dqekj xkSjo ¼vkbZ- vkj- ,l- bZ½ dk;kZy; mi eq[; vfHk;ark ¼fuekZ.

k½
mi eq[; vfHk;ark ¼fuekZ.k½ iqjkuh Mh - Vh - lh fcfYMax]
mÙkj if'pe jsYos] vkcwjksM+ jsYos vLirky ds ikl]
Kumar Gaurav (I.R.S.E) vkcqjksM+&307026
Dy. Chief Engineer (Construction) Office of Dy. Chief Engineer (Construction)
mÙkj if'pe jsYos
North Western Railway,Abu Road North Western Railway Old DTC building, Near Railway
Email-dycecabr@gmail.com Hospital, Abu Road – 307026
CUG: 9001197259

No. ABR/FDP/EDS /1/2023 Dated: 31.12.2023

Deputy Conservator of Forest
Sirohi

Sub: Observations raised in 23th PSC dated 31/01/2024

Ref: MoM ID: FC/MoM/PSC/482181/2024

I am writing to bring to your attention the observations raised during the Twentieth Project
Screening Committee Meeting of the Rajasthan Forest Conservation Authority, held on 31st
January 2024, pertaining to the "New BG Railway Line from Taranga Hill – Ambaji- Abu Road
(km71.580 to km-78.040 and km-87.040 to km-112.700)" under proposal number
FP/RJ/RAIL/444052/2023.
Enclosed herewith, please find the parawise remarks highlighting the observations made during the
meeting.

Thanking you.
DA: As above.
Dy. Chief Engineer (Construction),
North Western Railway,Abu Road
 Parawise Remarks of observations made in “23rd Dated 31.01.2024 PROJECT SCREENING COMMITTEE MEETING OF RAJASTHAN FCA “

Sr.No Observations Remarks

1 Polygon for forest and non-forest areas are not distinguished and Revised KML with forest boundary is now uploaded in CAF, also in
due to this calculation for area in KML file uploaded in CAF is not part 1, and now area calculation can be done.
possible. KML file with forest boundary should be provided
2 The project is not sharing International Borders. Rectification is Necessary corrections have been made in proposal.
required at point no. 4.2 of Common Application Form (CAF)
3 Some habitations are falling inside the proposed RoW but as per Undertaking for rehabilitation of FRA patta is now uploaded.
information provided at point no. 8, "no Rehabilitation and
Resettlement is required", which is contradictory. Justification is
required.
4 Justification of alternatives has not been provided as per socio- JUSTIFICATION FOR FOREST LAND IN GUJARAT
economic, technical and involvement of forest land etc. aspects. STATE FOR TARANGAHILL – AMBAJI – ABU ROAD
KML file has not been provided in polygon shape for calculation of NEW BG LINE PROJECT (112.953KM.)
the area involving the forest.
The proposed new line project between Tarangahill – Ambaji –
Abu Road (112.953 Km.) is connecting three important
religious/tourist places of Gujrat & Rajasthan state i.e.Tarangahill,
Ambaji in Gujrat state and Abu Road in Rajasthan state.

Taranga Hill – Ambaji - Abu Road new broad gauge line project was
sanctioned in Railway Budget session of 2013-2014, this project has
been approved by CCEA on 13.07.2022 and sanctioned by Railway
Board on 21.07.2022. The project is to be commissioned by 2026-27
ie. in next 4 years. The project is also being chased by PMO office
and Ministry of Railways on hourly basis.

Land acquisition is critical activity for timely completion of project.

The total forest land to be acquired for this project in Sirohi district
of Rajasthan states 184.111 Hectares.
  Route wise details.
Route No.-1 ( 115.242 Km Final Route)
Area Forest ( 348.081 Ha) Non Forest (335.657 Ha)
672.724 Rajasthan Gujrat(163.97 Rajasthan Gujrat(
Ha (184.111 Ha) Ha) (81.367Ha) 254.29Ha)

 In order to bypass wild life as well as to plan a shortest

possible route, this route no. IIIA is proposed.
 Alignment of this route is almost same as that of Alternative
Route No.- III with difference of ruling gradient of 1 in 100 is
used in hilly terrain in this route. This has resulted in
appreciable reduction in cutting and filling of bank quantity
and tunnel length and also length of alignment is reduced by
17.319 Km.
 This route completely avoids the Wild Life Sanctuary.
 This route is covering major populated area including the
Ambaji.
● The per Km. cost of this Alignment is worked out as Rs.23.98
crores per Km.
Route No.-2 ( 108.495 Km)
Area Forest ( 376.446 Ha) Non Forest (295 Ha)
648 Rajasthan Gujrat Rajasthan Gujrat(
Ha (197.4466 Ha) ( 179 Ha) (135.286Ha) 164Ha)

 The biggest demerit of this route is that 41.150 Km of the

Alignment passes through the Wildlife Sanctuary which is a
restricted and protected area.
 The per Km. cost of this Alignment is estimated to be Rs. 23.96
crores (approx.).
 Considering large length of route in wild life area which is
nearly 38% of total length; this route is not a favorable route.
Route No.-3 ( 113.500 Km)
 Area Forest ( 450 Ha) Non Forest (290 Ha)
740 Rajasthan Gujrat Rajasthan Gujrat
Ha (232 Ha) (218 Ha) (120Ha) (170Ha)

