4. description of the environment - Gujarat Pollution Control Board

4. DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT 

The present chapter describes the physical, biological, social and cultural environment along the 

project corridor and its immediate influence area. 

4.1 STUDY REGION DELINEATION 

The study region has been divided into: 

Corridor of Direct Impact: This includes the area adjacent to the existing road, roughly 30m on 

either side of the existing centerline. Minor alignment changes, widening, curve improvements, 

etc. is expected to directly affect the land and assets located in this region. 

Corridor of Indirect Impact: This includes the region within 15km offset of the road centerline 

on either side. 

4.2 COLLECTION & COLLATION OF DATA ON ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL 

FEATURES 

The data on the various environmental and social components relevant to decisions about 

project location, design and operation have been assembled from: 

Primary Survey of the corridor, and 

Secondary information collected from various organizations, institutes, publications, etc. 

4.2.1 Primary Data Collection 

The primary data collection along the project corridor has been carried out with respect to the 

following features: 

Environmental Features: Environmental features that may be directly impacted are trees along 

the roadside, water bodies like ponds, wells and water crossings, agriculture lands, plantations, 

ecological sensitive areas like coastal areas, forests. Apart from these, community resources like 

educational institutions; hospitals etc. have also been recorded. 

Social Features: Social features that may be affected include loss of land and structures within 

the proposed RoW. The type of structures i.e. residential, commercial, mixed uses (residential 

cum commercial), public, educational institutions and health facilities have been recorded. The 

structures have been further classified as kutcha, semi-pucca and pucca. To ascertain the impact 

on land and structures, the RoW limits are being verified on the field. 

Cultural Component: The cultural properties along the project corridor including shrines, 

temples, mosques, churches and graveyards have been listed. 

Almost all site specific information has been collected through primary survey. 

4-1

Final Feasibility Report 

Preparation of Feasibility– cum-Preliminary Design for 4/6 Laning 

of Jetpur-Somnath section of NH 8D, Package No: 

NHAI/DBFOII/DPR/02 

4.2.2 Secondary Data Collection 

VOLUME III: 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Secondary data collection has been collected primarily on regional environmental and social 

features from various Government Agencies/Institutions and through literature reviews. Such 

information includes Hydrogeological Atlas of Gujarat, Central Ground Water Board. Information 

on climate available from IMD data, information on soil & geology has been obtained from 

available maps (from National Atlas & Thematic Mapping Organisation -NATMO) and also from 

respective websites. 

For Socio-economic profile of the influence area along the project corridor, the database for 

analysis has been taken from Census of India (1991 & 2001) and other secondary sources. 

4.3 LAND ENVIRONMENT 

4.3.1 Physiography and Terrain 

The project region is located in Rajkot and Junagadh district in Gujarat. Rajkot district is situated 

in the central part of the Saurashtra Peninsula. It lies between the parallels of latitude 21°31’ and 

23°10’ and the meridians of longitude 70°1’ and 71°30’. Rajkot district is a part of Kathiawar 

Peninsula and is sub-divided into five sub-micro regions such as Maliya Coastal Plain, Rajkot 

Alluvial Plain, Rajkot Stony –Waste Land, Bhadar River Plain and Vinchhiya Upland. The project 

corridor falls in the Bhadar River plain. The eastern part of the region is above 200 metres while 

the western part has an altitude of 100 metres above M.S.L. The general slope of the region is 

towards south-west. The district is bounded on the west by Junagadh district. 

Junagadh district is situated at Saurashtra region and form part of the Kathiawar peninsula. It lies 

between the parallels of latitude 20°41’ and 21°41’ and the meridians of longitude 69°56’ and 

71°13’. It is sub divided into four sub-micro regions namely, Junagadh coastal plain, Bhadar, Ojat 

and Harna river plain, Girnar hills and Junagadh Gir forested Region. The elevation of the region 

falling in Mangrol, Manavadar, Keshod, Malia and Patan-Veraval talukas varies between 5 

metres and 52 metres above the M.S.L in the Junagadh Coastal Plain. Some parts of Mangrol, 

Manavadar, Keshod, Malia, Patan-Veraval, Vanthali, Junagadh talukas falls in the Bhadar, Ojat 

and Harna River Plain which elevates between 45 metres and 241 metres above M.S.L. 

The proposed alignment traverses through fertile plain terrain along its entire length. The 

physiography of the project area is depicted in Figure 4-1. 

4-2





PHYSIOGRAPHY 

ELEVATION 

(in metres) 

Above 600 

450 - 600 

300 - 450 

150 - 300 

100 - 150 

50 - 100 

10 - 50 

Below 10 

Sea 

SLOPE 

(in metres per 

km) 

More than 600 

300 - 600 

150 - 300 

80 - 150 

4.3.2 Geology 

Buffer Zone (Upto 15 km 

from corridor) 

Project Corridor 

Taluka boundry 

20 - 80 

10 - 20 

Porbandar 

Less than 10 

Ranavav 

Arabian Sea 

5 0 5 10 15 

Kilometre 

VOLUME III: 


Upleta 

Manavadar Vanthli 

Mangrol 

Jam Kandorna 

chorwad 

Dhoraji 

Junagarh 

Maliya 

Jetpur 

Somnath 

Figure 4-1: Physiography of the Project Area 

Malia 

Miyana 

Padadhari 

Wankaner 

Rajkot 

Lodhika 

Kotda Sangani 

The project region in the Rajkot district falls in Bhadar River Plain. The geological structure of this 

region is composed of Deccan Trap and Trap Dykes. The geological structure of Junagadh 

district consists mainly of Alluvium, blown sand in the Junagadh Coastal Plain. Small tracts of 

Dwarka beds, Nari and Gaj Series, Sub-Nummulitic Beds, Deccan Trap and Inter-Trappean Beds 

are also observed in this region. It has Oethids-Aquepts and Orthents-Ochrepts types of soil 

cover. 

Talala 

Morbi 

Gondal 

Una 

Jasdan 

4-3





GEOLOGY 

ROCKS 

Recent: Alluvium, Blown Sand & Miliolite Sand. 

Sub-Recent Pleistocene: Limestones, Sandstones, 

Shales and Laterite & Bauxite 

Upper Cretaceous to Palaeocene: Diorites, Basic 

Intrusives. 

Deccan Trap: Felsite, Rhyolite & Pitchstone 

Flows,Basalts Andesite, Trachyte Flows. 

Holocene Deposits 

Mesozolcs 

Sea 

Porbandar 

Ranavav 

Buffer Zone (Upto 15 km 

from corridor) 


MINERALS 

Mangrol 

Bauxite Chalk Lead / Zinc / Copper 

Calcite Ochre Sandstone & Other building stone 

Gypsum Salt Quartz and silica sand 

Limestone Agate 

Fire Clay Nepheline Syenite 

5 0 5 

Kilometre 

10 15 

4.3.3 Soil 


Arabian Sea 

VOLUME III: 


Upleta 

Vanthli 

Manavadar 

Padadhari 

Lodhika 

Somnath 

Jetpur 

Rajkot 

Wankaner 

Kotda Sangani 

Gondal 

Jam Kandorna 

chorwad 

Figure 4-2: Geology of the Project Area 

The geographical formation of Saurashtra region is of volcanic origin, hence the soils of Rajkot 

district are derived from trap rock. The land of the project region that falls in Rajkot district is 

mainly divided into two types: 

Salty land is mainly the type of land in Morbi and Maliya and black, loamy soil is mainly present 

in Jetpur and Dhoraji talukas. The soil of the project region that falls in Jetpur taluka is red soil. In 

Junagadh district, the soils are formed partly from sedimentary rocks and partly from igneous 

rocks. They are calcareous in nature, rich in potassium content but deficient in nitrogen and 

humus. The main types of soils in the district are black, medium black, alluvial soil in the lowlying 

area, calcareous and brackish. The black soil is found in parts of Vanthali, Manavdar and 

Keshod talukas excepting the Ghed area. Most of the villages in Junagadh, Malia talukas have 

medium black soil. The alluvial soil in the low-lying area, known as ‘Ghed’, comprises parts of 

Keshod, Mangrol and remains inundated during monsoon. The brackish soils are mostly found 

near the coastal belt of Mangrol, Malia and Veraval talukas and represent the degeneration of 

Dhoraji 

Junagarh 

Maliya 

Talala 

Malia 

Miyana 

Morbi 

Una 

Jasdan 

4-4





VOLUME III: 


coastal alluvial soil due to ingress of sea water. The different soil types in the project region have 

been depicted in Figure 4-3. 

SOIL 

SOIL TYPES: 

Salorthids 

Ustorthents 

Ustipsamments 

Ustochrepts 

Ustropepts 

Chromusterts 

Orthids 

Orthents 

Sea 

Porbandar 

Ranavav 

Buffer Zone (Upto 15 km from corridor) 



4.3.4 Land Use 

Arabian Sea 

5 0 5 10 15 

Kilometre 

Upleta 

Manavadar 

Mangrol 

Jam Kandorna 

Dhoraji 

Somnath 

Malia 

Miyana 

Padadhari Rajkot 

Wankaner 

Lodhika 

Kotda Sangani 

Jetpur 

Junagarh 

Vanthli 

chorwad 

Maliya 

Talala 

Figure 4-3: Soil of the Project Area 

The geographical area in the two districts can be divided into two major classes: arable land: that 

includes net sown area, fallow land and non-arable land: that includes forest, area not available 

for cultivation and other uncultivable land excluding current fallow. The proposed alignment runs 

through two districts, major portion being through Junagadh. The alignment mainly runs through 

agriculture land; water bodies in the form of ponds, rivers and canals also fall within the proposed 

Right of Way (ROW). At places, the alignment also runs through a few settlements and 

structures. 

Morbi 

Gondal 

Una 

Jasdan 

4-5





VOLUME III: 


The land use on either side of the cross roads is mostly agricultural, only at certain locations 

structures are being affected. The locations where comparatively more number of structures are 

present along the alignment are – Jetpur, Junagadh, Vanthali and Somnath. The land use of the 

project corridor is shown in Figure 4-4. 

LANDUSE 

Arable Land Irrigated 

Open Scrub 

Unculturable Waste Land 

Forest 

Urban Settlements 

Water Bodies 

Arable Land Unirrigated 

Sea 


Porbandar 



Ranavav 

5 0 5 10 15 

Kilometre 

Arabian Sea 

Upleta 


Mangrol 

chorwad 

Jam Kandorna 

Dhoraji 

Somnath 

Malia 

Miyana 


Junagarh 

Maliya 

Figure 4-4: Land use of the Project Corridor 

Jetpur 

Wankaner 

Lodhika 

Kotda Sangani 

The total landuse of the project corridor within the RoW is broadly classified and presented in 

Table 4-1. 

Table 4-1: Landuse in the Project RoW 

S. No. Land Use % To Total 

1 Agriculture 38.3 

2 Commercial 15.6 

3 Residential 13.8 

4 Mixed 32.3 

Total 100 

Talala 

Morbi 

Gondal 

Una 

Jasdan 

4-6





4.4 AIR ENVIRONMENT 

4.4.1 Climate and Meteorology 

VOLUME III: 


The climate of both the districts is characterized by a hot summer and dryness in the non-rainy 

seasons. The cold season from December to February is followed by the hot season from March 

to May. The south-west monsoon season is from June to September and is followed by the post 

monsoon season from October to November. 

Meteorological data has been collected from three meteorological stations of the IMD nearest to 

the site – Rajkot, Keshod (Junagadh) and Veraval (Junagadh). 

