Greens hail NGT order setting guidelines for tree felling
Bhopal: Environmental activists have welcomed the
National Green Tribunal
(NGT), Central Bench, order laying down stringent guidelines for allowing large-scale felling of trees for construction or infrastructure projects.
However, they said that execution would be key to making them effective.
They further pointed out that the green watchdog should have given a timeline for the implementation of the order so that compliance within a definite time frame could be ensured.
The Bhopal-based Central Bench of NGT, while hearing a petition against the proposed felling of 700 trees for the construction of roads and a stadium at Barkheda Nathu in the Neelbad area, in a significant judgement, asked the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (PCCF) to constitute a Centrally Empowered Committee (CEC) to decide on permission for tree felling in any project involving the cutting of 25 or more trees.
The tribunal further asked for geo-tagging of all trees in the state, a tree census across MP, and 10 to 100 times afforestation in ratio to felled trees in the same area where the trees are cut.
Advocate Harpreet Singh Gupta, who appeared in the case for the petitioner Nitin Saxena, described the NGT judgement as a 'landmark' judgement. However, he said that there are three major lacunas in the order: there is no timeframe for any of the measures mandated by the tribunal.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Gelsenkirchen: Gutes Hören sucht 700 Testhörer für Hörgeräte ohne Zuzahlung
Gutes Hören
Undo
"It's an open-ended order in a way with no time frame for the constitution of the CEC. There is no reference as to who will provide funds for the committee and logistic support like office space, staff, etc.
Besides, the NGT in several generic orders has said 'Vrikshon Ka Parirakshan Adhiniyam' but there is no clarity on how the green watchdog wants it to be done. If you look at sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Act, you will see that the tree officer is an important figure, who should be the municipal commissioner himself.
He can't delegate this responsibility to anyone. The state govt can, but the municipal commissioner himself delegates the responsibility to an assistant commissioner or someone else, and the law becomes ineffective." Gupta said that he would be moving a separate application pointing out the lacunas in the order and praying the judges to give clarity on the issues raised.
Environmental activist Subhash C Pandey also said that the decision could have a huge impact if its implementation is ensured.
He also raised the issue of the timeline and said the tribunal should have given a clear time frame for the execution of everything that it has ordered. "If there is a CEC, we hope permission to get trees felled would be difficult. I don't think members of a high-level committee will be as irresponsible as the municipal corporation.
The NGT should also have laid down a time limit for the CEC to give or refuse the permission.
It could be 15 days or 30 days. Then, it should also have been laid down by when the tree census or geo-tagging of trees will be done. It's possible that the govt and its agencies take years to do it if a time frame is not decided by the NGT."
Environmental activist Rashid Noor Khan, however, appeared to be disappointed with the NGT's inability to remedy the issues of grave environmental concern. "I have been fighting for years to see that blatant disregard of environmental laws in Kaliyasot and Kerwa areas stops, the forests in the twin localities are saved, but nothing happens. Unless and until NGT gets strict with the govt agencies and departments concerned, any judgement, howsoever pathbreaking, could not have the desired impact," he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
26 minutes ago
- The Print
India's all-party delegations show a problem with our embassies
Governments regularly send foreign affairs ministers or senior officials to convey important and special messages. But the use of all-party parliamentary delegations is a rare practice in diplomacy. I cannot recall any recent example of a country taking such a step. That such delegations were needed to convey India's position on terrorism reflects the limitations of Indian missions abroad in performing this task effectively. My view is that the government was compelled to send these delegations because Indian missions abroad are unable to aggressively promote India's national interests. The decision of the Modi government to send all-party parliamentary delegations to different countries for mobilising support against terrorism, following the ceasefire with Pakistan, has attracted significant public attention. As these delegations are reaching various countries, questions are being raised about why such a step was necessary in the first place. This situation can be attributed to two interrelated factors. One is that successive governments have failed to carry out necessary reforms in the Indian missions abroad. The other is that officials working in Indian embassies get little public recognition back home, which impacts their performance. As a result, the