A CAG audit found that nearly 70% of 153 plantation sites across nine states showed no clear increase in greenery despite ₹1,163.42 crore in expenditure. Satellite verification also revealed major gaps between official records and actual plantation activity.

₹1,163 Crore Spent on Plantation, but 70% of Sites Show No Clear Green Gain

The420 Correspondent
4 Min Read

New Delhi: The government spent hundreds of crores of rupees on increasing green cover and promoting environmental conservation, but the ground reality of plantation activities has raised serious concerns. An audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) found that nearly 70% of 153 plantation sites examined across nine states showed no clear increase in trees or greenery by 2024 from plantations claimed to have been carried out between 2016-17 and 2019-20. Despite expenditure of ₹1,163.42 crore on these projects, significant discrepancies were found between official claims and the actual plantation activity.

The CAG compared satellite imagery of the 153 sites with government records. The states had claimed plantation across 1,245.69 hectares at these locations. However, the audit raised questions over the authenticity of these claims. Government maps recorded the total area of the sites at 1,305 hectares, while satellite-based measurement put the area at 1,807.01 hectares. This resulted in a discrepancy of 502.01 hectares between the two sets of figures.

FCRF Launches Flagship Certified Cyber Security Auditor (CCSA) Program for Next-Generation Cyber Auditors

The audit found that only 46 of the 153 sites showed some visible change in greenery after plantation. Government records indicated plantation across 561.32 hectares at these 46 locations, but actual plantation activity was found to cover only 179.43 hectares. As a result, just 9.93% of the total area examined showed a visible impact of plantation activity in satellite imagery.

Major Discrepancy Found in Uttarakhand

In Uttarakhand, plantation work was reported across 105 hectares at 14 locations between 2018 and 2023. However, when the CAG assessed the boundaries and actual plantation activities, work was found to have been carried out over only 67.14 hectares. This revealed a gap of nearly 38 hectares between the area recorded in official documents and the plantation activity found during the audit.

The CAG also took technical assistance from the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, to examine maps related to 170 plantation sites. Eight maps were found to be inaccurate and were therefore excluded from further examination. The findings raised questions over the reliability of record-keeping and monitoring mechanisms used for plantation schemes.

Previously Planted Areas Shown Again

In Odisha, the CAG identified nine sites where plantation had already been carried out, but the same locations were subsequently presented as new plantation sites. This resulted in the reported achievement being overstated by around 45 hectares. The finding also raised questions over the system for identifying previous plantation work and verifying records before reporting new achievements.

The audit also raised questions over additional or unauthorised expenditure of ₹5.82 crore in Odisha, Andhra Pradesh and Haryana. In Madhya Pradesh’s Burhanpur, plantation was reported across 135 hectares in 2022, with ₹58 lakh shown as expenditure. The audit found that plantation had already been carried out across 75 hectares of the same land under other schemes.

The CAG findings indicate that merely recording expenditure and reporting plantation targets as achievements is not sufficient. Independent monitoring of the actual area covered, survival of planted trees and changes in green cover over subsequent years is equally important. The discrepancies revealed through satellite-based verification have raised serious questions over the monitoring of government claims and the effectiveness of implementation at the ground level.

About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.

Stay Connected