Temperature: The mean maximum temperature in the region reaches 41C in the warmer 

months from March to June. During the winter season, in December-January, the minimum 

temperature dips to 12.2C and the maximum temperature remains around 29C. The lowest 

average monthly minimum temperature is around 21C. The average monthly maximum and 

minimum temperature of the project region as recorded during the period 2007 by the Indian 

Meteorological Department (IMD) is presented in Table 4-2 below. 

Table 4-2: Temperature of the Project Region 

Months 

Rajkot 

Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 

Mean Minimum 12.2 16.9 18.8 22.9 25.9 27 25.6 24.5 24.2 21.7 19.2 14.1 

Mean Maximum 

Keshod 

28.9 32.1 35.6 41.1 41.2 38.1 33.3 31.6 33.2 35.8 34.4 29.7 

Mean Minimum 12.3 16.2 18.2 22.7 25.9 - - - - - - - 

Mean Maximum 

Veraval 

29.3 32 35.5 38.6 36.6 - - - - - - - 

Mean Minimum 16.2 18.9 20.4 24 27 27.7 27.7 25.7 25.9 23.1 21.1 18 

Mean Maximum 30 30.1 32.9 33.5 32.3 33.3 31.6 29.9 31.3 34.2 33.4 30.7 

Based on IMD Observation from 2007 

Humidity: The maximum humidity is observed to be 92.00 percent (Veraval) during the month of 

August. The minimum humidity is recorded at Rajkot (26 percent) during the month of January. 

The monthly variation of humidity in the project region is presented in Table 4-3 below. 

Table 4-3: Monthly Average Humidity of the Project Region (in %) 

Time (hrs) 

Rajkot 

Jan Feb Mar Apr May 

Months 

Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 

8.30 55 79 62 76 76 80 88 91 89 72 74 66 

17.30 

Keshod 

26 36 22 19 32 56 69 76 65 35 36 36 

8.30 

Veraval 

56 68 54 68 69 - - - - - - - 

8.30 54 73 60 73 82 84 88 92 86 65 67 58 

17.30 51 64 67 72 74 80 85 88 80 65 68 54 


4-7





VOLUME III: 


Rainfall: Maximum rainfall occurs under the influence of the South West monsoons (June- 

September). The annual rainfall is around 1097mm. The rainfall and temperature of the project 

area is depicted in Figure 4-5. 

Table 4-4: Rainfall in the Project Districts (in mm)] 

Station 

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 

Months 

July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 

Rajkot 0 1 0 0.1 0 195.4 372.6 521.4 324.7 0 29.2 0 

Keshod 0 4.2 0 0 0 - - - - - - - 

Veraval 0 0.5 0 0 0 211.3 142.2 1097.2 255.8 0 0 0 


Wind Speed: The most predominant wind speed in the region is 1-19 Kmph. Wind speed above 

62 kmph is not found to occur, those in the range of 20-61 kmph is also rare for Keshod. Calm (0 

kmph) conditions also prevail in Veraval. 

Months 

Jan 

Feb 

Mar 

Apr 

May 

Jun 

Jul 

Aug 

Sept 

Oct 

Nov 

Dec 

Table 4-5: Wind Speed in the Project Region 

No of days with Wind Speed (Kmph) 

Keshod Veraval 

62 or more 20-61 1-19 0 62 or more 20-61 1-19 0 


- 3 27 1 - 3 22 6 

- - - - - 4 27 - 

- 3 25 - - - 28 - 

- - - - - 11 17 - 

- 3 28 - - 2 29 - 

- - - - - 16 15 - 

- - 30 - - 1 24 5 

- - - - - 17 13 - 

- 10 21 - - 4 26 1 

- - - - - 15 16 - 

- - - - - 14 14 2 

- - - - - 20 10 - 

- - - - - 22 8 1 

- - - - - 25 6 - 

- - - - - 15 9 7 

- - - - - 17 14 - 

- - - - - 2 18 10 

- - - - - 6 24 - 

- - - - - - 31 - 

- - - - - 10 19 2 

- - - - - - 24 6 

- - - - - 5 23 2 

- - - - - 4 26 1 

- - - - - 2 29 - 

4-8





VOLUME III: 


Table 4-6: Mean Wind Speed (Kmph) 

Station 

Jan Feb Mar Apr May 

Months 

Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 

Keshod 11.54 11.42 13.35 12.6 17.03 - - - - - - - 

Veraval 12.16 13.49 15.15 14.5 15.2 20.3 25.15 19.64 10.8 11.68 9.9 13.795 


CLIMATIC CONDITIONS 

RAINFALL 

(in mm) 

Above 600 

500 - 600 

Below 500 

Sea 


Mean Maximum temperature Summer 

Mean Minimum temperature Winter 

Taluka Boundry 

4.4.2 Air Quality 

Porbandar 


5 0 5 10 15 

Kilometre 

Ranavav 

40 C 

O 

Arabian Sea 

Upleta 


Mangrol 

40 C 

O 

Jam Kandorna 

Dhoraji 

10 C 

chorwad 

O 

Somnath 

12.5 C 

Malia 

Miyana 

O 

40 C 


Junagarh 

Maliya 

Figure 4-5: Climate of the Project Area 

Jetpur 

O 

Wankaner 

Lodhika 

Kotda Sangani 

The air polluting sources in the project region primarily consist of industries and the vehicles 

plying on the roads. A total of ten (10) ambient air monitoring stations were identified based on 

the different existing land use pattern to study the ambient air quality along the project corridor. 

The ambient air quality in the corridor was found to be in compliance with the ambient air quality 

norms stipulated by CPCB/GPCB. The ambient air quality monitoring stations have been 

depicted in Figure 4-6. 

Talala 

Morbi 

Gondal 

Una 

Jasdan 

4-9





LEGEND: 

To Porbandar 

Existing Road 

Proposed Alignment 

Railway Line 

Taluka Boundary 

District Boundary 

River 

Air Quality 

Waterbody 

Forest 

JUNAGADH 

DISTRICT 

State Highway 

To Porbandar 

To Porbandar 

Kanza village 

(Ch. 61+200) 

Agatral village 

RF 

T-Juction 

(yogiraj motor) 

(Ch. 36+500) 

Vanthali village 

(Ch. 45+800) 

AQ-7 

(Ch. 62+200) AQ-8 

Panidhra village 

(Ch. 84+700) 

AQ-9 

RAJKOT 

DISTRICT 

VOLUME III: 


T-Juction 

(jaydeep El.) 

(Ch. 27+000) 

AQ-5 

AQ-6 

Vivekanand 

Sillicate ind. 

Keshod Town 

T- Junction 

(Ch. 126+700) 

Jetpur Bypass 

(Ch. 0+100) 

Jetalsar high school 

(Ch. 24+900) AQ-3 

AQ-10 

AQ-4 

Figure 4-6: Air Quality Monitoring stations 

AQ-1 

(Ch. 7+900) AQ-2 

GIRNAR 

RESERVE FOREST 

GIR RESERVE 

FOREST 

To Rajkot 

NH 8B 

To Bhavnagar 

4-10





The results of ambient air quality monitoring are as follows: 

Monitoring 

Location & 

Code 

Chainage 

(km) 

Jetpur Bypass 0+100 

Jetalsar 

Highschool 

Vivekanand 

silicate Ind. 

T-Junction 

(Jaydeep 

Electricals) 

T-Junction 

(Yogiraj Motor) 

Vanthali 

Village 

VOLUME III: 


Table 4-7: Ambient Air Quality Results 

Pollutant Concentration (μg/m3) 

Location Area 

24 hourly mean values 

Reference Category 

RSPM TSPM SO2 NO2 HC CO 

Start point of 

Jetpur Bypass 

after crossing 

Jetpur taking NH- 

8B and near the 

junction where 

the road goes 

towards Jetpur 

City, near the 

Dye and Polymer 

Industry.* 

7 + 900 Shops at Jetalsar Residential 

& Rural 

24 + 900 

27 + 000 

36 + 500 

Kanza Village 61 + 200 

Agatrai Village 62 + 200 

Panidhra 

Village 

Vivekananda 

Silicate Industry 

At the T Junction 

continuing from 

Jungadh Bypass 

where one road 

goes to Dhoraji 

on the RHS and 

and the other 

road goes to 

Junagadh city on 

LHS 

End of Junagadh 

Bypass at the T 

Junction where 

the road on RHS 

goes to Keshod 

and on the LHS 

goes to Jungadh 

City 

45 + 800 Vanthili Junction* 

84 +700 

At the Junction 

near Kanza 

Village 


near Agatrai 

Village* 


near Panidhra 

Village 

Industrial 184.73 354.55 13.28 22.05 Nil 763 

152.39 286.27 11.87 18.33 Nil 1526 

Industries 121.89 230.05 9.02 13.67 Nil 1335 

Residential 

& Rural 

Residential 

& Rural 

Residential 

& Rural 

Residential 

& Rural 

Residential 

& Rural 

Residential 

& Rural 

190.63 399.92 16.95 28.4 Nil 1144 

183.97 384.88 14.53 24.54 Nil 1526 

159.04 287.44 15.7 22.86 Nil 1335 

167.48 310.93 10.67 16.33 Nil 1526 

170.84 327.85 12.27 20.02 Nil 1144 

139.11 275.54 11.16 16.38 Nil 1716 

4-11





Monitoring 

Location & 

Code 

Chainage 

(km) 

T-Junction 126 + 700 

NAAQ Norms* 

(8/24 hourly 

Mean) 

Location 

Reference 

At T Junction 

near Somnath 

where the road 

on RHS goes to 

Somnath and on 

LHS goes to 

Bhavnagar* 

Area 

Category 

Residential 

& Rural 

VOLUME III: 


Pollutant Concentration (μg/m3) 

24 hourly mean values 

RSPM TSPM SO2 NO2 HC CO 

147.26 274.92 12.24 15.72 Nil 1335 

150 500 120 120 

The TSPM range is 230.00μg/Nm 3 to 399.00 μg/Nm 3 . The total particulate concentration at 50% 

of location is less than 288 μg/Nm 3 . The higher concentration of TSPM at some locations is due 

to higher concentration of RSPM in the ambient. In most of the samples, RSPM is 50% higher 

than the prescribed standard. All gaseous pollutants viz. SO2, NO2, HC and CO are well within 

the prescribed limit. 

4.5 WATER ENVIRONMENT 

Surface Water: The project region falls in Rajkot 

and Junagadh district. Junagadh district is 

prosperous in water on account of rivers, reservoirs 

and lakes. The principal rivers of the district falling 

along the project region are Uben, Ojat, Hiren, 

Meghal and Raval. The slope of the district is 

towards south. The rivers that cross the project 

road are– Uben river at Ch 14/200, Lol river at Ch 

29/200, Sonrakh river at Ch 30/800, Kalve river at 

Ch 35/000, Vali river at Ch 47/000, Ozat river at Ch 

48/000, Badodari river at Ch 61/100, Meghal river at 

Devka River Crossing the Project Road 

Ch 102/000 and Devka river at Ch 117/000. All the rivers are non perennial, rainfed. The rivers 

are used for washing and cleaning. The hydrology of the project area is depicted in Figure 4-8. 

Ground Water: As per the discussion with the officials of Gujarat Pollution Control Board, the 

talukas falling in the project of both Rajkot and Junagadh districts are in Grey zone (restricted 

zone). This categorization is attributed to the level of extraction of ground water against 

increased domestic, industrial and irrigation requirements. The extraction is higher in the region 

of Saurashtra. 

In the year 2002, both the districts were categorised as Grey zone and the availability of the 

ground water along the corridor varied between from 5 to 20 m below ground level (bgl) during 

pre-monsoon (May 2002), while during post monsoon (November 2002) it has varied from less 

than 5 to 10 m bgl . Ground water depth mostly depends on aquifer geology, geomorphology and 

4-12





VOLUME III: 


rainfall. South-West monsoon is the main source of ground water recharge for the entire area of 

the corridor. Ground water is also a source of irrigation in the area. Drinking water is available 

through borewell. 