 Total cost of the project through this route is Rs. 3434 crores.
This is the costliest route among three feasible proposals as
discussed.
 The per Km. cost of this Alignment is worked out as Rs. 25.81
crores pe Km.
 The biggest demerit of this route is that this Alignment passes
through Archeological Protected sites of Jasvapura (Danta
tehsil ,Banaskantha district) & Chandrawati village (Abu Road
Tehsil) which is a restricted and protected area.
Therefore, from the above mentioned routes , route 1 is selected
and as area of Forest land i.e 184.111 Hectares is lowest and
route 1 is the most economical and required least time of
completion .
5 Legal status of the forest land mentioned at point no. 2.3 of Part - I Necessary corrections have been made in proposal.
is wrong
6 Area has been calculated on the basis of Jamabandi of the forest Area calculations has been done as per the Jambandi and forest
area but it doesn't match with the notification of the forest area. notification.
SDM Abu Road has certified that forest area which is in ABR Tehsil are
matching with the forest notification and Jambandi(. Copy enclosed in
additional documents) .
7 Patch-wise KML file has not been submitted. Necessary corrections have been made in proposal.
8 Component wise details have been provided but area details for  Component wise details are now being attached with proposal.
railway track, tunnel and station yard have not been provided. Justification:
Justification of area taken for dumping site has not been provided.  The selection of muck disposal sites was carried out
It should be out side the forest.
considering the quantity of the muck, landscape, cost
effectiveness, nearness to source of generation, absence of
ground and surface water, relief and scope for afforestation
works.
 Two No of Dumping site now deleted from the proposal.
 Approximately 45 lakhs cum of muck will be generated. Out of this 50
% muck will usable and will be utilized for filling embankment. Hence
the remaining unusable quantity of muck is 22.5 lakh cum, out of this,
50% of this unusable muck i.e.11.25 lakh cum will be disposed off.
Therefore, total 12.3 hectares of Forest Land will be required for
dumping of this surplus quantity of unusable muck and rest 25% will
be used in other location other than embankment .
9 DGPS map has not been provided with forest boundary. The map DGPS map are provided with forest Boundary now. The DGPS Map
should be provided in parts. ESZ boundary of Mount Abu Wildlife provided in parts.
Sanctuary should also be demarcated.
10 Order/Consent to provide NFL land (Non-Forest Land) has not been Consent to provide NFL land has been uploaded.
provided as the owner of the land is User Agency. Some CA land 1. Collector Sirohi vide letter no /प.15 (1) (2)
falls inside the forest Block Dhargdha. It should be rectified. CA
should be given as per new FCA Guidelines but details have been राज व/2022/4668-4672 dated 11.10.2023 ,has given consent
provided only for 72.45 ha. that CA land for this project alignment falling in sirohi distrct
will be given from land previously reserved as land bank for
forest reclamation. (Copy enclosed in additional documents)
2. Collector Sirohi vide letter no /प.15 (1) (2) राज व/2022-
01109/287-294 dated 10.05.2024 has given consent and land
has been set apart for forest.(Copy enclosed in additional
documents)
3. Land will be given as per the new FCA guidelines.

11 CB Ratio (Cost-Benefit Ratio) is not based on current CA and NPV Necessary corrections have been made in proposal.
rates. The costs for rehabilitation/resettlement and shifting of road
transmission line etc. have not been included.
12 The proposed railway line falls within 10 Kms of Mount Abu Government of India Vide SO.No 1545(E) on 25th June 2009,

Wildlife Sanctuary. Environmental Clearance is also required due to issued notification regarding ECO –Sensitive Zone of Mt.Abu
lying of new railway line. and surrounding areas. As per the above notification this
project is not falling in ESZ of Mt -Abu and surrounding areas,
hence no Environmental clearance is required.
13 The project has not been marked on Revenue map and Jamabandi Now project has been marked on revenue map and jamabandi, copy
of the forest area has not been submitted. of jambandi is attached.
14 Layout plan/Cross-section of required forest land has not been Typical Cross-Section of Cutting, Filling , Station Yard & Tunnel are
 submitted. submitted with proposal.(Copy attached)
15 Administrative/Financial approval of the project has not been Copy of administrative/financial approval of the project is uploaded in
submitted proposal.
16 DCF informed that more than 60 pattas (in FRA Act) are falling in Regarding FRA Pattas joint survey will be done in consultation with
the ROW of proposed railway line. UA is advised to solve this issue. revenue and forest official in the proposed alignment of project.
Undertaking for certificate under Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 has .Undertaking for rehabilitation of FRA Patta is now uploaded.
also not been submitted
17 One old proposal Kota - Chittorgarh railway line is pending for In terms of RB letter No.2017/W-I/NWR/NL/104pt.(E:3380777) dated
compliance of In principle approval. UA is advised to expedite the 30.04.2024. and Minutes of meeting
compliance. NWR/HQ/S&C/Gen/land/444259001 dated 20.05.2024, payment will
be made.

18 UA is advised to submit the proposal also in offline mode to the Revised copy of proposal will be submitted in hard copy to the DCF
concerned DCF for verifying the proposed diverted forest area and Sirohi for verifying the proposed diverted area and it’s KML.
its KML. UA is also advised to submit the proposal again with
complete compliance of the above points otherwise the proposal
will be deregistered as per Rule 9(4)(c) of FCA Rules, 2022.