Dr Thara KG Speaks On The Kalladi Landslip And Why Kerala Remains Unprepared For The Disasters It Keeps Facing
Dr Thara K G is a geologist and disaster management expert with over three decades of experience in disaster risk reduction, climate resilience and environmental planning.
She was a member of the first Kerala State Disaster Management Authority and headed the Disaster Management Centre under the Institute of Land and Disaster Management for 16 years. Earlier, she served as a senior scientist at the Remote Sensing and Environment Centre and also coordinated the National Institute of Urban Affairs’ Climate Resilience of Urban Cities project across the southern states. In this interview, Dr Thara speaks about the lessons from the Wayanad disasters, the role of scientific risk assessments in preventing future tragedies, and why disaster preparedness and climate resilience must become central to development planning.
Is it correct to say the Kalladi landslip was caused only by contractor negligence, and there is no problem in the Wayanad tunnel project itself?
No. The landslip resulted from a combination of factors: Contractor negligence, dilution of environmental laws in recent years, the site’s inherent landslide risk, and a lack of timely monitoring by govt authorities.
Environmental regulations have been diluted at the central level. A 2023 amendment to the Environment Protection Act, 1986 now allows environment impact assessments (EIA) to be conducted within three years of a project starting, rather than before implementation. This is a serious dilution that risks heavy environmental and human cost.
Building a tunnel in a landslide-prone red zone is inherently hazardous. When approving the project, the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) recommended 25 specific conditions and 60 amendments to the detailed project report (DPR) and directed the EIA agency to conduct detailed micro-level mapping of the landslide-prone site.
Any such study should be publicly available, but it is unclear whether one was carried out. Despite govt authorities in Wayanad twice warning the construction agency in June to halt work, the agency did not comply, and the district disaster management authority failed to monitor compliance.
Reportedly, around 1 lakh cubic metres of excavated soil was dumped near the tunnel and it is a huge quantity. The immediate trigger was that this soil was piled unscientifically on a steep natural slope, instead of on flat terrain away from the site as the approval stipulated. But the project has deeper systemic problems around environmental viability. Safety norms require constant monitoring before, during and after monsoon in such critical-slope areas, monitoring that apparently did not happen.
Tarpaulin sheets covering the soil proved insufficient; rain increases the soil’s weight. The mandatory concrete retaining wall was also built on inadequately compacted excavated soil, worsening the landslip. Such negligence, when it causes disaster, can be prosecuted under Section 56 of the Kerala State Disaster Management Act, which carries heavy fines and up to three years’ imprisonment, provisions that have not been invoked so far in the state,
At approval stage, the state agency itself noted the site’s high landslide susceptibility, and flagged that the DPR did not include a study on vibration impact during excavation. It remains unclear whether the automated weather stations recommended by the SEIAA for both ends of the tunnel have been installed. It was reported that SEIAA had deferred the project across eight sittings citing shortcomings and ecological fragility, before approving it with conditions at the ninth, conditions the disaster suggests were not fully followed.
It is argued that the project proceeded with state, central and Supreme Court approval. But it remains to be probed whether the state govt presented all relevant facts to the ministry of environment and forests and the court. Approval does not exonerate those responsible for the disaster.
Should there be a comprehensive EIA review given the latest disaster?
Yes. The existing EIA needs review, including whether the 25 conditions and 60 amendments have actually been followed. The central empowered committee (CEC), a statutory Supreme Court body under MoEF guidance, should visit the site to examine the muck management plan, drainage plan, evacuation routes and monsoon protocols. The CEC must mandatorily submit reports to the MoEF and SEIAA every six months—these need scrutiny. Monitoring is a shared state-central responsibility that needs to be ensured.
It should also be examined whether the DPR is outdated in light of the devastating 2024 Wayanad landslide, which altered the region’s geomorphological and hydrogeological profile. Did the DPR account for more frequent cloudbursts, intense rainfall and a changing groundwater regime under climate change?
Is it fair to argue Wayanad’s healthcare suffers without faster access to Kozhikode hospitals?
Not entirely. Existing govt hospitals in Wayanad could be upgraded to speciality and super-speciality care at a fraction of the Rs 2,134 crore project cost, avoiding the ecological and wildlife risks of tunnelling through a landslide-prone zone.
Improving road connectivity to interior areas like Muthanga would also widen medical access. Whether this project is worth its environmental cost needs examination.
What disaster mitigation measures should the state adopt?
Kerala remains strong on post-disaster response but lags in preparedness, prevention and mitigation. Disaster management should be included in school syllabi. Given rising urbanisation, often mistaken for development, city dwellers face growing exposure to climate-induced events. Urban master plans need revision to make green and open spaces mandatory.
India also lacks a building code requiring structures resilient to multiple disaster types. A bigger challenge is the absence of land-use policy, allowing construction virtually anywhere; this must change.
The KSDMA itself needs restructuring, bringing in external experts across sectors.
Should govt and communities work together on disaster mitigation?
Yes. Community members who know the terrain are usually the first responders, making combined govt-community efforts far more effective. Kerala lacks a culture of partnering with NGOs on preparedness, prevention, mitigation and recovery. Bangladesh offers the best model for NGO involvement in disaster management, and neighbouring Tamil Nadu is also doing commendable work in this space.
Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author’s own.