Table 4-8: Depth to ground water level along the corridor 

S.No. District Taluka 

Depth to Water level (mbgl) 

Pre Monsoon (May 2002) Post Monsoon (November 2002) 

1 Rajkot Jetpur Greater than 20 m Greater than 20 m 

2 Junagadh Junagadh Greater than 20 m Greater than 20 m 

2 Junagadh Vanthali 10 – 20 m 5 – 10 m 

3 Junagadh Keshod 10 – 20 m 5 – 10 m 

4 Junagadh Mangrol Greater than 20 m 5 – 10 m 

5 Junagadh Malia 10 – 20 m 5 – 10 m 

6 Junagadh Veraval 5 – 20 m 5 – 10 m 

Source: Central Ground Water Board 

Water Quality: The water quality of Uben, Lol, Ozat, Megal and Devka rivers were taken for 

monitoring the surface water quality. Borewells are the major source of water for drinking and 

other domestic purposes in villages and towns. Samples from borewells at Sahajanand Swami 

Gurukul, at the junction near Panidhra Village and Jetpur Industrial Area have been taken for 

detailed analysis. The monitoring stations have been depicted in Figure 4-7. 

4-13





LEGEND: 

JUNAGADH 

DISTRICT 

To Porbandar 

Existing Road 


Railway Line 



River 

Water Quality 

Waterbody 

Forest 

State Highway 

To Porbandar 

To Porbandar 

Badodari River 

(Ch. 61+100) 

RF 

Meghal River 

(Ch. 102+000) 

Ozat River 

(Ch. 48+000) 

WQ-7 

Vali River 

(Ch. 47+000) 

WQ-8 

RAJKOT 

DISTRICT 

Lol River 

(Ch. 29+200) 

Sonrakh River 

(Ch. 30+800) 

Kalve River 

(Ch. 35+000) 

WQ-6 

Devka River 

(Ch. 117+000) 

VOLUME III: 


Keshod Town 

Uben River 

(Ch. 14+200) 

WQ-2 

WQ-3 

WQ-4 

WQ-5 

WQ-9 

WQ-1 

GIRNAR 


Figure 4-7: Water Quality monitoring stations 

GIR RESERVE 

FOREST 

To Rajkot 

NH 8B 

To Bhavnagar 

N 

4-14





The results of the water quality analysis are given in Table 4-9 and Table 4-10. 

VOLUME III: 


Table 4-9: Water Quality Results 

Sl. 

No. Parameter 

River 

UBEN LOI OZAT MEGAL DEVKA 

Sahajanand 

Swami 

Gurukul 

Borewell 

At the 

Junction 

near 

Panidhra 

Village 

Jetpur 

Industrial 

Area 

CPCB 

Norms 

for 

Surface 

Waters 

IS:10500 

Norms 

for 

Drinking 

Waters 

1 Colour Clear Colour Less 

2 Odour Odour Less 

3 Turbidity 

(NTU) 

None 5 

4 ph (Unit) 7.7 7.36 7.72 7.8 7.9 7.58 7.4 7.78 

5 Temperature 

(Deg. C) 

6 

7 

8 

Total 

Dissolved 

Solids (mg/l) 

Ether Soluble 

(Oil & Greece) 

Total 

Hardness as 

CaCO3 

(mg/l) 

9 Chloride 

(mg/l) 

10 Sulphate 

(mg/l) 

11 Phosphate 

(mg/l) 

12 

Bio Chemical 

Oxygen 

Demand (3 

Days at 27 C) 

(mg/l) 

28 31 33 32 31 32 32 31 40 

5.5 to 

9.0 

6.5-8.5 

593 571 445 480 266 925 1080 1430 2100 2000 

NIL 

198 170 112 112 92 258 295 325 300 

124 208 172 168 86 335 380 482 1000 1000 

48 61 51 40 38 110 118 154 1000 400 

1 2 1 2 2 5.0 

NIL 

13 Lead (mg/l) NIL 0.1 0.05 

14 Arsenic (mg/l) NIL 0.2 0.05 

15 Iron (mg/l) NIL 1.0 

16 

Total 

Coliforms 

(CFU/100 ml) 

NIL 

17 E. Coli Absent 

Source: Monitoring and Analysis by Vaibhav Enviro Consltants, Ahmedabad 

Table 4-10: On-Site Sea Water Quality Monitoring Results (Arabian Sea near Somnath Temple) 

Sl No Parameters Concentration 

1 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) 6.84 

2 Temperature (deg C) 24 

3 pH 7.11 

4 Oil and Grease (either soluble) (mg/l) Nil 

5 COD (mg/l) 20 

4-15





VOLUME III: 


Sl No Parameters Concentration 

6 BOD (mg/l) BDL 

7 Total Hardness (mg/l) 7400 

8 Chloride (mg/l) 18504 

9 Sulphate (mg/l) 4608 

10 Phospate (mg/l) 7.0 

11 Turbidity None 

12 Lead (mg/l) BDL 

13 Iron (mg/l) BDL 

14 Arsenic BDL 

15 Total Coliforms (CFU/100 ml) 17 

Source: Sampling and Analysis by Vaibhav Enviro Consltants, Ahmedabad 

HYDROLOGY & IRRIGATION 

GROUND WATER POTENTIAL 

3 

(Yield in M hour) 

20-50 Discontinuous aquifers with 

limited thickness down to 300m or more 

5-20 Groundwater restricted to weathered residium 

tracture zone having secondary porosity. 

Sea 

Reservoir 

Sandstone, Shale conglomerate 

Limestone, Grit 

Blast with intertrappean Clay 

GROUND WATER HYDROLOGY 

15 




Direction of groundwater flow 

Water Table Contour (m.a.msl.) 

Well, Tube-well Spring 

Canal 

Hard Rock Area 

Saline Rock Area 

10 

Porbandar 

120 

Ranavav 

Arabian Sea 

5 0 5 10 15 

Kilometre 

5 

15 

20 

Upleta 


10 

Mangrol 

10 

15 

15 

Somnath 

Malia 

Miyana 

10 


80 

Lodhika 

80 

10 

15 

10 

20 

40 

160 

10 

80 

Wankaner 

Gondal 

Jam Kandorna Kotda Sangani 

chorwad 

Figure 4-8: Hydrology of the Project Area 

Dhoraji 

Junagarh 

Surface Water: The pH value ranged between 7.36-7.90. TDS content ranged between 170- 

1430 mg/l while Chloride values ranged from 86 to 482 mg/l respectively, well below the 

tolerance limits. Iron content is found to be nil. There is no significant presence of trace metals in 

Maliya 

Jetpur 

Talala 

Morbi 

5 

120 

Una 

Jasdan 

4-16





VOLUME III: 


the surface waters. There is no faecal contamination as the Total Coliform bacteria and E.Coli 

are nil. Nil turbidity indicates that there is no sediment load in the water bodies and negligible soil 

erosion. Oil and grease, toxic constituents like phenolic compounds and cyanides are found to be 

absent. 

While comparing with the CPCB Norms for Surface Waters, all parameters are found to be within 

the standard limits. 

Ground Water: The ground water sources had agreeable colour, taste and odour. The pH value 

ranged between 7.40-7.78, generally above the neutral mark and within the permissible limits for 

drinking water. TDS value ranged between 31-32 mg/l, in some stations and is within the 

permissible limit for drinking water (500 mg/l). Chloride values ranged from 335mg/l to 482 mg/l, 

iron content was nil, thus within permissible limits. BOD is also absent. There is no significant 

bacteriological contamination of these sources. Total alkalinity is found to be within the 

permissible limits. Total Hardness ranged between 258-325 mg/l and exceeds the limit in Jetpur 

Industrial Area. Heavy metals like iron, zinc, arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium and 

selenium are absent. 

In general, the ground water quality in the project corridor is found to be in compliance with 

IS:10500 Standard for Drinking Water. 

4.6 NOISE ENVIRONMENT 

4.6.1 Noise Quality 

To assess background noise levels in the study area, ambient noise monitoring is conducted. A 

total of fourteen (14) locations were identified along the project road, based on different 

categories of area. 

Ambient noise level or sound pressure levels (SPL) are measured by a portable sound level 

meter having built in facilities to read noise level directly in dB(A). From the SPL values, 

equivalent continuous sound pressure level values (Leq) are calculated. Noise measurement is 

conducted as per IS: 4954 as adopted by CPCB. 

Ambient noise level monitoring has been carried out during October 2008. At each location 

monitoring was conducted continuously over a period of twenty- four hours to obtain Leq values 

at uniform time intervals of 1 hour. Description of the noise monitoring stations and the Leq 

values at each station are given in Table 4-11. 

The noise monitoring stations have been depicted in Figure 4-9 

4-17





LEGEND: 

To Porbandar 

Existing Road 


Railway Line 



River 

Noise Quality 

Waterbody 

Forest 

JUNAGADH 

DISTRICT 

State Highway 

To Porbandar 

To Porbandar 

Swami Narayan 

Gurukul 

(Ch. 45+300) 

Vanthali Juction 

(Ch. 45+300) 

Kanya Chatralay 

(Ch. 59+400) 

JS-6 

JS-7 

RF 

JS-8 

Nr. School In 

Manekawada 

(Ch. 61+200) JS-9 

Agatrai Village 

(Ch. 62+200) JS-10 

Srijarka School 

(Ch. 99+900) 

Vinoba Vidya Mandir 

(Ch. 106+400) 

Saraswati Vidya Mandir 

(Ch. 107+900) 

JS-11 

RAJKOT 

DISTRICT 

BabyLand School 

(Ch. 34+700) 

JS-12 

JS-13 

T- Junction(Bhavnagar 

Verval-somnath) 

(Ch. 126+700) 

VOLUME III: 


Alpha Vidya School 

(Ch. 24+900) 

JS-5 

Keshod Town 

JS-14 

Jetpur Bypass 

(Ch. 0+100) 

Jetalsar high school 

JS-1 

(Ch. 7+900) JS-2 

Krishna Garden Hotel 

(Ch. 22+700) 

JS-4 

Figure 4-9: Noise quality Monitoring Stations 

JS-3 

GIRNAR 


GIR RESERVE 

FOREST 

To Rajkot 

NH 8B 

To Bhavnagar 

N 

4-18





VOLUME III: 


Table 4-11: Noise Quality Results 

Noise Levels, dB(A) 

Sl. 

No. 

Location 

MoEF 

Category 

Day Time 

(06:00-22:00 hrs.) 

Night Time 

(22:00-06:00 hrs.) 

Overall 

Leqmin. Leqmax. Leqmin. Leqmax. Leqmin. Leqmax. 

