The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change has since directed the state forest department to investigate the matter on priority following a complaint by Satara honorary wildlife warden Rohan Bhate.
The Tarali project is proposed around the Tarali dam reservoir and covers 150.74 hectares of non-forest land across Nivade, Tondoshi, Kalambe and Jalu villages in Patan taluka.
According to the state forest department, it falls within the buffer or deemed eco-sensitive zone of Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary, which forms part of the Sahyadri Tiger Reserve.
A senior forest official quoted by the newspaper said the sanctuary’s eco-sensitive zone had not yet been notified and that a 10-km surrounding area was being treated as a deemed zone under Supreme Court directions. The official said private projects in such areas were required, under applicable conditions, to contribute up to 4 per cent of their cost towards conservation and protection.
A Union environment ministry letter dated 11 February 2025 recommending prior environmental clearance recorded the project cost as Rs 5,675 crore.
When the State Board for Wildlife considered the proposal on 23 February 2026, it imposed 15 conditions, including the conservation contribution. Maharashtra’s Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife), M. Srinivas Reddy, wrote to the company in March seeking payment of Rs 227 crore and an undertaking to meet the other conditions before the proposal was forwarded for national wildlife clearance.
On 8 September, Adani Green Energy submitted a notarised affidavit requesting that Rs 56.75 crore be treated as the project cost. In an accompanying letter, chief operating officer Naresh Telgu referred to an “analogous estimation” used while submitting part of the proposal.
The documents quoted in the report did not explain how the substantially lower figure had been calculated or reconcile it with the earlier estimate.
On 12 October, Reddy informed the company that his office had accepted the affidavit. He sought immediate payment of 1 per cent of the revised cost, with the remaining 3 per cent payable after national wildlife approval.
Sahyadri Tiger Reserve field director Tushar Chavan confirmed to the newspaper that the Rs 56.75 lakh payment had been received. Asked about the revision, Reddy directed questions about the affidavit to the company.
Bhate lodged complaints on 30 October through the Prime Minister’s grievance portal and Maharashtra’s Aaple Sarkar platform. He questioned both the plausibility of the revised estimate and the forest department’s decision to accept it.
The Union environment ministry’s 6 November communication asked the state authorities to investigate promptly, take appropriate action and inform the complainant of the outcome. A separate state-level direction on 5 November asked the deputy director of Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary to examine the complaint.
Responding to the newspaper, an Adani Group spokesperson said the project’s components were on privately owned land and involved no forest land. The spokesperson maintained that pumped storage operations would not adversely affect downstream ecology or wildlife and argued that the reservoirs could support surrounding flora and fauna.
The spokesperson did not answer the specific question about the revised project cost.
With an inquiry sought by the Union ministry, the central questions are how the lower estimate was derived, why it was accepted and whether the resulting reduction in the conservation contribution was justified.
About the Author