government has to resort to temporary mechanisms such as sending all-party delegations. However, the long-term solution lies in the structural reform of India's missions abroad. Also Read: Sanskrit to satellites, embassies in Delhi are using culture to show ties, get close to India Decolonising the structure of Indian embassies The Indian missions abroad, called high commissions in Commonwealth countries and embassies in others, are primarily responsible for conveying the message of the Indian government. Increasing the efficiency of these missions is crucial, but unfortunately, successive governments have not paid any attention in this regard. Reforms are needed in two directions—decolonisation of the structure of Indian embassies, and the promotion of active over passive leadership. First, the structure of Indian embassies. For example, the Indian High Commission in London still seems to be organised along colonial lines. Presently, six of its officials are designated as ministers. They are minister (counsellor), minister (audit), minister (economic), minister (coordination), and minister (Nehru Centre). Interestingly, the designation of minister is not used by the Indian High Commissions in Australia, New Zealand, or Canada. And only India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh have this designation in their London-based high commissions. This practice appears to have been inherited from the office of the Secretary of India during colonial rule. While the positions of secretary and deputy secretary may have been replaced with High Commissioner and Deputy High Commissioner, the remaining designations are unchanged. The designation of minister also creates confusion when Union or state ministers officially visit London. Usually, the embassy 'ministers' receive and accompany them. It causes great confusion for those unfamiliar with the bureaucratic hierarchy. The second issue relates to leadership style. The government needs to ensure that Indian embassies show active rather than passive leadership. Presently, embassies tend to act only after receiving instructions from the government, and their engagement remains very formal. However, they need to be encouraged to engage with the Indian diaspora and other stakeholders informally. Based on my six years of experience in London, I have noticed that purely bureaucratic appointments reduce such engagement. Therefore, the government needs to diversify its officials in Indian missions. It should incorporate professors, journalists, writers, and other young leaders into the pool. I have found, for instance, that the appointment of Amish Tripathi as the Chair of the Nehru Centre in London significantly increased social activities. The centre acts as the cultural wing of the Indian High Commission in London, and it emerged as a premier institution engaged in India's cultural interface with the UK. Coming from a literary background, Tripathi, who served until October 2023, did not concern himself with bureaucratic protocols and met people both formally and informally. This led to a rise in cultural activities and social gatherings at the Nehru Centre. The appointment of diverse professionals in Indian missions abroad is needed for two further reasons. First, the missions increasingly need to engage with the Indian diaspora, which is itself diverse in terms of region, ideology, caste, and profession. A broader mix of professionals in missions will improve outreach. Second, the appointment of diverse professionals will provide them with exposure to foreign policy and diplomacy, which would be beneficial for developing future leaders. Also Read: Countering Pakistan isn't India's only challenge. We need doctrinal clarity on China factor The problem of invisibility The lack of public recognition for the good work done in Indian embassies also discourages officials from showing active leadership. For example, the current Indian High Commissioner in London, Vikram Doraiswami, is the most active one I have seen in comparison with his predecessors. He frequently meets people and actively participates in community events. Yet most Indians would not know his name. Similarly, the security officer of the Commission, Kiran Bhosale, was injured while protecting the Tricolour during a Khalistan protest in 2023. Yet this news found no space in the media. All of these point to a lack of recognition for the work being done in the Indian mission. This too acts as a disincentive to active leadership. To sum up, decolonising Indian missions, promoting active leadership through professional diversification, and increasing recognition for officials would go a long way in making embassies better equipped to fulfil the role they were set up for. Arvind Kumar is a Visiting Lecturer in Politics & International Relations at the University of Hertfordshire, UK. He tweets @arvind_kumar__. Views are personal. (Edited by Asavari Singh)
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
How to talk politics at work when you disagree