JS1 Jetpur Bypass Industrial 37.1 75.1 34.0 68.6 34.0 75.1 

JS2 Shree Jetalsar High School Commercial 40.5 77.2 33.4 67.6 33.4 77.2 

JS3 Krishna Garden Hotel Commercial 44.7 78.5 36.8 71.9 36.8 78.5 

JS4 Alpha Vidhya School Residential 43.2 73.2 36.8 73.2 36.8 73.2 

JS5 Babyland School Commercial 43.2 72.3 36.1 63.2 36.1 72.3 

JS6 Swaminarayan Gurukul Residential 39.1 70.2 30.4 76.3 30.4 76.3 

JS7 Vanthili Junction Commecrial 40.5 87.0 33.4 70.8 33.4 87.0 

JS8 Kanya Chatralay Residential 40.5 69.2 34.0 65.1 34.0 69.2 

JS9 Nr. School in Manekwada Residnetial 34.0 65.8 33.2 57.2 33.2 65.8 

JS10 Agatrai Village Commercial 40.3 72.9 37.6 66.4 37.6 72.9 

JS11 Srijarka School Residential 40.5 69.2 34.0 65.1 34.0 69.2 

JS12 Vinoba Vidhya Mandir Residential 34.8 74.8 34.2 54.0 34.2 74.8 

JS13 Saraswati Vidhya Mandir Residential 37.2 68.6 34.9 58.5 34.9 68.6 

JS14 

T-Junction (Bhavnagar - 

Veraval - Somnath) 

Commercial 34.4 71.8 33.8 68.3 33.8 71.8 

Leq Day Norms* for Residential Areas 55 45 - 

Leq Norms* for Commercial Areas 65 55 - 

Overall the Leq noise level range is 33.4 to 87.0 dB(A). During daytime, the noise level ranges 

from 34-87 dB(A). During the night time, the Leq range is 30 to 76.3 dB(A). The higher noise 

levels have been observed in commercial areas. 

4.7 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT 

4.7.1 Terrestrial Ecology 

a) Forests 

No reserve forests are identified within the direct influence area of the project corridor. Details of 

the forests in project influence area i.e., at the district level are provided below. 

The forest areas of Gujarat are unevenly distributed. The major concentration of forests is found 

all along the eastern border of the state and the hilly portion of Saurashtra. The forests are found 

mainly in the district Junagadh. Tropical Dry Deciduous Forests thrive in the region having the 

rainfall between 600 mm to 1200 mm. These forests are found in the central part of the state in 

parts of Saurashtra in the districts of Junagadh. Northern Tropical Thorn Forests occur in the 

region with less than 600 mm rainfall. These forests are found in Rajkot and Junagadh districts. 

These forests contain spare and stunted growth of species like Acacia and thorn bushes etc. 

Littoral and Swamp Forest, Mangrove forest are found in the coastal creeks in the districts of 

Junagadh. The main species found in these forests is Avicenia sp. Out of 207 subtypes of 

forests, recorded by Champion and Seth, 31 subtypes, (14.7%) have been identified in the state. 

4-19





VOLUME III: 


b) Sensitive Ecological Habitats/ Ecosystems in the Indirect Influence Area 

No sensitive ecological habitats or ecosystems are identified within the direct influence area of 

the project corridor. Girnar Forest, Gir National Park and Gir Wildlife Sanctuary are the three 

sensitive ecological habitats in the indirect influence area. The details are discussed below. 

Girnar Forest: This forest is about 1km away from the project road (aerial distance). Moreover, 

this stretch of the existing road is proposed to be bypassed (Junagadh Bypass) in the opposite 

direction (right side) while the forest falls in the left side. The chief glory of Junagadh lies in the 

hills. The hills Karakio (593.14 metres) mounts guard over Visavadar, the hills Dundvies with 

Ratno (494.69 metres) and elsewhere. Lapla, Rozmal, Hadulidhar and Sayo breast the upper air. 

Then follow magnificent mass of the Mt. Girnar (1,117.4 metres) with its rugged sides with Datar 

(847.07 metres), the Lasa Pavadi (770.23 metres) and the Bhensla (697.99 metres). 

The Gir – is far from the project road (more than 15 km away). The largest compact tract of dry 

deciduous forests in the semi-arid western part of India is the last abode of the Asiatic lion 

(Panthera leo persica). The sanctuary is internationally acclaimed for successfully saving this 

precious species from the brink of extinction. It was declared as a sanctuary in 1965. 

Subsequently, an area of 258.71 sq. km. was declared a National Park. 

Gir has a topography made up of succession of rugged ridges, isolated hills, plateaus and 

valleys. Besides being the last abode of Asiatic lions, Gir forms a unique habitat for ratel, rusty 

spotted cat, pangolin, ruddy mongoose, civets, paradise flycatcher etc. There is an overwhelming 

presence of the omnipotent big cat and bird population. 

Flora & Fauna of the forests: Teak, dudhlo, khair, ber, desi baval, dhav, hermo, sadad, timru, 

ashitro, saledi, modad, khakhro etc. Details of the flora of the study area are given in Annexure 

4.3. The Gir forests support a rich biodiversity comprising 32 species of mammals, 300 species 

of birds and 26 species of reptiles and thousands of species of insects. 

c) Flora and Fauna in the Study Area 

Flora: The flora in the project area comprises of roadside trees, fruit trees in certain villages 

besides the vegetables and crops grown in the agriculture lands. 

Roadside Plantation: A total of 18000 trees are present on either side of the project road. 

These include trees in Protected forest & non forest land (within existing ROW). There are about 

9500 trees on non forest land. The common tree species found along the roadside are given in 

Table 4-12. Fruit trees are observed in certain locations along the corridor: Guava, mango, 

coconut, Safeda and banana garden. 

Sl No 

Table 4-12: Road Side Tree Species 

Common Names Scientific Names 

1. Amla Emblica officinalis 

2. Arduso Ailanthus excelsa 

4-20





VOLUME III: 


Sl No Common Names Scientific Names 

3. Bor Zizyphus glabrata 

4. Desibaval Acacia nilotica 

5. Gando baval Prosopis juliflora 

6. Gundo Cordia dichotoma 

8. Jambu Syzygium cumini 

9. Karanj Derris indica 

10. Khair Acacia chundra 

11. Khajuri Phoenix sylvestris 

12. Khijdo Prosopis cineraria 

13. Limdo Azaditachta indica 

14. Mitosaragavo Moringa oleifera 

15. Piplo Ficus religiosa 

16 Rayan Manilkara hexandra 

17. Sag Tectona grandis 

18. Sisam Dalbergia latifolia 

19. Vad Ficus benghalensis 

Notified Protected Forests: The roadside trees along the project road (within the existing RoW) 

in certain stretches are notified as protected forests. About 67.325 km of the project road stretch 

comprises the notified Protected forests. In Rajkot division 800 trees are present while in 

Junagadh division 7744 trees are present in these Protected forest sections. Tree enumeration 

has been conducted by concerned forest officials in both the forest divisions. 

Chainagewise details have been provided below: 

Table 4-13: Protected Forest Stretches Along the Project Road 

Protected Forests Chainage Side Length of the road (km) 

Km 6 to Km 12.800 LHS & RHS 6.8 

Km 42.650 to Km 66.200 LHS & RHS 23.55 

Km 78.350 to Km 115.325 LHS & RHS 36.975 

Total Protected Forests - 67.325 

Fauna: Local Fauna in the project area includes reptiles like gecko, garden lizard owing to the 

large number of water bodies and fruit gardens in the area. Common animals like dogs, cats and 

cattle are also present. Avifauna includes peacock, myna, kingfisher, pigeon, kite, cattle, egret. 

4.7.2 Marine Ecology 

The fauna found in the coastal area are given in Table 4-14 below: 

Table 4-14: Faunal Biodiversity of the Coastal Area 

Sr.No. Type of Fauna Family Scientific Name Local Name 

1 Annelids Tachinidae Bonellia Bonellia 

2 Annelids Naididae Tubifex Tubifex 

3 Annelids Lumbricidae lumbricus terrestris Earth worm 

4 Coelenterates Fungiidae Fungia repanda Correlium [disc coral] 

5 Coelenterates Metridiidae Metridium senile Metridium 

4-21





VOLUME III: 


Sr.No. Type of Fauna Family Scientific Name Local Name 

6 Porifera Clionaidae Cliona celata Cliona 

7 Porifera Spongillidae Spongilla Spongilla 

8 Porifera Veneridae Mercenaria mercenaria Snail 

9 Mollusca Chitonidae Acanthopleura granulata Chiton 

10 Mollusca Arcidae Anadara granosa Blood clam 

11 Mollusca Sepiidae Sepia spp. Sepia 

12 Arthropods Diogenidae Diogenes pugilator Hermit crab 

13 Arthropods Pulicidae Xenopsylla cheopis Ratflea 

14 Arthropods Nephropidae Acanthacaris Lobster 

15 Arthropods Penaeidae Fenneropenaeus chinensis Fleshy prawn 

16 Arthropods Daphniidae Daphnia magna Daphnia 

17 Arthropods Ostreidae Crassostrea madrasensis, 

Pinctada spp. 

pearl oyster 

18 Arthropods Scorpionidae Heterometrus spinifer Scorpion 

19 Arthropods Sicariidae Loxosceles reclusa Brown Recluse Spider 

20 Fish Carcharhinidae Galeocerdo cuvier Tiger shark 

21 Fish Ray fish Potamotrygon motoro Trigon /motoro 

22 Fish Tetraodontidae Tetraodontidae Puffer fish 

23 Fish Synodontidae Synodus hoshinonis Lizard fish 

24 Fish Clarias / catfish 

25 Fish Synodontidae Harpadon nehereus Bombay duck 

26 Fish Bramidae 

Brama brama 

Pacific Pomfret 

Stromateidae 

Pampus Argentues 

Silver Pomfret 

27 Fish Pristidae Pristis pectinata Pristis / sawfish 

28 Fish Delphinidae Tursiops Dolphin shark 

29 Fish Squalidae Spiny dogfish, 

Squalus acanthias 

30 Fish Trachipteridae Scalloped ribbonfish, Zu 

cristatus 

Dogfish shark 

Ribbon fish 

31 Fish Holocentridae Sargocentron rubrum Red coat squirrel fish 

32 Fish Sciaenidae Otolithes spp Big mouth croaker fish 

33 Fish Clupeidae Tenualosa ilisha Hilsa 

Source: Study Report by Vaibhav Enviro Consultants, Ahmedabad 

However, it can be mentioned that no water body or cross drainage exists within the proposed 

right of way in CRZ area. 

Phytoplankton and Zooplankton 

Plankton is any of a large variety of organisms that drift in the pelagic zone of water bodies. 

Plankton that is able to undergo photosynthesis and other plantlike functions are called 

phytoplankton. Algae are phytoplanktons. Plankton that does not undergoes photosynthesis and 

act as consumers in the ecosystem is called zooplankton. 

Phytoplankton: This consists of autotrophic, prokaryotic or eukaryotic that lives near the water 

surface. 

4-22





VOLUME III: 


Zooplanktons: This consists of small protozoan or metazoans, larvae of large animals, such as 

fish, crustaceans, and annelids. 

During the survey and after detailed analysis of samples, following species of phytoplankton and 

zooplankton were identified and given in Table 4-15 below.: 

Table 4-15: Details of Different Species of Phytoplankton & Zooplankton 

S. No. Local Name Faimly Scientific Name 

1 Oscillatoria (Blue-green algae) Oscillatoria Oscillatoriaceae 

2 Oedogonium 

Oedogoniaceae Oedogonium foveolatum 

(Green algae) 

Wittrock 

3 Volvox (Protozoa) Volvocaceae Volvox aureus 

4 Spirogyra (Green algae) Zygnemataceae Spirogyra 

5 Microspora (Green algae) Mycotyphaceae Teratosphaeria microspora 

6 Amoeba (Protozoa) Amoebidae Amoeba proteus 

7 Anabaena 

(Blue-green algae) 

Nostocaceae Anabaena spiroides 

8 Pinnularia (Diatom) Pinnulariaceae Pinnularia Braunii 

9 Paramecium 

(Protozoa) 

Parameciidae Paramecium 

10 Vorticella (Protozoa) Vorticellidae Vorticella Linnaeus 

11 Closterium (Desmids) Closteriaceae Cylindrotheca closterium 

Source: Sampling and Analysis by Vaibhav Enviro Consultants, Ahmedabad 

Photographs of the different species found in the coastal area are provided in Annexure-4.2. 

