Monday, May 25, 2020 | Last Update : 11:45 AM IST

62nd Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra50231146001635 Tamil Nadu162778324112 Gujarat140636412858 Delhi134186540261 Rajasthan70283848163 Madhya Pradesh66653408290 Uttar Pradesh62683538161 West Bengal36671339272 Andhra Pradesh2780184156 Bihar257470211 Karnataka208965442 Punjab2060189840 Telangana1854109253 Jammu and Kashmir162180921 Odisha13365507 Haryana118476516 Kerala8485206 Assam393584 Jharkhand3701484 Uttarakhand317583 Chandigarh2621794 Chhatisgarh252640 Himachal Pradesh203594 Tripura1941650 Goa66160 Puducherry41120 Manipur3220 Meghalaya14121 Arunachal Pradesh210 Mizoram110 Sikkim100

Kharghar pond is not wetland, says state dept

THE ASIAN AGE. | SONALI TELANG
Published : Sep 17, 2018, 2:15 am IST
Updated : Sep 17, 2018, 2:15 am IST

UDD has stated that the land was never a pond and was not connected to the creek.

The citizens group, Abhivyakti, had earlier moved court against the debris being dumped in a pond, which the citizens have asserted is a wetland.
 The citizens group, Abhivyakti, had earlier moved court against the debris being dumped in a pond, which the citizens have asserted is a wetland.

Mumbai: In a blow to the efforts by Navi Mumbai citizens to save natural resources, the state urban development department has, in its affidavit to the Bombay high court, stated that the water body in Kharghar, where City and Industrial Devel-opment Corporation (CIDCO) has been carrying out dredging work, is not a wetland. The citizens gro-up, Abhivyakti, had earlier moved court against the debris being dumped in a pond, which the citizens have asserted is a wetland.

The Maharashtra Rem-ote Sensing Application Centre (MRSAC) too has stated that the water body is not recognised as a ‘wetland’. In the affidavit to the HC, the UDD stated, “The land referred to in the petition is acquired from private owners for public purpose i.e. for the purpose of development of the city of Navi Mumbai. The said land was used for agricultural purposes by the land owners prior to the said acquisition, which is appa-rent from the revenue records, that CIDCO has given the benefit of allotment of land under the 12.5 per cent scheme to the land owners.”

The UDD has further stated that the land was never a natural pond and was not connected to the creek, so the water accumulated is not seawater but rainwater.. Meanw-hile, the MRSAC also said in its report annexed to the affidavit filed by sub-divisional officer of Pan-vel, that the said area is not identified as a wetland.

The petitioner has refuted the claims stating that the area can be identified as wetland going by the MRSAC website, as per the latest wetland rules. “The report by MRSAC also mentions that the data by SAC Ahmedabad should also be considered for complete information, which is the authority to identify wetlands across the country.  We are also awaiting the Konkan Wetland Grievances Redressal Committee’s report on the matter. We will be filing our response with substantial evidences,” said Nareshchandra Singh, member of Abhivyakti group.

Tags: cidco, kharghar pond
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT