Bhopal Dialogue: Indian Administrative Service.
In 1973 the Indian Administrative Service [IAS] assessed the UCC proposal to convert the pesticide formulation unit in Bhopal into production facility. The District Collector MN Buch judged chemical production to be a hazardous and turned down the application to build the facility in the populated area of Bhopal. He recommended the facility to be built in the hazardous industrial zone 20km outside Bhopal.
Bhopal City and Hazardous Industrial Zone
The town and country planning laws in India were in their infancy and the refusal of planning permission and recommended location were ignored by Union Carbide. The facility was converted and a retrospective planning application was made to a new District Collector.
This process of events lead to the Union Carbide Chemical facility in Bhopal changing the nature of its business from chemical processing to chemical production, at a location 3km from the city's center. According to MN Buch, Bhopal is one of India's fastest growing cities with a population expected to be well over 2 million people in the next census.
Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!
MN Buch - Union Carbide plans rejected in 1974
“In 1969 when Union Carbide was first established in Bhopal there was no Town and Country Planning act only very rudimentary act. A more comprehensive Town and Country Planning act similar to the British Town and Country act came into being in 1973. It was enacted in 1972 but came into effect in 1973. Now there was no environmental pollution control act, water pollution, air pollution or a general environmental protection act in being in India and therefore the permission given to Union Carbide was under the Industrial Policy of Government, not under any Town and Country Planning act or a zoning regulation.
When the Town and Country Planning act came into effect and Union Carbide applied for permission to expand, the proposal was examined under the context of the statutory profile development plan by then in force and Union Carbide, because it was a chemical based industry was generally brought within the definition of hazardous industries, was told they could not expand in the present location of Bhopal and had to move to a new area which was earmarked for hazardous industries that is industries which processes or emissions or whatever could cause a problem and is hazardous for human life.
Now therefore their application for permission to expand was rejected, it was rejected under the zoning regulations and the point is that we knew at the time but did not know the exact process of Union Carbide, we did not know the toxicity of the product they were making we only knew that as a chemical industry it was not to locate where it was located. And I think that was a perfectly legitimate thing. We were ignorant about the entire process and the possible danger but we also knew that this was not the kind of industry for a place where any accident could cause loss of life or damage to people so I think that was a perfectly legitimate rejection.”
When the Town and Country Planning act came into effect and Union Carbide applied for permission to expand, the proposal was examined under the context of the statutory profile development plan by then in force and Union Carbide, because it was a chemical based industry was generally brought within the definition of hazardous industries, was told they could not expand in the present location of Bhopal and had to move to a new area which was earmarked for hazardous industries that is industries which processes or emissions or whatever could cause a problem and is hazardous for human life.
Now therefore their application for permission to expand was rejected, it was rejected under the zoning regulations and the point is that we knew at the time but did not know the exact process of Union Carbide, we did not know the toxicity of the product they were making we only knew that as a chemical industry it was not to locate where it was located. And I think that was a perfectly legitimate thing. We were ignorant about the entire process and the possible danger but we also knew that this was not the kind of industry for a place where any accident could cause loss of life or damage to people so I think that was a perfectly legitimate rejection.”