Benthos 

Benthos are organisms which live on, in or near seabed, also known as the benthic zone. They 

live in or near marine sedimentary environments. Benthic organisms such as sea stars, oysters, 

clams, sea cucumbers, brittle stars etc are present in the study area. 

4.8 COASTAL REGULATION ZONE 

The western end of the corridor ends at Somnath near the temple close to the western coastline 

of Gujarat. 

As per the guidelines of Gujarat Coastal Zone Management Authority for obtaining CRZ 

clearance, a map clearly demarcating HTL and LTL along with other proposed activities, landuse 

within 5 km radius, latitude and longitude had been prepared by an external agency authorized 

by MOEF and submitted with the State Department, Gandhinagar. The CRZ locations for the 

project corridor have been presented in the map below. Recommendation for the project has 

beenr ecieved from the State Coastal Zone Management Authority. 

4-23





VOLUME III: 


Figure 4-10: Coastal Zone Locations along the Project Corridor 

4.9 SOCIAL & CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT 

4.9.1 Social Environment 

The project corridor passes through seven talukas and two Districts, namely Rajkot and 

Junagarh. 54 villages and 7 urban areas would be directly impacted, 5 in Rajkot and the 

remaining in Junagarh District. Details of each of the districts are presented in Table 4-16. Refer 

Annexure-4.1. 

Table 4-16: Number of Settlements along the Project Corridor 

S. No District Taluka Urban Village 

1 Rajkot Jetpur 1 5 

2 Junagadh Junagadh 1 19 

Vanthali 1 7 

Keshod 1 7 

Malia 1 6 

Mangrol 1 2 

Patan- Veraval 1 10 

Total 6 7 54 

4-24





VOLUME III: 


Figure 4-11: Number of Settlements along the Project Corridor 

4-25





VOLUME III: 


Therefore, in order to understand the socio-economic profile of the influence area of the project 

corridor, a micro-level analysis is essential. The aerial unit for analysis of the socio-economic 

profile of the influence area of the project corridor includes all traversed villages, urban and forest 

areas. Though the corridor passes through two administrative districts, for better appreciation, all 

socio-economic characteristics have been analyzed. 

4.10 SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE 

The socio-economic profile along the project corridor takes into account the social as well as the 

economic aspects: 

Population Distribution; 

Density of Population; 

Gender Ratio; 

Share of Vulnerable Groups and 

Literacy Rate 

Workforce Participation Ratio and 

Sector-wise Distribution of Workers 

4.10.1 Population Distribution 

The project influence area comprises of 7 talukas falling under two districts namely Rajkot and 

Junagadh. The growth rate of population in the project influence area is 3.17 % which is higher 

than the average growth rate of population in the state (2.06%). The highest population growth 

rate is 4.66% recorded in Veraval taluka of Junagadh district followed by 4.46% in Junagadh 

taluka. In rest of the talukas, growth ranges between1% to 2%. Jetpur taluka of Rajkot district 

has registered the lowest growth rate of 0.77%. Talukawise demographic characteristics in 

project influence area are presented in Table 4-17 

4-26





Figure 4-12: Population Distribution 

VOLUME III: 


4-27





VOLUME III: 


Table 4-17: Population Distribution in Talukas along the Project Corridor, 2001 

District Taluka 

1991 

Population 

2001 

AAGR (91-01) 

Rajkot Jetpur 122699 132423 0.77 

Rajkot 2514122 3169881 2.34 

Junagadh 

Junagadh 200703 310628 4.46 

Vanthali 41976 51987 2.16 

Keshod 89905 104251 1.49 

Mangrol 9735 11735 1.89 

Malia 30778 36941 1.84 

Veraval 141014 222458 4.66 

Junagadh 2394859 2448173 0.22 

Project Influence Area 636810 870423 3.17 

Gujarat State 41310000 50671017 2.06 

Source: Population Totals of Gujarat, Census of India, 2001 and 1991; Note: Figures are rounded of to first decimal place 

4.10.2 Population Density 

The project influence area has population density of 741 persons per sq.km in 1991 and 1012 

persons per sq.km in 2001. In 2001 the population density varies from 261 persons per sq.km to 

2017 persons per sq.km amongst all the talukas. Due to high population growth rate there had 

been a remarkable increase in the density of Veraval (1910 persons per sq.km) taluka of 

Junagadh district which experiences the highest density. (Table 4-18). 

Table 4-18: Population Distribution and Density along Project Corridor, 2001 

District Taluka Area (Sq Km) 

Population 

1991 2001 

Density (Persons/Sq Km) 

1991 2001 

Rajkot Jetpur 108.76 122699 132423 1128 1218 

Rajkot 11200.00 2514122 3169881 224 283 

Junagadh 

Junagadh 154.04 200703 310628 1303 2017 

Vanthali 143.97 41976 51987 292 361 

Keshod 167.72 89905 104251 536 622 

Mangrol 44.94 9735 11735 217 261 

Malia 123.94 30778 36941 248 298 

Veraval 116.48 141014 222458 1211 1910 

Junagadh 8800.00 2394859 2448173 272 277 

Project Influence Area 859.84 636810 870423 741 1012 

Gujarat State 196024.00 41310000 50671017 211 258 

Source: Census of India, 2001 

4-28





Figure 4-13: Population Density 

VOLUME III: 


4-29





4.10.3 Sex Ratio 

VOLUME III: 


As per the Census estimates (2001) number of Sex ratio (females /1000 male) of project 

influence area is 934 which is higher than the state average of 920. All the districts have shown a 

decrease in sex ratio from 1991-2001 (Refer Table 4-19). Amongst all the talukas, Malia taluka 

registered the highest sex ratio with an increase from 962 in 1991 to 964 in 2001 followed by 

Veraval. A decline in sex ratio is observed in five talukas of project influence area during 1991- 

2001 in accordance with the decline observed at state level. 

Table 4-19: Sex Ratio along Project Corridor, 2001 


1991 

Sex Ratio 

2001 

Rajkot Jetpur 922 906 

Rajkot 946 930 

Junagadh 

Junagadh 943 931 

Vanthali 914 911 

Keshod 929 933 

Mangrol 962 938 

Malia 962 964 

Veraval 961 956 

Junagadh 959 955 

Project Influence Area 940 934 

Gujarat State 934 920 

Source: Population Totals of Gujarat, Census of India, 2001 Note: Figures are rounded of to first decimal place 

4-30





Figure 4-14: Sex Ratio 

VOLUME III: 


4-31





4.10.4 Vulnerable Population 

VOLUME III: 


Distribution of scheduled caste and scheduled tribe population is presented in Table 4-20. The 

percentage distribution of scheduled caste is higher than scheduled tribes in project influence 

area. About 66846 SC (1.86 percent of the total SC population in the State) and 5398 ST 

population resides in the project influence area. Mangrol, Vanthali and Keshod Taluka has a 

higher percentage of SC population (percentage of SC population to total population in the state), 

ranging between 11 to 13 percent (Table 4-20) 

Table 4-20: Share of Vulnerable Groups along Project Corridor, 2001 


Population 2001 

SC ST 

% to Total Population 

SC ST 

Rajkot Jetpur 9114 208 6.88 0.16 

Rajkot District 244364 13163 7.71 0.42 

Junagadh 

Junagadh 22014 2690 7.09 0.87 

Vanthali 6566 101 12.63 0.19 

Keshod 11203 733 10.75 0.70 

Mangrol 1549 0 13.20 0.00 

Malia 3416 107 9.25 0.29 

Veraval 12984 1559 5.84 0.70 

Junagadh District 235624 18832 9.62 0.77 

Project Influence Area 66846 5398 7.68 0.62 

Gujarat State 3592715 7481160 7.09 14.76 

Source: Population Totals of Gujarat, Census of India, 2001 and 1991; 

Figure 4-15: Vulnerable Population 

4-32





4.10.5 Literacy Rate 

VOLUME III: 


As per the Census estimates (2001), 69 percent of the population are literate in the State, where 

as the average literate rate is lower (67 percent) in the project influence area. Within the project 

influence area, Junagadh taluka has the highest literacy rate (73 percent) followed by Jetpur (70 

percent) and Keshod (68 percent). The lowest literacy rate was observed in Malia (55 percent) 

and Veraval (59 percent) (Table 4-21). 

Table 4-21: Literacy Rate along Project Corridor, 2001 


Literates 

1991 2001 

Literacy Rate (%) 

1991 2001 

Rajkot Jetpur 74341 92772 61 70 

Rajkot district 1419681 2033946 56 74 

Junagadh 

Junagadh 133075 225781 66 73 

Vanthali 23501 32498 56 63 

Keshod 55200 70421 61 68 

Mangrol 5359 7180 55 61 

Malia 13758 20292 45 55 

Veraval 69441 130359 49 59 

Junagadh District 1217725 1408878 51 68 

Project Influence Area 374675 579303 59 67 

Gujarat State 21131400 29827750 51 69 


4-33





Figure 4-16: Literacy Rate 

VOLUME III: 


4-34





4.10.6 Workforce Participation 

VOLUME III: 


The given table describes the average annual growth rate and work participation rate at district 

and taluka level (within the project influence area). The average WPR in project influence area is 

34 percent in 2001. Mangrol of Junagadh district has the highest WPR (48 percent) followed by 

Malia (44 percent) and Vanthali (43 percent). The lowest WPR is recorded in Veraval (31 

percent) and Junagadh (32 percent), followed by Jetpur (34 percent). 

During the decadal period (1991-2001), the growth rate in the number of workers is observed to 

be higher (6 percent) in Mangrol, Malia and Veraval talukas of Junagadh district and lower (3 

percent) in Jetpur and Keshod talukas of Rajkot and Junagadh districts respectively. 

Table 4-22: Workforce Participation Ratio along Project Corridor, 2001 


Total Workers 

1991 2001 

AAGR of Workers 

(1991-01) 

WPR 

1991 2001 

Rajkot Jetpur 34778 44885 3 28 34 

Rajkot District Total 927237 1244806 3 37 39 

Junagadh 

Junagadh 59991 99231 5 30 32 

Vanthali 14957 22414 4 36 43 

Keshod 28126 38116 3 31 37 

Mangrol 3251 5631 6 33 48 

Malia 9552 16432 6 31 44 

Veraval 39170 69970 6 28 31 

Junagadh District Total 922375 1000842 1 39 41 

Project Influence Area 189825 296679 5 30 34 

Gujarat State 16620519 21255521 2 40 42 

Source: Population Totals of Gujarat, Census of India, 2001; Note: Figures are rounded of to first decimal place 

4-35





Figure 4-17: Workforce Participation 

VOLUME III: 


4-36





Type of Workers 

VOLUME III: 


Table 4-23 shows the types of workers in the project influence area. As per the Census estimates 

(2001), Jetpur taluka of Rajkot district has 91 percent of main workers. The percentage of main 

workers in the 6 talukas of Junagadh district within the project influence areas ranges between 

70 percent (in Mangrol) and 91 percent (in Junagadh). About 30 percent of total workers are 

marginal workers in Mangrol and Malia talukas of Junagadh district (Table 4-23). 

Table 4-23: Type of Workers within the Project Influence Area, 2001 


Main Workers 2001 

No. % 

Marginal Workers 2001 

No. % 

Rajkot Jetpur 40883 91 4002 9 

Rajkot District 1076436 86 168370 14 

Junagadh 

Junagadh 90052 91 9179 9 

Vanthali 18675 83 3739 17 

Keshod 31865 84 6251 16 

Mangrol 3950 70 1681 30 

Malia 11615 71 4817 29 

Veraval 62130 89 7840 11 

Junagadh District 785530 78 215312 22 

Project Influence Area 259170 87 37509 13 

Gujarat State 17025074 33.6 4230447 8.35 

Source: Population Totals of Gujarat, Census of India, 2001; Note: Figures are rounded of to first decimal place 

4.10.7 District wise land use 

District and Block wise land use is presented in the Table 4-24 below. 

