Ek Ped Maa Ke Naam, Pura Jungle Dost Ke Naam: The Story From Mangroves In Raigad To Hasdeo In Chhattisgarh, What More Will Go To Adani?

India’s forest cover and the trees that constitute it face continuous pressure from infrastructure energy and industrial projects of Adani and others. Every diversion of reserved forest mangrove or dense woodland for roads ports power plants mines or terminals removes standing biomass disrupts habitats fragments corridors and reduces the capacity of landscapes to regulate water climate and biodiversity.

The legal pathway for such diversion exists under the Forest Conservation Act and subsequent rules. Project proponents seek Stage I and Stage II clearances the state forest departments and the Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change examine proposals compensatory afforestation is mandated and conditions are imposed. In practice the scale and location of approved diversions have generated sustained public and legal scrutiny especially when high conservation value forests or areas with documented wildlife presence are involved.

Recent data from 2025 and 2026 illustrate the pattern. In August 2026 the Maharashtra government issued resolutions permitting diversion of approximately 83,700 square feet of forest land for two Adani Group projects. Of this 0.6497 hectare comprising reserved forest nala mangrove and creek mangrove in Shahapur and Shahabaz villages of Alibag taluka Raigad district was allocated for Adani Cementation Limited’s proposed berthing jetty conveyor corridor backup facilities and approach road for a cement bulk terminal.

A further 0.1281 hectare of forest land in Amravati was cleared for an Adani Total Gas pipeline. The permissions carry conditions including continued access for forest officials and requirements for compensatory measures. Mangrove systems in particular perform coastal protection and nursery functions; their conversion even in relatively small parcels contributes to cumulative coastal ecological change.

In Bihar approximately 1,020 acres in Pirpainti Bhagalpur district were leased to Adani Power for a 2,400 MW ultra supercritical thermal power plant. Reporting indicates a nominal lease rate of one rupee per acre per year for a multi decade term. The project was awarded following a competitive bidding process according to state government statements and forms part of larger capacity addition plans. Land ownership is described in official clarifications as remaining with the state energy department with the lease structured under industrial promotion policies.

Opposition parties and local reports have questioned the valuation of the land the adequacy of farmer compensation and the environmental implications of a large coal based plant including water draw from the Ganga and emissions. The nominal lease rate has become a focal point of political debate even as the government maintains that similar incentives are available under the state’s investment package to qualifying investors.

Larger forest tracts appear in coal mining clearances. In the Singrauli region of Madhya Pradesh forest diversion of approximately 1,397.54 hectares for the Dhirauli coal block linked to Adani Group entities through Mahan Energen and related companies received Stage II clearance. Activist challenges citing elephant corridor status dense forest cover and potential felling of hundreds of thousands of trees reached the National Green Tribunal and the Supreme Court.

In May 2026 the Supreme Court declined to interfere primarily on grounds of limitation in the filing of the challenge while noting the possibility of other remedies. Reports associated with the project have referenced potential impacts on large numbers of trees and the ecological character of the area previously discussed in no go assessments.

In Chhattisgarh’s Hasdeo Aranya region the Kente Extension coal block has been the subject of repeated controversy. The forest department recommended diversion of approximately 1,742.6 hectares of dense to moderately dense forest. In principle clearance processes have advanced with the block allotted to Rajasthan Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited and mining operations linked to the Adani Group as developer and operator.

Official documents indicate potential felling of around 4.48 lakh trees with phased implementation proposed. Hasdeo has been described in scientific assessments as one of the larger unfragmented forest landscapes in central India supporting Schedule I species and serving as catchment for rivers and reservoirs. Earlier assembly resolutions and biodiversity studies had urged restraint on further mining. The progression of clearances despite these concerns has intensified debate over the weight given to conservation advice versus energy security arguments.

