi seeking

consent for the request made by the University as found in Annexure-R

1 filed by the 6th respondent. The RDO issued a reply on 29.07.2013

stating that as per the report of the Tahsildar, Tirupathi, the land was

33

covered by thorny bushes and red sander trees and it was not possible

for counting the red sander trees. The RDO made a request for clearing

the thorny bushes in the land and to report for further action as found in

Annexure-R 2 of the documents filed by the 4th respondent. In turn, the

DFO sent a communication dated 19.10.2013 as found in Annexure-R 3

filed by the 4th respondent to the 9th respondent Registrar of the

University to make arrangements for the limited purpose of enumerating

the red sander trees. In the meanwhile, the Forest Department raised

objection stating that the proposed land for the stadium is in Sy.No.589

which forms part of the forest land. After a joint inspection was made,

the RDO, Tirupathi reported to the District Collector, Chittoor that the

Forest Department cannot claim any right over the land in Sy.No.588/A

as found in Annexure-R 4. Revised orders were issued in the

Proceedings dated 19.11.2013 and thus as per the revenue records the

land in Sy.No.588/A stood in the name of TTD.

40. When an inspection was conducted by the DFO, Tirupathi on

29.11.2013, it was noticed that in an extent of 25 acres out of 30.01

acres of the land allotted to the 8th respondent, all standing trees lying

with the entire shrub growth such as neem, tamarind, usiri and few other

species except red sanders have been removed by machine along with

thorny bushes without any permission from the competent authority. It is

pertinent to point out that while a communication was addressed by the

34

DFO, Tirupathi under Annexure-R 3 referred to above for removal of

thorny bushes for the purpose of counting the trees, it was found that not

only the shrub growth was removed, but also all kind of trees except the

red sanders by machine.

41. An affidavit filed by the 8th respondent/Association on

18.01.2015 reads as follows:

“4. Pursuant to permission granted by the concerned

authorities, this respondent took upon the exercise of

clearing the grass, thorny bushes, shrubs, wild plantations

and forest growths, vegetation and other small plants and

this respondent had completed the same in an extent of 25

acres. While doing so and in that process, some dead wood

and small forest trees of varieties like adavi nimma

(kattukkaruvai trees) etc., numbering not more than about 30

or 35 situate within the cluster of shrubs and bushes would

have been cleared without the knowledge of this respondent.

It is respectfully submitted that the report of the fourth

respondent as if large number of trees were removed or

missing is not correct and the same is statistical guess work.

The value alleged is also hypothetical, exaggerated and

imaginary which is not true and correct”.

42. The very reading of the above would be indicative of the fact

that the 8th respondent, while clearing the thorny bushes and shrubs has

cut and felled the trees of different species in the entire area of 25 acres

out of 30.01 acres. While the 8th respondent was permitted only to

35

remove the thorny bushes and shrubs, the act of the 8th respondent in

removing the trees was against the permission granted and also in

violation of the legal requirements. Admittedly, for removal of those

trees no permission was obtained as required by law. Pertaining to the

reply of the 4th respondent, namely, the DFO, Tirupathi, the learned

counsel for the 8th respondent Association that even in the reply the

forest department has well admitted that the red sander trees were not

removed and those trees which were removed were only neem,

tamarind, usiri and few other species. But, it cannot be disputed that

even for removal of those trees as pointed out by the DFO in his reply

that necessary permission should have been obtained from the forest

department. The contention putforth by the learned counsel for the 8th

respondent that the trees which were cut and felled down during the

process of removal of thorny bushes were about 30 to 35 in numbers

within the cluster of shrubs, bushes that too without the knowledge of the

8th respondent cannot be countenanced even for a moment. It should not

be forgotten that the shrubs and bushes were removed in the entire

extent of 25 acres out of the total extent of 30.01 acres covered under

the lease deed. In view of the interim orders of the Tribunal, the

Association could not proceed with the remaining 5 acres of land for

removal of shrubs and bushes and cutting and felling of trees.