District 

Table 4-24: Landuse along the Project Corridor 

District-wise Land Utilisation in Gujarat (2003-2004) 

Net Area 

Sown 

Gross Sown 

Area 

Net Irrigated 

Area 

Gross 

Irrigated 

Area 

(Hundred Hectares) 

% of Gross Irrigated 

to Gross Sown Area 

Junagadh 5238 6022 1231 1545 25.7 

Rajkot 7378 7559 1832 1984 26.2 

Gujarat 96779 107910 29944 35728 33.1 


The extent of Public Land adjacent to the project corridor was collected from the Department of 

Land Revenue. Knowledge of extent of land was required to restrict development within the 

public land and thereby reducing private land acquisition. 

4.10.8 Cultural Environment 

Baseline Information on Cultural Environment is presented for the project corridor. This includes 

heritage structures as well as those having local and regional significance. 

4-37





Protected Sites & Monuments 

VOLUME III: 


There are no significant protected sites or monuments in the immediate vicinity of the project 

corridor. Within the 10 km offset of the corridor the following monuments are of State level 

significance. Also the famous Somnath temple is about 500m away from the end point of the 

project road. The main temple is far from the road. 


Table 4-25: Protected and Conserved Monuments Located in the Project Districts 

Places of Interest / 

Religious 

Importance 

Distance 

(in KM) 

ASI protected Monuments 

Rajkot Dhoraji Dhoraji Fort 16.7 --- 

Junagadh 

Distance 

(in KM) 

Junagadh Uparkot 1.21 Ashokan Rock (Edicts) 2.15 

Junagadh Girnar Hill Temple 5.59 Baba Pyare, Khapra Kodia caves 

Junagadh Mahabat Makbara 0.3 --- 

Junagadh Gir Sanctuary 15.48 --- 

Junagadh Sakar Bagh Zoo 0.15 --- 

Junagadh Swaminarayan Mandir 0.12 --- 

Junagadh Damodar Kund 2.87 --- 

Manavadar Pipleshwar Mahadev --- 

Vanthali Step well 0.5 

Mangrol --- Jami Masjid 17.09 

Mangrol --- Bibi Masjid 

Mangrol --- Raveli Masjid 

Veraval Somnath Temple 1 --- 

Source: Google earth, Census of India handbook and internet. 

Cultural Properties of Local /Regional Significance 

There are about 45 religious structures that exist along the project road; most of them are 

situated within 30 m from the edge of the carriageway. 

4-38

5. PUBLIC CONSULTATION 

Public consultation has been taken up as an integral part of environmental assessment process 

throughout the project preparation stage of this project. 

5.1 INTRODUCTION 

Public consultation is a continuous two way communication process which involves promoting full 

public understanding of the project, its benefits, problems and solutions. Public consultation 

ensures participation of the project beneficiaries in decision making with respect to environment 

and social aspects. This contributes to the design considerations of the proposed project and is 

essentially a part of environmental and social assessment process. 

The process benefits both the project proponent and potentially affected communities. The 

significance of the Public Consultation process is discussed below: 

Educates the potentially impacted communities about the proposed course of action, the 

alternatives to it, the costs and benefits associated. 

Solicits the views of the potentially affected communities regarding impact on environmental 

components due to the project and their significance. 

Allow potentially affected communities to provide input into such matters as project design and 

selection of mitigation measures before irrevocable decisions are taken. 

Serves as an important tool for collecting information about the natural, social and cultural 

environment as certain information are only available through these interactive grass root level 

discussions. 

Since the residents have a much better knowledge of their circumstances, environment and living 

conditions, they sometimes contribute to the identification of new alternatives to the proposed 

alignment. 

Provides insight into public acceptance of the project within the Corridor of Impact. 

Helps in lessening public resistance to change by involving them in decision making. 

Consultation with community and their involvement at the project planning (screening) stage 

helped in informing and educating the stakeholders about the proposed action before the 

finalisation of design. It assisted in identifying the problems associated with the proposed project 

and the needs and values of the population likely to be impacted by the project. 

The minutes of the consultations carried out in respective locations is presented in the next 

section. 

The consultation process has been summarized in the following Table 5-1. 

Table 5-1: Details of the Consultations along the project corridor 

S.No. Date/Venue of Consultation/Participants Issues Raised Remarks 

25/11/2008 at Jetpur Bypass in District Rajkot at Land The villagers told that the land 

1 

Developer Office cum Farm- Naran Bhai K Patel-farmer, 

Rampariya Suresh-Building Developer, Rajnikanth B 

required for road development 

beyond the railway track has 

Ranparita- Builder, Rupesh Valiji Bhai-Developer, Virji Bhai many structures and thus it 

5-1





VOLUME III: 



2 

3 

4 

Vakeria-Farmer, Balvanth Bhai Jeena Dhami-Builder, Girish 

Kumar K Bhutani-Builder, Bhimji Bhai Patel-Owner of 

Patel,Harish Kumar Chandali-Secretary of Chambers of 

commerce 

Consultation at Jetpur bypass 

25/11/2008 at Village Vadala in district Junagadh at 

Panchayat Office- Pravin Bhai-Factory owner, Ashok Batuk 

Bhai-Pan shop owner, Bipin Bhai Chagan Bhai-Business, 

Ramesh Bhai Kapadiya-Business, Kanji Bhai Buta Bhai 

Gajera-Business, Vipul Bhai Kalu Kumbhani-Pan shop 

owner, Mansukh Bhai Mohan Bhai Dhumar-Shop, Ramesh 

Shirji Bhai Patoria-Business-Business, Kishor Bhai Natha 

Bhai Dhudhana-Resident cum Commercial Shop and 

Dinesh Bhai Takharsi Bhai Donaria-Commercial Godown 

Consultation at Village Vadala 

26/11/2008 in Village Agatrai in Keshod Taluka in Junagadh 

district at Sarpanch House- Hingora Iqbal Ibrahim- Pan 

Shop, Krishan Dhiraj Lal Maru-Barber, Harun Ala Rakha- 

Tea Shop, Kishan Bhaguandi Kataria-Garage, Chandu 

Govind- Barber, Chawda Rajwala-Pan Shop, Atul Jayanti lal 

Parmar- Barber, Gahil Arvind Khinji-Cycle Store, Tida Nata 

Labari-Tea Shop and Hingara Amin Ibrahim- Cold Drink 

Shop. 

Consultation at Village Agatrai 

26/11/2008 at Keshod Bypass in Junagadh district at a 

Farmer’s house- Babul Gela Barat-Farmer, Amba Premji 

should be considered in the 

preparation of the design. 

The negative impacts raised 

could be the loss of many 

medicinal and valuable plant 

species like Arjuna, Coconut, 

Neem, Peepal, Eucalyptus. 

The villagers also stated that fair 

monetary compensation as per 

market price should be given to 

them for the loss of property or 

land. 

The villagers demanded for the 

relocation of public utilities like 

well etc. and street lights along 

the road. 

A group of villagers who are 

directly impacted by the project 

are consulted. 

The villagers opine that the road 

should be widened on the LHS as 

RHS has dense structures. 

The temple along the road can be 

enhanced and relocated in the 

Panchayat land available in the 

village. 

The people have opposed the 

construction of the Toll Plaza as it 

would require more land 

acquisition. 

The villagers have demanded fair 

monetary compensation. 

Provision for an underpass should 

be included in the proposed 

project design. This would be 

helpful for the regular commuters 

and would ensure safety for the 

students. 

A group of villagers including 

shop-keepers are consulted at 

this place. 

The villagers are of the views that 

the project would involve loss of 

employment as their commercial 

establishments would be 

removed. 

Villagers stated that fair 

compensation should be given to 

them as per the policy. They also 

hold the opinion that the project 

would benefit in the development 

of the village. 

A cattle underpass requires to be 

constructed. An appropriate 

crossing should also be given to 

ensure the safety of school-going 

children. 

The villagers also wanted a 

Higher Secondary School to be 

built in their area. 

The villagers stated that the 

compensation provided by the 

The land on the left 

hand side as well as 

on the right hand 

side is under PWD, 

but the construction 

is illegal. 

According to the 

villagers, the land 

5-2





VOLUME III: 



5 

6 

Barat-Farmer, Laxman Bhai Karman Bhai-Farmer, Nathi 

Ben Maran Bhai Moran-Farmer, Karsan Bhai Ranjhan Bhai 

Gajera-Farmer, Vilji Bhai Ramji Bhai- Farmer, Mansukh 

Bhai Amba Bhai-Farmer, Maldev Bhai-Owner of Mill. 

Consultation at Keshod Bypass 

26/11/2008 at Village Kanza in District Junagadh district- 

Navneet Kumar Jhiladia-Mobile Shop owner, Irfan Iqbal 

Hasan Bhai- Pan Shop, Ramadev Singh-Pan 

Shop,Changan Bhai & Jeeva BHai Parmar 

Consultation at Village Kanza 

27/11/2008 at Jetalsar in Panchayat office in Junagadh 

district- J K Joshi-Book Stall, Hukah Bhai Manji Bhai Ghuashop. 

Shiva Bhai maji Bhai Parmar-Resident, Arvind Bhai 

Manji Bhai- Motor Repair Shop, Hansraj Bhai Aryan Bhai 

Ghadiya-Pan Shop, Chandu Bhai Huka Bhai Puah-Pan 

Shop Owner, Valabh Bhai Natha Bhai Bhua-Motor Cycle 

Repair, Atul Bhai Mohan Bhai Saruiya- Pan Shop, Manu 

Narsi Maladiya-Tea Shop, Valabh Bhai Rudah Bhai-Pan 

Shop, Mansukh Bhai Devji Bhai Bhua-Tea Shop, Teja 

Ghusa Hanat-Electrician Shop, Daya Gopal Lakhani-Shop, 

Nukesh Jaithi-Pujari, Savita Ben Nandlan Ghua-Shop, Hans 

Ramji Bhai Luah, Paresh Ram ji Bhai Babaria-Pan shop, 

Sauji Mohan Bhai Babaria,Kalyan Bhai Ramji Bhai Veshno, 

Bipin Bhai Jadav Bhai Veshno, Hemant Bhai Ranjho Bhai 

Koldara 

government is too less and they 

have registered a case in the 

court against the compensation 

provided. 

The people were of the opinion 

that the government should 

provide appropriate compensation 

as per market price of land i.e. 

Rs.20-25 lac per acre of land as 

this is the price of land along the 

road and on the bypass. 

The villagers also stated that if 

residential structures fall in the 

bypass area, then the 

compensation for the cost of 

construction should be given by 

NHAI. 

The villagers also wanted a less 

median width so that the land 

acquisition should be more on the 

other side and the residential 

structures along the road should 

also get correct compensation for 

new construction. 

The villagers are in favor of the 

road development and find the 

project good for better economic 

condition as it would generate 

commercial activities. 

The villagers demanded land to 

land compensation and money for 

construction of new shop. The 

land should be provided in the 

same village or nearby area or 

along the road. 

The villagers also wanted cross 

sections to move to Gadhila 

village on LHS and to Kanjala 

village on RHS. 

The villagers were in favor of the 

road development a sit would 

solve the problems of traffic. 

The people wanted a community 

hall and public park to be 

constructed for all religions. 

The villagers stated that fair 

compensation for land and money 

for construction of new house 

should be given to them. 

The people wanted that the land 

should be provided under the 

guidelines of Panchayat and 

should be within the village, but 

there is no land available in the 

village at present. The people 

informed that land should be 

provided on the other side (LHS) 

because it is under the Gram 

Panchayat. 