Since the Pahalgam terror attack in Kashmir last month, Ishaan Kanoi has been discussing politics in his office more than ever. Though Kanoi, 38, usually maintains a 'neutral" stance at work, the recent tension between India and Pakistan forced him to 'break the code". 'I couldn't help myself if anyone spoke against India," says the Mumbai-based sales professional at an IT company. 'While I usually refrain from contributing to political conversations at work, it felt like the right step to defend my country now. It resulted in several arguments with my colleagues." Unlike Kanoi, Ananya Banerjee has always been vocal about her political ideologies at work. In recent weeks, though, her views have resulted in several confrontations, impacting her relationship with co-workers. She has regrets about this. 'There have been several repercussions—a former manager blocked me on social media and started to ignore me at work. He was otherwise very appreciative of my achievements but we now don't see eye to eye. Some other colleagues also choose to ignore me," says Delhi-based Banerjee, 41, who works as a content head at an advertising agency. Also read: The power of hitting pause during a workday Given the political upheaval across the world, it's becoming harder to keep politics out of the workplace. Organisations and employees are embedded in the larger socio-political structure of the country, so they are impacted by it as well, says Ankita Tandon, associate professor (organisational behaviour and human resources), International Management Institute, Delhi. When people come to work, they bring their whole selves: their professional expertise, their personality, their beliefs, their mental models, and their opinions, she adds. 'Political discussions are a kind of social interaction. Organisations cannot stop people from engaging in social and political discussions as it might be looked upon as curtailing the right to free speech." Discussing politics at work, however, can be a double-edged sword. While it can serve as an ice-breaker, it can also cause damage. The 2024 State of the Global Workplace Report by analytics and advisory company Gallup, which surveyed 10,000 employees, suggests the same. About 14% of employees in the report claim having political discussions with co-workers has helped them feel included. But 12% say political conversations at work have made them feel uncomfortable. 'In this scenario, organisations can set guidelines for such discussions to happen within certain boundaries," suggests Tandon. 'Us Versus Them' Talk With social media providing a constant stream of political news and commentary, it's natural that employees will bring their political views into the office, says Vigil Thomas, head of human resources at Bengaluru-based digital payments startup, ToneTag. There's another caveat—unchecked political opinions or the spread of misinformation can subtly but significantly, erode team dynamics. 'What starts as a casual remark or a shared link can quickly spiral into deeper issues that affect trust, collaboration and morale," says Thomas. 'When employees share biased or inaccurate political content, it can damage their credibility." Also read: Can AI help employees be happier at work? Heated political discussions also disrupt focus. Meetings can veer off track, time is lost debating unrelated topics, and productivity suffers. Over time, teams may begin to polarise, forming cliques based on ideological alignment. This creates an 'us versus them" environment, making some employees feel excluded and less likely to contribute. So, how can HR professionals and managers manage political discourse in a way that maintains a professional, productive and respectful work environment? 'While fostering an inclusive, open environment where employees can freely express themselves is essential, the workplace must also be a space where focus remains on collaboration, performance and shared goals," says Thomas. 'Disagreements over political views often escalate into personal conflicts." Tandon agrees, adding that verbalisation of strong political opinions and discussion of information circulating on social media can easily escalate into conflicts and confrontations at work. Once that happens, interpersonal relationships can get affected which, in turn, can reflect in changes in team dynamics and team. The involved employees may form negative opinions and lack trust in each other, which is likely to spill over into work. 'There is a strong relationship between interpersonal relationships at work and team cohesion, happiness, satisfaction and performance," says Tandon. Setting an Example Establishing a strong foundation starts with setting clear guidelines about workplace behaviour during the onboarding process, suggests Thomas. 'Emphasise the importance of maintaining respect for differing views while making it clear that political discussions should not overshadow professional responsibilities," he adds. 'Make sure these expectations are reinforced regularly." The goal is not to silence voices but encourage conversations where diverse perspectives are respected, says Sahil Sharma, global chief human resource officer at RateGain, a global provider of AI-powered travel and hospitality SaaS solutions. 