36

43. In so far as the remaining 5 acres of land in respect of which

the interim injunction granted restraining the cutting and felling of trees is

in force, it is made clear that either the 8th respondent or any one on

behalf of the 8th respondent shall not cut or fell the trees either directly or

in the guise of removal of thorny bushes without obtaining necessary

permission from the Forest Department as required by law.

44. It is an admitted position that the extent of 30.01 acres covered

under the lease agreement between the 8th and 9th respondents and

meant for establishment of the cricket stadium formed part of the total

extent of 924.68 acres which was originally leased out to the University

by TTD. The University which took the extent of 924.68 acres of land on

lease from TTD has created a sub- lease in favour of the Association in

respect of 30.01 acres now earmarked for the Stadium. Thus, the

ownership of the land continues to remain with the TTD. It is true that

the Association has taken possession on the strength of the sub-lease

entered into between the University and the Association who are

respondents herein. Since the ownership continues to vest with the TTD

and in order to avoid avoidable multiplicity of proceedings, it would be fit

and proper to direct the 8th respondent Association to pay the entire

amount of Rs. 96.40 lakhs fixed as compensation.

45. Applying the Doctrine of Polluter Pays, the Andhra Cricket

Association shown as 8th respondent who was solely responsible for the

37

unauthorized cutting and felling of trees is absolutely liable to

compensate for the damaged caused. Hence, a direction is issued to the

8th respondent/Andhra Cricket Association to pay the said sum of Rs.

96.40 lakhs fixed as compensation above directly to TTD within a period

of 3 months herefrom.

46. In so far as the remaining 5 acres of land out of 30.01 acres

which was earmarked for construction of the Stadium is concerned, the

8th respondent shall remove the trees only after getting permission, from

the Forest Department as required under the law and while granting

permission, the Forest Department shall impose among other conditions

that the Association shall plant saplings numbering 4 times the different

species of trees in respect of which the permission is to be granted.

47. In the result, this suo motu application is disposed of with the

following directions in addition to the directions given in paragraphs 33

and 34 of this order:

1. A direction is issued to the 8th respondent/Andhra Cricket

Association to apply and obtain Environmental Clearance from the 1st

respondent/Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India or

38

from the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA),

procedurally if warranted after finalization of all the details of the

proposed International Cricket Stadium project.

2. The 8th respondent/Andhra Cricket Association is directed to

approach the 5th respondent/Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control

Board (APPCB) for Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate at

appropriate stages and the 5th respondent APPCB is also directed to

consider the application as and when made by the 8th respondent and

pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with the law.

3. The 8th respondent is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 96.40 lakhs

(Rupees ninety six lakh and forty thousand) only towards the

compensation for unauthorized cutting and felling of trees in 25 acres of

land in Sy.No.588/A, Alipiri Village, Tirupathi Taluk to the Tirumala-

Tirupathi Devasthanam (TTD), Tirupathi within a period of 3 months

herefrom and also the 8th respondent is further directed to plant 4000

saplings of different species as per the directions of the Forest

Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh within a period of six

months herefrom and the Forest Department, Government of Andhra

Pradesh is directed to monitor and verify the compliance of this direction.

39

4. In so far as the remaining 5 acres out of the total extent of 30.01

acres leased out to the 8th respondent/Andhra Cricket Association by the

9th respondent/Sri Venkateswara University (University), Tirupathi, the 8th

respondent is restrained by way of an order of injunction not to cut or fell

any tree in the said extent of 5 acres either directly or in the guise of

removal of thorny bushes without necessary permission from the Forest

Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh as required in law and while

granting such permission, the Forest Department, Government of Andhra

Pradesh is directed to impose among other conditions that the 8th

respondent/Andhra Cricket Association shall plant saplings 4 times of the

number of trees cut in respect of which permission is granted.

5. It is held that the 6th and 7th respondents representing the TTD

and the 9th respondent University are not liable in respect of the

environmental degradation or damage to the ecology caused by the

unauthorized cutting and felling of trees by the 8th respondent/Andhra

Cricket Association in 25 acres of land in Sy.No.588/A.

No cost.

(Justice M. Chockalingam)

Judicial Member

(Prof. Dr. R. Nagendran) Expert Member

Chennai, 30th January, 2015