The people wanted that 

acquisition for the 

bypass had 

already been done 

and many farmers 

had registered a 

court case for fair 

compensation to 

be given to them 

after land 

acquisition. The 

villagers were not 

against the road 

development 

provided they 

should be given 

fair compensation. 

They have not 

been given fair 

compensation till 

now by the 

government. 

According to one 

of the villagers, a 

25 year old Pan 

shop should be 

considered during 

the road 

development. 

The villagers 

wanted 

appropriate 

medical facilities in 

the area as the 

existing hospital 

did not have 

appropriate staff 

during emergency. 

The villagers 

wanted an 

appropriate 

crossing to move 

safely on either 

side of the road 

with a proper Bus 

shelter, toilet and 

drinking water 

facilities. 

The people did not 

want any over- 

5-3





VOLUME III: 



7 

8. 

9. 

Consultation at Jetalsar 

28/11/2008 at Veraval Bypass-Chapadev Alpesh- 

Shopowner, Dardanadal Solanki-Shop owner, Pithal Lal 

Paltiath-Sarpanch 

Consultation at Veraval Bypass 

30/11/2008 at Panidhra village-Dinesh Dhaniv Bhai Ahir- 

Dhaba owner, Prabhat Shih K Gangada-Pan and Tea Shop 

Owner, Dalu Shih NK-Pan Shop, Bharat Shih Dhodia-Pan 

Shop owner 

Consultation at Village Panidhra 

1/12/2008 at Junagadh Bypass in Farm Land ( Village 

Shahpur)-Puroshtam Bhai Gordhan Bhai Vadodia-farmer, 

Jamna Das Bortha-Farmer, Gopal Devji- Farmer, Guni lal- 

compensation should be given to 

those structures too who have 

residence on government land. 

The villagers opined that temple 

along the road should be 

relocated to some other nearby 

area. 

The villagers wanted equal land 

acquisition on both the sides with 

compensation in terms of money 

or land. 

The villagers stated that 

government land should be 

acquired on both the sides and 

relocation of shops should be 

considered. 

The villagers opine that the 

alignment for the proposed 

bypass is appropriate as it would 

save a number of commercial 

structures and also lessen 

accident cases. 

The people believe that the land 

price would also increase along 

the road. 

The villagers commented that the 

land along the bypass region is in 

small sections and the land to be 

acquired is only a part of it, as a 

result, the remaining portion 

would not be of any use to the 

land owner. 

The villagers wanted the 

compensation in terms of money 

and would accordingly decide at 

the time of land acquisition. 

The people demanded a hospital 

to be constructed in their area. 

The villagers feel that the road 

development would reduce the 

number of accident cases in their 

area and also the flow of traffic 

would be better now. 

The people were of the view that 

the land on the LHS is vacant, 

development is very minor and 

belong to government, therefore, 

the widening should be done on 

the LHS. 

The people stated that the traffic 

flow at RHS is more. 

The people wanted the 

compensation to be given at the 

rate of market price. 

The people were also of the view 

that due to the loss of the 

commercial shops, the 

government should consider and 

provide an alternate source of 

livelihood to them. 

The villagers were of the opinion 

that the bypass should not pass 

through their agricultural land as it 

bridge to be 

constructed and 

also were worried 

about their 

structures falling 

along the road. 

The people told 

that the road 

should pass 

through the old 

bypass, otherwise 

the farmers would 

be in a big 

problem. 

The villagers on 

the other hand 

also favored the 

road development 

as it would save 

many commercial 

structures along 

the existing road. 

5-4





VOLUME III: 



10. 

Farmer, Suresh Kumar Ranji Bhai- Contractor, Samaji, 

Paroshatam Bhai Valji-Farmer, Jetha Bhai Valji Bhai- 

Farmer, jethi Bhai Valji Bhai-farmer,Valabh Bhai 

Consultation at Village Shahpur in Junagadh 

29/11/2008 at village Supasi in District Junagadh in Gram 

Panchayat office- Jathua hera Bhai Arjan Bhai-Shop owner, 

Mahendra Hera Solanki, Dr. Ram Bhai Vasanth, Vasha 

Menji Vada, LAxman Vera Rathod, Devsi arsi Salank, 

Narang Jeeva Kheer, Chandera Atul Desha, Khimji Rana 

Baran, Vijay Gakad, Anil Harjivan Lohar, Ismail Jamal Patel, 

Arshi Mora Parmar, Naga Naran Ram, Hera Naran Ram, 

Naga Arjan Jatua, Pratap Baju Ram, Ismal Kesham Noor 

Bhai, Jawerkhar Daya Ghar, keshar Amar Sinh Luwar, 

Alarakha Asam Tavani, Ajit AMar Ajam, Ramesh Daya Ghar 

Bapu, Ala Rakha Puja, Pooja Nagajan Solanki, Abadrum 

Nathu, Hasan Bhaiji , Noor Bhai Maji, Hussain Bali Hisa 

Khani, Abraiman Jamal Hisa Khani, Gani Ala Rakha, Ismail 

Ala Rakha, Devath Sarman Jathua, Bhura Dada Roo, 

Rajshi Govind Jathua, Jayanthi Jayram, Veno Bhai 

Vanmadi, Hala Muslim Samaj, Garbi Mandal Supasi, Supasi 

Hindu Shanshan, Laxman Pooja, Desa Arjun Kharan, Vali 

Meeraji, Hatam Mikardi, Sidhi Hasann, Kishad Mirr, Kantha 

Pooja, Shashi Kant Karji, Pradeep Soonarwala 

Consultation at Village Supasi 

would result in huge loss of 

irrigated land. 

The people also stated that the 

compensation would vary from 

person to person as in people 

might demand for market price or 

land to land compensation. 

The people discussed that the 

land had already been acquired 

by NHAI for the existing road and 

very les portion of land is 

available with the farmers that is 

falling in the bypass area. The 

people do not want any additional 

land acquisition further as they 

were not offered fair 

compensation earlier too. The 

bypass alignment should be 

designed through a kutcha road 

that runs parallel to the existing 

road. 

The people viewed that the land 

should be taken from one end 

and not from the middle of the 

land. 

The villagers opined that the 

project will ensure better flow of 

traffic, reduction of accident 

cases, increase in commercial 

activity and thus would be good 

for the development of the village. 

The villagers demanded an 

appropriate crossing from LHS to 

RHS, proper street lights, service 

roads, Government Bank, 

Hospital and a proper roundabout 

for the way to village Adri at the 

existing Chokri. The people 

wanted that the existing facilities 

along the road should 

The villagers opposed the 

development of an over bridge in 

the area and wanted fair 

compensation for the loss of 

existing shop. The compensation 

would vary from person to person. 

The villagers were of the view that 

minimum width of the median 

should be considered. The 

median should have street lights 

on the entire stretch 

There is mosque and a graveyard 

that is falling along the road and 

the villagers stated that the 

mosque should be considered 

during the design of the road as it 

could not be relocated. 

The Sarpanch was of the opinion 

that the project should be an 

Access controlled road a same as 

that of Jaipur-Bhilwada section. 

The road should have 

underpasses for the villagers to 

5-5





VOLUME III: 



move freely for various facilities 

on either sides of the road. 

11. 

12. 

30/11/2008 at Vanthali Bypass in District Junagadh- Yusuf 

Haji Hussain, Mhoor Bhai Ismail(Deelip Bhai)-Farmer, Tara 

Bhai Chana Bhai-Farmer and Labourer, Dawood Ibrahim- 

Farmer, A.Sarthar and Shabir Ahmed,Usuf Ali, Pagaria 

Ritesh Remji Bhai-President-Nagar Palika 

30/11/2008 at Manekwada Bypass in District Junagadh- 

Atrodia Kana Bhai Karan Bhai-Farmer, Kheema Bhai 

Samanth-Farmer, Dev Si Bhai Karan-Farmer, Atrodia 

Karsan Karan-Farmer. 

5.2 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS 

The people were of the opinion 

that the road development would 

solve the traffic flow problems and 

reduce the number of accidents. 

The land to be acquired for 

Bypass is available in plots 

towards the end of the bypass 

and thus after the land 

acquisition, the remaining part of 

the land would be of no use to the 

farmer. Thus, the government 

should take the entire area and 

the compensation should be 

given in terms of market price. 

The people wanted that the water 

logging problem in the area 

should be solved. 

The land acquisition should be 

from either side of the agricultural 

land and not from the middle of 

the land. 

The villagers wanted approach 

roads to be built for traveling to 

the villages. 

Bypass land should be preferably 

taken from LHS as it belongs to 

the government. As per the 

villagers, if land acquisition is 

done, then government job should 

be provided to one member of the 

family. 

Agricultural lands are available in 

small plots and as such if land is 

acquired then only small portion 

of land would be left for farming 

and that would be of no use. Few 

villagers also feel that the bypass 

should not be constructed and the 

existing road should be widened. 

Few consultations were carried out with various stakeholders who are likely to be affected due to 

the proposed project. Stake holder consultation included Govt department viz District Magistrate, 

Forest Department, Gujrat Pollution Control Board etc, affected persons along project corridor 

and cultural property consultation. The affected persons were consulted during conducting 

census and socio-economic surveys apart from specic meetings with the affected persons. Some 

of the stake holder consultation is summerized in Table 5-2 below: 

Sl 

No 

1 

Table 5-2: Details of the meetings with various Stakeholders along the project corridor 

Name of the 

stakeholder 

Occupation Subjects Discussed 

Village 

Manekwada in 

Consultation at Vanthali Bypass 

Consultation at Manekwada Bypass 

Construction 

Labour 

Bethar is a construction labour whose place of stay is 25 km from the 

place of work and takes him 30 minutes to travel by bus or auto- 

5-6





Sl 

No 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

Name of the 

stakeholder 

Keshod Taluka at 

Junagadh District- 

Bethar Bhai 

Vaghela. 

Village Supasi in 

Patan Veraval 

Taluka at 


Rajsi Rana- 

Jetpur in Rajkot 

District- Arvind 

Soraliya 

Vanthali in 


Kannayya Lal 

Jetalsar in Rajkot 

District-Rai Singh 

Choudhary 

Jetpur in Rajkot 

District- Kamal M 

Shah 

Village Bhanduri in 


Joshi Bharti Ben 

Village Shahpur in 


Chuni Bhai 

Panarah 

Vanthali in 


KD Kharadi 

Occupation Subjects Discussed 

VOLUME III: 


rickshaw. He opined that there was a problem of drinking water in the 

area. He opines that the road should be widened. 

Private Transport 

Owner He stays in Shantipara and works in Supasi Char Chowk. He has been 

in this profession for 7 years now. During the road improvement, hE 

would like to be involved in Planning programs. 

School Teacher- 

Sardar Patel 

Academic Center 

for Education 

Anaj Mandi 

Worker 

Panchayat 

Member 

Remica Tiles- 

Factory Owner 

Anganwadi 

Worker 

He stays in Jai Park 

Society.i.e. 500 metres 

away from the school. He 

travel by his two-wheeler to 

the school. There should be 

proper road built in the area 

as the existing road is RCC 

make. He would like to be 

involved in the Planning and 

Monitoring stage during the 

road development. 

He owns a Residential 

cum Commercial shop. It 

takes him a day for the 

transportation of goods. 

There is a problem of 

accidents in the area. 

There is no separate 

place to park the vehicles. 

The project is good for the 

development. 

His place of stay is seven kms away from the place of work. The main 

focus of development in the area is agriculture. 

He stays in Navagadh i.e. 3 kms away from the place of stay. The raw 

material in his factory comes from Rajasthan.The employees in his 

factory usually travel by cycle or go walking to their residence. 