'The senior leadership must set the tone that the goal is understanding, not persuading. Provide team members with resources on empathetic listening and constructive communication," he adds. Also read: Be goal-oriented, not task-focused, to get ahead at work In industries where political discourse may be part of the work, such as public policy, social justice, or media, creating designated spaces for employees to express their views is a smart decision. Thomas says, 'These discussions should be voluntary, structured, and moderated to ensure they remain respectful and productive." Organisations must also communicate to their staff that all political opinions are welcome during interpersonal interactions, says Tandon. However, employees must be willing to be sensitive towards each other's viewpoints and emotions, and know when to de-escalate discussions before they become too heated. 'Organisations must firmly communicate that political opinions should not be entertained during work related discussions," she adds. In any case, leaders and managers should model the right behaviour by staying neutral about politically sensitive topics at work, focusing conversations on shared goals and business objectives rather than personal beliefs, suggests Sharma. 'Besides, leaders must consider hosting short awareness sessions on digital literacy and responsible information sharing to prevent the spread of fake news," he says. There must also be a mediation mechanism for conflict resolution should any differences in personal opinions lead to interpersonal conflicts. 'Plus, organisations must create clear guidelines regarding consequences for employees who let interpersonal differences of political opinions seep into workplace coordination and productivity," says Tandon. Lastly, regular training and workshops to foster team trust, open communication and team cooperation across hierarchies can help maintain a positive team environment. 'Proactive policies and respectful boundaries are essential to keep the workplace focused, inclusive and collaborative," says Thomas. Write to us at feedback@ Also read: Do Gen Z workers need etiquette training?
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
‘10k unrecognised schools operating in Bihar, Jharkhand'
Over 10,000 unrecognised school are operational in Jharkhand and Bihar, with over 1.6 million students enrolled in those schools, in violation of the Right to Education Act, data from the minutes of a recent Project Approval Board (PAB) meeting of the education ministry has shown. With 5,879 such schools, Jharkhand has the highest number of unrecognised schools in the country with an enrolment of 837,897 students and 46,421 teachers, the data showed, while Bihar has 4,915 such schools with an enrolment of 775,704 students and 42,377 teachers. The observation came during PAB meetings for the approval of budget and plans under Samagra Shiksha scheme for 2025-26 with officials from all states between March and April 2025. During the meeting, the ministry flagged that unrecognised schools violate section 19 of the RTE Act, 2009, which mandates pre-existing schools to meet prescribed norms within three years of the Act's commencement. Unrecognised schools are private, unaided institutions operating without formal government recognition and regulatory frameworks. 'The Act also mandates that if such schools fail to fulfil the norms, the recognition shall be withdrawn, and the school shall cease to function,' the minutes of the meetings uploaded on ministry's website recently said. Further, the ministry has both states to 'take action and issue suitable instructions to the concerned authorities to recognise these unrecognised schools or to take appropriate action as deemed fit at the earliest.' While the ministry used data from the Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE)+ 2023-24 report, these records are not publicly available in the report which was released in January this year. While officials in the education ministry did not respond to HT's request for comment, an official in Jharkhand said that directions for appropriate action have already been issued to the schools. 'These [Unrecognised] schools started functioning before the implementation of RTE Act 2009. The state government has already issued directions for recognition of such schools. We have formed district-level recognition committees for recognition of such schools,' Sachidanand Diyendu Tigga, administrative officer at Jharkhand education project council, said. According to the minutes of the PAB meetings, the ministry has also flagged 'large variation' in reporting of data about out-of-school children (OoSC) by Bihar and Jharkhand on the education ministry's Project Appraisal, Budgeting, Achievements and Data Handling System (PRABANDH) portal and the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) survey. The ministry advised both the states to 'monitor the data uploaded on the portal by responsible officer under the supervision of the State Project Director (SPD).' 'We will look into discrepancies in the number of OoSCs. We are running the campaign 'back to school' to enroll those students who are not going to the schools,' Tigga said. HT reached out to officials from the Bihar Education Project Council, but was yet to receive any response.
