THE MAHARASHTRA government on May 13 exempted an iron ore mining and processing project in Gadchiroli from wildlife clearance by claiming — incorrectly — it was not located in any tiger corridor, official communications reviewed by The Indian Express show.

The project proposal involves diverting 9.4 sq km of forest land in Gadchiroli for iron ore extraction and processing by Lloyds Metals & Energy.

It received forest clearance on April 15 and environment clearance on May 12, a day before it was exempted from obtaining wildlife clearance.

According to the project site map submitted by Lloyds to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, the area falls in forest compartments 196, 197, 273, 274, 275, 276, 298, 300 and 301. All but one (300) of these compartments are identified as part of the Tadoba-Indravati tiger corridor in the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA)-approved Tiger Conservation Plan (TCP) of the Tadoba Andhari tiger reserve.

Tiger corridors are vital wildlife pathways that connect tiger habitats, enabling animal movement, gene flow, and long-term survival. Under the Wildlife Act, development projects involving land in or around tiger reserves or corridors require statutory clearance from the standing committee of the National Board for Wildlife. A TCP is a 10-year roadmap for every tiger reserve approved by NTCA.

👁 Lloyds Metals project in Gadchiroli: Maharashtra clears mine project, says not in tiger area; maps show otherwise

Under ‘Category of Area Required’, Lloyds itself identified the project site as a “Tiger Corridor” in its wildlife clearance application submitted in March 2024.

Yet, records show that on May 13, Maharashtra Chief Wildlife Warden (CWLW) M Srinivasa Reddy exempted the project from obtaining wildlife clearance and recommended handover of forest land to the company, stating that the project area was not within or near any national park, sanctuary, tiger reserve or corridor identified in any TCP.

When contacted, Reddy said: “That information was provided by a senior officer of the rank of conservator of forests. Now I will have to check if it is incorrect.”

As reported by The Indian Express, the issue of tiger corridors became contentious when the NTCA did a volte-face in August 2025. Within a month of telling the Bombay High Court that tiger corridor identification should consider multiple scientific studies and parameters, it narrowed the scope to only 32 “least cost pathways” identified in 2014 and corridors listed in approved TCPs.

👁 Maharashtra clears mine project, says not in tiger area; maps show otherwise

On March 9 this year, records show, the nodal officer of the Maharashtra forest department sought further relaxation, writing to the MoEF that only 32 forest links “should be treated as recognised legal corridors” and that inclusion of corridors identified in TCPs “may create ambiguity.”

On April 24, Reddy cautioned that the nodal officer’s contention “does not appear to be legally correct.” In a letter to the Additional Chief Secretary (Forests), he pointed out corridors identified in TCPs by the NTCA under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, “carry statutory relevance” for scrutiny of project proposals.

Reddy further requested the state government to “issue suitable clarification” that tiger corridor scrutiny in the state should include those identified in TCPs, as well as “scientifically justified additional corridors… to ensure legally sound scrutiny of diversion proposals.”

In less than a month, Reddy withdrew the letter on May 21.

Asked if there was a rethink on factoring in corridors identified in TCPs, Reddy said the question should be addressed to the NTCA.

When contacted, NTCA member secretary Sanjay Kumar said: “Like tiger reserve buffers, corridors identified in approved TCPs are meant for ecologically compatible land uses which generally exclude activities such as mining and industries.”

Last July, the NTCA told the Bombay High Court that it was “in the process of the refinement of tiger corridors” based on the all-India tiger estimation data. That process remains incomplete, even as decisions on project clearances continue to hinge on how tiger corridors are defined.