It takes her one hour to travel to the place of work as there is no direct 

transport mode available. She believes that the road condition should 

be improved and there should be appropriate crossing in the area. 

Farmer The most expensive agricultural land in the area is near the major 

road. The major crops grown in the agricultural land are cotton, 

groundnut, wheat. Hi average income is Rs.50000 per acre. The 

village is connected to transport modes like bus, auto, tractor etc. The 

farmer suggests that there should not be too many turnings on the 

road. 

Police 

Consultation with a school teacher 

Consultation with an anajmandi worker 

He stays in the Police Headquarters. The main problem of the existing 

road is the bad condition and traffic jam due to the reduced size of the 

bridges. 

5-7





5.2.1 Cultural Property Consultations 

VOLUME III: 


The proposed project corridor has many temples, shrines, dargahs along the stretch. 

Consultations were carried out at few cultural properties falling within the ROW and at few 

temples where somw part of the land is to be acquired. 

5.2.1.1 Place of Consultation: Hanuman Mandir at Village Ektanagar, Timbavadi 

The temple is a pucca structure and is 12-15 years old. Consultation 

was held with local people of community. Alternative relocation site for 

temple was preferred just along the proposed RoW or inside village, 

along with enhancement of structure. 

5.2.1.2 Place of Consultation: Neelkanth Nagar 

The temple is a semipucca structure and 5 -6 years old. Consultation 

was held with local people of community. They expressed plans for 

construction of temple. Alternative relocation site for temple was 

preferred just along the proposed RoW. 

5.2.1.3 Place of Consultation: Yogi Park Society, Vanthali Highway 

The temple is a pucca structure owned by the public and is 15-20 years old. Consultation was 

held with local people. They suggested that temple could be relocated inside the village. While a 

community meeting is to be done then only final decision can be taken. 

5.2.1.4 Place of Consultation: Manekwada 

The temple is a pucca structure owned by the public and is 10-15 years 

old. Consultation was held with local people and sarpanch of community. 

They suggested that alternative relocation site for temple is available 

inside the village. 

5.2.1.5 Place of Consultation: Manekwada 

Consultation was held with trustees of mandir. The temple is famous 

among adjoining communities and people from various villages visit it. 

Main mandir structure is located at distance of 29 meters from the 

carriageway. About 500 devotees visit temple daily. Trust members 

were reluctant for relocation of main temple. For compensation of land 

acquired for widening, they preferred to take land available at backside of existing temple and 

also construction of new compound wall at government expense. 

5-8





5.2.1.6 Place of Consultation: Khodiya Maa Ashram 

VOLUME III: 


The temple is a pucca private structure about 13 years old.Consultation 

was held with priest and few devotees of temple. The main temple 

structure is at a distance of 30 m from the carriageway, but there is a 

hand pump of religious importance which is falling within the ROW at a 

distance of 25 meters. The hand pump is famous for generating sweet 

water, as a result, the villagers use this water for drinking purpose. On an average, 60-70 people 

visit the temple on daily basis. The priest of the temple is reluctant about the relocation of the 

temple, especially the hand pump. 

5.2.1.7 Place of Consultation: Dargah at Agatrai 

The dargah is a semi-pucca structure about 400-500 years old. 

Consultation was held with local people. They opposed the shifting or 

relocation of the structure and suggested that the dargah could be 

retained as a median during the widening of the project road. However, 

the people were in the favor of the project road because of the poor 

condition of the existing road. 

5.2.1.8 Place of Consultation: Mugal Mata Mandir at village 

Panidhra 

Consultation was held with local people. They agreed for relocation of 

temple in near by area provided all relocation expenses should be bared 

by government. However, permission from owner needs to be taken, as 

he was not available at time of consultation. 

5.2.1.9 Place of Consultation: Hanuman Mandir at Village Koilana 

Consultation was held with local people and sarpanch of the village. They 

agreed for relocation of structure if appropriate compensation provided. 

Site of relocation can be decided after discussion with all the community 

people. However, final decision of relocation will be taken only after 

community meeting. 

5.2.1.10 Place of Consultation: Chandra Moleshwar at Somnath-Veraval Bypass 

Consultation was held with MLA of the local area. He suggested that 

moderate opposition by local people can be faced for relocation of 

structure. If possible widening at other side must be considered. 

However, after detail discussion with community member’s final 

decision shall be taken. 

5-9





VOLUME III: 


5.2.1.11 Place of Consultation: Hanuman Shani Dev Mandir at Somnath 

The temple is Pucca Government structure about more than 300 

years old. Consultation was held with priest. He agreed for relocation 

of structure on area behind Somnath trust. However, government 

should take care of all expenses of relocation and shifting of utilities. 

5.3 PUBLIC HEARING (IN ACCORDANCE TO PROCEDURES 

OUTLINED IN THE MOEF NOTIFICATION SEPT 2006 & IT’S 

SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS) 

The project is category – A. Thus, the user agency (NHAI) had submitted application for Public 

Hearing to Regional Offices at two districts, namely Rajkot and Junagadh. The proceedings of 

the Public Hearing is provided below. 

5.3.1 Public Hearing in Rajkot District 

Gujarat Pollution Control Board, Rajkot has published advertisement on 14 th November 2009 in 

Gujarati daily namely “Sandesh” and “Divyabhaskar” and in English daily “Times of India” where 

in it was circulated for the general public that Public Hearing for the Project in Rajkot district shall 

be carried out at Group Kumar School, Village-Jetalsar, Taluka Jetpur, District Rajkot on 15 th 

December 2009 at 11:00 hr. 

The Project Proponent in coordination with GPCB, Rajkot had sent copy of the EIA Report along 

with Summary of the EIA (in English and Gujrati), Summary of the Project Report, Resettlement 

Action Plan (one hard copy and one soft copy of each) to District Magistrate, Zila Parishad, 

District Industries Office, Regional office of MoEF and MoEF, New Delhi. In addition to this, 

Project Proponent in coordination with GPCB, Rajkot had also sent copy of the Summary of EIA 

in Gujarati and in English to the village panchayat office of villages through which project corridor 

passes for wide publicity about the project. 

Mr Pankaj Thakar, Additional District Mangitrate, Rajkot, Mr S M Jha, Regional Officer, GPCB- 

Rajkot, Mr H K Bhatt, DGM cum Project Director, NHAI, PIU-Rajkot, Mr Mehul Bhatt, Manager- 

Tech, PIU-Rajkot Dr S D Badrinath, Environmental Expert, LASA (Consultant) and Mr Debashis 

Pal, Sr Manager (Environment) were present during the Public Hearing at the aforesaid venue on 

15 th December 2009. 

Mr Mehul Bhatt presented the project describing the proposed improvement, likely impacts due 

the project and mitigation measures proposed to minimize the anticipated impact, the land 

acquisition procedure and likely compensation package. 

The Public Hearing Proceedings (including the minutes) for Rajkot district is enclosed as 

Annexure-5.1. 

5-10





5.3.2 Public Hearing in Junagadh District 

VOLUME III: 


Gujarat Pollution Control Board, Rajkot has published advertisement on 3rd December 2009 and 

4 th December 2009 in Gujarati daily namely “Sandesh” and “Divyabhaskar” and on 4 th December 

in English daily “Times of India” where in it was circulated for the general public that Public 

Hearing for the Project in Junagadh district shall be carried out at Shamaldas Gandhi Town Hall 

(Mahanagar Sevasadan Hall) Kalwa Chalk, District Junagadh-362001 on 5 th January 2009 at 

12:00 hr. 

The Project Proponent in coordination with GPCB, Junagadh had sent copy of the EIA Report 

along with Summary of the EIA (in English and Gujarati), Summary of the Project Report, 

Resettlement Action Plan (one hard copy and one soft copy of each) to District Magistrate, Zila 

Parishad, District Industries Office, Regional office of MoEF and MoEF, New Delhi. In addition to 

this, Project Proponet in coordination with GPCB, Junagadh had also sent copy of the Summary 

of EIA in Gujrati and in English to the village panchayat offices of villages through which project 

corridor passes for wide publicty about the project. 

Mr A M Parmar IAS, District Mangitrate, Junagadh, Mr G M Sadhu, Regional Officer, GPCB- 

Junagadh, Mr H K Bhatt, DGM cum Project Director, NHAI, PIU-Rajkot, Mr Mehul Bhatt, 

Manager-Tech, PIU-Rajkot, Dr S D Badrinath, Environmental Expert, LASA (Consultant) and Mr 

Debashis Pal, Sr Manager (Environment), LASA were present during the Public Hearing at the 

aforesaid venue on 5 th January 2010. 

Mr Mehul Bhatt presented the project describing the proposed improvement, likely impacts due 

the project and migigation measures proposed to minimize the anticipated impact, the land 

acquisition procedure and likely compensation package etc. 

The Public Hearing Proceedings (including the minutes) for Junagadh district is enclosed as 

Annexure-5.2. 

Compliance status of the Public Hearing for Rajkot district and Junagadh district is enclosed as 

Annexure-5.3. 

5.4 CONCLUSION 

The predominant means of livelihood in the project region is agriculture. There are land owners 

and agriculture labourers who do not own the land but get a share of the yield from the land 

owner. 

Despite the fact that the proposed project would require significant area of agriculture land, the 

consultation process reflected that majority of villagers in the project area are in favour of the 

project as it would enhance the development of the region and improve infrastructure facilities. 

They are ready to part with their land but demand adequate and rightful compensation from the 

State Government. 

5-11

6. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS & MITIGATION MEASURES 

This chapter assesses the nature, type and magnitude of the potential impacts likely on the 

various physical, biological and cultural environmental components along the project corridor, 

methods adopted for assessing impatssuch as use of model; details of mitigation & methods 

proposed to reduce adverse impacts. 

6.1 INTRODUCTION 

Road widening projects have typical potential impacts though these vary in accordance with the 

intensity of construction works involved, future scenario envisaged during the operation stage 

and the importance attached to the impacted environmental attributes. Since the project involves 

widening of the existing NH-8D from existing two lane to four lane, most of the impacts will be 

confined to the proposed RoW. Subsequent sections detail out the likely impacts on various 

environmental components & the various mitigations suggested. 

6.2 LAND ENVIRONMENT 

6.2.1 Anticipated Impacts 

Physiography & Terrain: The project corridor traverses through plain to rolling terrain. A large 

stretch of the road passes through agricultural and barren lands. Widening to 4 lane will involve 

large quantities of earthwork as fill materials. Such modifications in the topography may lead to 

drainage problems both along the project corridor and at the borrow area sites. The road 

widening will involve about 472249 cum of cutting and 4774392 cum of filling. 

Soil: The widening of the road to 4 lane would require acquisition of agriculture lands at places 

where the presently available RoW is inadequate to accommodate the proposed improvements. 

Establishment of labour camps, hot mix plants and movement of construction machinery shall 

avoid ecologically sensitive locations and construction and allied activities such as setting up of 

construction camps and movement of vehicle along haul roads would result in compaction of soil. 

Disposal of oil wastes from vehicle and construction equipment maintenance yards shall also 

lead to contamination of productive soil. 

Besides, due to widening of the project corridor, adverse impacts on the soil would include: loss 

of topsoil, increase in soil erosion, soil instability, tipping of spoils generated from construction 

work and contamination of soil. 

Borrow Areas: The investigation was aimed at locating the potential borrow areas for sub-grade/ 

embankment fill and granular sub-base along the project corridors within economic hauling 

distance. To obtain this information regarding probable borrow pits along the corridor and to 

obtain this objective, the offices of Rajkot Public Works Department and local people were 

contacted. Based on the information received and field surveys carried out, the consultants 

identified the borrow areas which are new ones /existing ones belonging to the government or 

6-1

4. description of the environment - Gujarat Pollution Control Board

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?