Sirhind-Patiala road widening project: Explain hurdles in acquiring land for compensatory afforestation, state told

The controversial 22-km road widening project between Sirhind and Patiala has once again come under scrutiny after the National Green Tribunal (NGT) directed the state government to submit an affidavit explaining why land cannot be acquired for compensatory afforestation within 10 km of the affected area.

The directive, a copy of which is with The Tribune, comes on an ongoing petition where environmental activists and NGOs have raised concerns over the project’s ecological impact and non-compliance with the Indian Road Congress (IRC) guidelines.

7,392 fully grown trees felled for project

The four-laning of the Sirhind-Patiala road is expected to improve connectivity and ease traffic congestion in Patiala and its surrounding areas. However, the environmental cost of the project remains a significant concern, with the felling of 7,392 mature trees, including sheesham (1,176), Arjun (1,850), mulberry (1,413), eucalyptus (1,101) and peepal (33).

The issue gained attraction after The Tribune highlighted felling of 7,392 fully grown trees for the project in a report published on July 4, 2024.

Following this, the NGT issued a notice to the Punjab government.

Petitioners Kapil Arora, Dr Amandeep Singh Bains and Jaskirat Singh from the Public Action Committee (PAC) argued that the proposed compensatory plantation in Hoshiarpur and Ropar, located 80 km and 120 km away, respectively, violated NGT guidelines mandating afforestation within 10 km of the deforested site.

During a hearing before the three-member Bench of Justice Prakash Shrivastava, Chairperson, Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi, Judicial Member, Dr Afroz Ahmad, Expert Member, on February 6, the petitioners asserted that the Punjab Public Works Department (PWD) failed to comply with mandatory IRC guidelines (IRC SP: 21-2009 and IRC: SP: 84-2019) regarding roadside plantation and landscaping. They alleged that the PWD sought to bypass these regulations by classifying the project as “brownfield”, meaning it involved widening an existing road rather than building a new one.

The PAC members emphasised that IRC codes require land acquisition for tree plantation to be integrated into highway expansion plans as a single planning process. They argued that environmental landscaping and afforestation should be included in detailed project reports, with no compromise on budgetary allocations. Failure to adhere to these guidelines, they warned, would lead to increased air and noise pollution in Fatehgarh Sahib and Patiala.

In response, the PWD informed the tribunal that acquiring land for compensatory afforestation within 10 km of the affected area was not feasible due to unavailability. However, the petitioners countered the claim by highlighting that approximately 85% of the road stretch consisted of agricultural land, implying that land acquisition was possible with proper planning.

The NGT, after hearing both sides, noted that the PWD had not provided sufficient details on efforts made to acquire land or justified why land acquisition was deemed impossible. Consequently, it directed the state government to submit a detailed affidavit within four weeks clarifying its stance.

Furthermore, the tribunal instructed the state authorities to make all possible efforts to acquire land for compensatory afforestation and ensure compliance with environmental guidelines. The next hearing is scheduled for April 25.