Additional thermal power expansions ports SEZ related land and hydro or pumped storage proposals linked to Adani entities have received environmental and related clearances or amendments over the period from 2015 onward. Examples include expansions at various locations and earlier forest diversions for projects such as Tiroda. Each individual approval may satisfy procedural requirements yet the cumulative removal of forest cover across states alters landscape connectivity carbon stocks and local livelihoods dependent on forest produce.

The formal system requires compensatory afforestation usually on equivalent or larger areas of non forest or degraded forest land. Implementation quality survival rates of planted saplings and ecological equivalence remain subjects of independent evaluation. Plantations on distant or lower quality land do not immediately replace the structural complexity of old growth or dense natural forest. Phased felling conditions and translocation of smaller girth trees are sometimes imposed yet the net loss of mature canopy and associated biodiversity is difficult to offset fully within short time frames.

Forest Cutting and Modani Tales: The Political Closeless of Adani With The Head Of Central Governance

Political proximity between large industrial groups and the central government is a frequent subject of public commentary. Gautam Adani and senior political leadership have appeared together at project inaugurations and policy events. Infrastructure and energy capacity addition form stated national priorities. Clearances and land allocations occur through established bureaucratic and statutory channels involving state governments and central ministries.

Critics argue that the volume and location of approvals for particular corporate groups raise questions about consistency of environmental scrutiny and the influence of economic scale on decision timelines. Supporters point to competitive bidding employment generation and the necessity of domestic coal and power capacity. The record shows repeated successful navigation of clearance processes by Adani Group companies across multiple states and sectors.

Data oriented assessment requires distinguishing individual project footprints from systemic trends. Small diversions of less than one hectare for terminals or pipelines appear modest in isolation. Aggregated over years and combined with multi hundred hectare mining blocks the totals become substantial. High conservation value designations earlier no go classifications and documented wildlife presence increase the ecological stakes. When clearances proceed in such areas the decision reflects a prioritisation of extractive or industrial use over preservation of the existing forest ecosystem.

Local communities including tribal groups in Hasdeo and farmers in Bihar have voiced concerns over displacement loss of livelihood resources and adequacy of consultation under the Forest Rights Act and related frameworks. Legal challenges have tested the limits of tribunal and court intervention often constrained by procedural timelines. The result is that many projects advance once Stage II clearances are obtained.

The critique that follows from the data is not that infrastructure is unnecessary. India requires power ports and industrial capacity. The critique is that the conversion of dense reserved forests mangroves and high conservation zones carries irreversible elements that compensatory mechanisms have not demonstrably neutralised at scale. The pattern of large land parcels and forest tracts becoming available for projects associated with a single major group invites examination of whether environmental decision making applies uniform stringency or whether project size and political visibility affect outcomes. Transparency in the valuation of public land the quality of public hearings and the long term monitoring of compensatory plantations remain areas where independent verification is limited.

Continued expansion of coal mining inside remaining contiguous forest blocks accelerates fragmentation. Each new clearance reduces the viability of corridors for elephants and other wide ranging species. Coastal mangrove loss diminishes natural buffers against storm surge. The cumulative carbon release from felling mature trees is only partially offset by young plantations that take decades to sequester comparable amounts.

Policy choices therefore involve explicit trade offs. Accelerating energy and industrial projects through streamlined clearances delivers measurable capacity additions. Preserving remaining high quality forests delivers less immediately quantifiable but long duration ecological and climate services. The data from 2025 and 2026 show that in multiple instances the former priority has prevailed. Whether the resulting landscape configuration remains compatible with biodiversity commitments climate goals and the rights of forest dependent communities will be tested in the decades ahead as the planted offsets mature or fail and as the converted lands generate their intended economic output.

The record of diversions leases and clearances is public. The ecological consequences are measurable in hectares trees and habitat connectivity. The political and economic context in which these decisions occur is equally visible. The question that persists is whether the institutional processes designed to weigh forest conservation against development needs are functioning with sufficient independence and long term perspective or whether the pressure of large scale project timelines consistently tips the balance toward conversion.