The Central Empowered Committee constituted by the Supreme Court to report on the feasibility of three linear infrastructure projects in Goa has given an elaborate submission punching holes into all arguments that supported the controversial doubling of the railway track between Tinaighat Castlerock in Karnataka and Kulem in Goa. The operational, economic and ecological arguments that were put forth by the Railways, Centre and the Goa government have been systematically demolished point by point.
The observations of the committee have echoed popular Goan sentiment on the colossal damage the projects are going to inflict on ecologically sensitive and bio-diversity rich forest areas, including the Bhagwan Mahaveer Wildlife Sanctuary and the Mollem National Park. People’s contention of the adverse impact in terms of increased pollution and the dangers to the ecologically fragile forest area, including one of the eight biodiversity hotspots of the world were well amplified.
The question here before every Goan is why did the State government, the very custodian of these forests fail to rise up and defend its land, the way CEC argued? Why did it continue to toe the line of the Centre and silently overlooked such extensive damage to its forests? Against this backdrop, what is the meaning of the Goan identity that has become part of political jargon time and again? The highly critical report on these projects only reflects a clear submission by the powers that be.
Some of the key questions raised by the CEC should have been debated and deliberated at the State level and needed a broader consensus instead of being hushed up. For example, the CEC questioned the rationale behind double-tracking when the revised policy of the Government of India does not support the import of coal but encourages the use of indigenously mined coal. It held that the Environmental Assessment prepared by the Indian Institute of Science Bangalore was not questioned, at least on the impact of the 17,59,000 cubic metres of muck that will be left behind during the construction phase. Also, questions were not raised over fears of landslides that could occur on account of the 23 tunnels that would be carved out along the high rainfall areas of the Western Ghats.
The CEC has observed the double-track between Castlerock and Kulem will be as inefficient as the existing line given the restrictions and limitations both have. It explains that the new line will not be able to remove the bottleneck in the railway connectivity between Karnataka and Goa. The idea of double-tracking falls flat when statistics revealed that the current movement of goods to MPT constitutes only about 20% of the rakes going out leaving a huge capacity unutilized in the single track. Finally, the argument of choosing Goa is questionable when there are other routes available that are more efficient in terms of better connectivity which permit higher speeds and without any ecological damage.
The report comes as a resounding slap on all those who were stoutly backing double-tracking and those who were sitting on the fence for political benefits. The submission is a major victory for NGOs, environmentalists, activists and the thousands of opponents of double-tracking who battled through days and night in support of nature’s cause. Their stand is vindicated.
