a. Yes. b. The process is realistic as it is in accordance with Minutes of meeting dt 21st June 2019 between the Union Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and Principal Conservator of Forest, Maharashtra. Hence, first time in the history since the 2005 Judgement of High court Bombay in the PIL of Bombay Environmental Group, Issues faced due to forest mutation were recognised in official minutes of a Industry ministry. c. The fact that the government machinery recognises & consensus with the roadmap designated by the minutes of MOEF&CC speaks volumes about the process being realistic and doable. Also, Forest Conservation rules 2003 and Central Empowered Committee [CEC] Report empowers State Regional Empowered Committee [REC] to conduct the process. d. Following which Secretariat have issued subsequent process letters and currently as per DIC letter to Pundhe Shahpur Collection of Data in Exhibit 1 is going on PAN Maharashtra for affected MSMEs (Industries) otherwise legitimately established within the framework of Law.

a. No. b. An application to Forest and Land Revenue ministry would be governed by the Forest conservation Act 1980 & Conservation rules 2003 which entails giving of equivalent alternative land and afforestation and other charges. c. Forest and Land Revenue have domain over our issue, but Industry Ministry is our Guardian. An application to Industry Ministry requesting them to save MSME’s by giving a strong recommendation for categorisation as per CEC report and further compliances with Supreme court for de-reservation of affected industries in the quest of saving existing employment, investment and creating new opportunities. d. Moreover, MSME’s fall under the purview of Industry Ministry and based on NOC’s received from DIC all industrial permissions are granted by Revenue department, hence the application ought to be made to industry ministry.

a. Yes, b. Consent for payment of NPV is compulsory. Forest act supersedes other civil acts, environment being of paramount importance, all other acts take a back seat. c. Moreover, as it is specified in the Supreme Court judgement of Godrej and Boyce NPV had to be deposited as per categorisation of CEC report dated 13/07/2009. Hence payment of NPV has become law of the land.

a. No, as the movement is unbiased, based on integrity and utmost transparency, levying differential rates of contribution would be against the fabric of the movement. b. Therefore, the parameter considered for collection of contribution is the standard parameter used officially for land related compliances i.e., “Area”.

a. No b. We cannot ascertain a concrete time-line as multiple ministries, internal departments and ultimately Supreme Court is involved in the process. Moreover, speedy positive actions from members is the key factor. c. Godrej and Boyce took almost 5 years for the end result. Looking into the practicality and number of departments and tables the file shall move a period of approx. 2 years from the date of Submission of Collective information to DIC can be reasonably estimated.

a. No. b. It has to be contributed stagewise and as work progresses. A detailed stage wise schedule shall be shared with each member. Only after progress from one stage to another, contribution shall be due for payment. The stage-wise contribution schedule forms part of the engagement agreement.

a. NPV payment is based on the Categorisation to be done as per CEC report. Categorization shall be decided by REC, Maharashtra. b. As per expert’s opinion category 1A should be applicable in most of the cases, wherein one-time NPV is to be paid. c. Further NPV payable for category 1A shall range from Rs. 107 to 160/- per Sq meter depending upon the classification of forest as per latest NPV schedule notified in January 2022. d. As per information gathered Shahpur falls under ECO Class-I open category wherein NPV payable is Rs. 117 per Sq Mt as per latest upward revision.

a. Members ought to be slight flexible and practical in this aspect. Due collective efforts be made for sustainability. However in rare circumstances abnormal NPV becomes payable then an alternative method for excess NPV payment to be given a thought and efforts can be made for achieving sustainable solution.

a. No. b. It is standard operating procedure of the government and judicial machinery to give beneficial implementations of any judicial decisions upon completion of due process only. c. It is clearly evident in Godrej and Boyce case, wherein judgement is made applicable only to the 19 petitioners who abided by the CEC report by paying the NPV. d. Land owners not joining the movement will have to complete the procedure on their own, which will very likely entail huge cost and devotion of time.

a. Yes, b. The contribution may increase depending upon the duration of time and incidentally if any unforeseen large out of pocket expenses need to be incurred with collective majority consensus. c. The contribution covers small out of pocket expenses, administrative expenses, welfare documentation camp expenses and incidental charges for an approx timeframe of 2 years.

a. No. b. Only for legitimate industries (MSMES) established within the framework of Law.

a. Yes, united we stand divided we fall. b. A movement envisages huge existing and potential employment, potential Investments and large government revenue at stake, all these factors make it sustainable for the Industry Ministry to recommend the proposal for de-reservation of forest mutation from the applicant i.e., Pundhe Shahpur Industrial Estate and Premises Society Ltd and Others. c. Further to create awareness and process collective documentation representation to the Government in the spirit of overall sustainable growth and development.

a. No. b. The fact that we have consented to pay NPV ensures that Environment shall be taken care off. The concept of NPV is implemented for the sole purpose of afforestation of land, NPV is the approximate value in monetary terms, of loss / diversion of forest land for non-forest use. It is calculated on the basis of services and ecological value of forest land concerned. c. Moreover, disputed Lands in question do not come under the purview of definition of Forest as per Sec 2 (c-i) of Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act ,1975 on the date of Mutation. In simple language physical ground Status of such land is “non-Forest Area” on the date of Mutation, hence it shall neither affect the existing forest cover nor the environment.

a. Yes, b. The movement is basically designed in a way of assistance to the State Government within the existing framework of Law and process for collective submissions. It is strictly not for “Confrontation”

a. Yes b. Providing accurate and complete individual documentation as per process, timely stage wise contribution and mandatory attendance for the meet on the said subject whenever called for with prior intimation.

a. No, b. It is designed for creating a sustainable environment for MSMEs. Currently having #Special emphasis and focus on industries adversely affected by Mutation of Forest Pan Maharashtra. c. Other legitimate issues highlighted which needs collective representation and submissions can be considered.