Himachal Hydro Projects Draw Water from Same Stream, Bypassing Environmental Review
The Jal Shakti department of Himachal Pradesh has officially confirmed that two small hydroelectric projects under development near Kasol in the scenic Parvati Valley are drawing water from the same rivulet. This revelation lends substantial weight to long-standing allegations that the projects have been deliberately split to circumvent mandatory cumulative environmental impact assessments.
Affidavit Details Project Ownership and Water Source
In a significant affidavit submitted before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), Superintending Engineer Bhag Singh disclosed critical details. The two 5-megawatt projects are the Kasol Small Hydro Project, owned by Beena Butail, and the Grahan-Kasol Hydro Project, owned by Dinesh Butail. Beena Butail is the wife of veteran Congress leader Brij Bihari Butail and mother of Palampur MLA Ashish Butail, while Dinesh Butail is a Palampur-based tea grower.
The affidavit explicitly states that both projects source water from a single stream system, with the Grahan project located upstream and the Kasol project downstream. Notably, the Kasol project allotment refers to this water source as the "Kasol river," whereas the Grahan-Kasol project identifies it as "Grahan Nallah," despite both being integral parts of the same hydrological system.
Department's Stance on Processing and Regulatory Compliance
The Jal Shakti department defended its actions, explaining that both project proposals were processed independently because they were submitted by separate legal entities with distinct allotments from HIMURJA, the state agency responsible for small hydro projects. The department asserted, "Accordingly, No Objection Certificates (NOCs) were issued based on the nomenclature in the allotment letters, without any concealment or fraud by the department."
This affidavit gains heightened significance as project proponents face accusations of regulatory evasion. Critics allege that by portraying the projects as being on different streams, the proponents aimed to avoid cumulative scrutiny, which would have required a more comprehensive environmental appraisal.
Environmental and Safety Concerns Raised by Local Residents
The NGT took up this matter in December last year following a plea filed by residents of Thunja village. The application, submitted by Chandresh Kumar and social activist Rohit Singh, highlighted serious concerns. Villagers alleged that blasting and excavation activities for head race tunnels were being conducted below the village without proper studies on slope stability, vibration impact, or disaster risk assessment.
They warned of imminent threats to life, property, water security, and local wildlife, urging the tribunal to halt work on what they described as "unstable terrain." The applicants also accused the project proponents of "regulatory evasion" and deliberately concealing facts to avoid scrutiny and cumulative appraisal of the environmental impacts.
Department's Clarification on Its Role and Impact
In its affidavit, the Jal Shakti department maintained that no drinking water or irrigation schemes are affected by these projects. It further clarified that its role is strictly limited to safeguarding such schemes and does not extend to environmental appraisal, forest clearance, or cumulative impact assessment. This statement underscores the fragmented nature of regulatory oversight, which may allow projects to slip through without holistic environmental review.
The case continues to unfold, with the NGT expected to deliberate on these findings and the broader implications for environmental governance in ecologically sensitive regions like the Parvati Valley.
