On Monday, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) dismissed petitions challenging the environmental clearance for the project. The bench, after careful consideration, found no good reason to interfere with the clearance granted earlier. Additionally, the tribunal acknowledged the project’s strategic importance while noting that adequate safeguards were in place within the environmental clearance.
Justice Prakash Shrivastava, leading the NGT bench, emphasized the high-powered committee’s important role in reviewing the project’s clearance. The HPC, formed under a 2023 order, had thoroughly addressed concerns about the project’s potential environmental impact. Consequently, the tribunal agreed with the committee’s assessment and decided to uphold the decision to clear the project.
Environmental Concerns and Project Scope
The project spans a significant area of 166 sq km, involving the diversion of 130 sq km of forest land. Furthermore, developers will need to fell almost one million trees for various construction purposes. Specifically, the project includes a transshipment port, an integrated township, a civil and military airport, and a 450-MVA power plant that will utilize both gas and solar energy.
While the NGT acknowledged the project’s undeniable strategic importance, it also took local concerns into account. In particular, the Nicobarese community expressed valid concerns about losing their ancestral land. This worry, understandably, intensified after the devastating impact of the 2004 tsunami, which had already caused severe disruption to their land and livelihood.
Environmental Safeguards and Legal Protections
Despite these concerns, the NGT highlighted that strict environmental safeguards were integrated into the project’s framework. These safeguards are specifically designed to mitigate any potential ecological damage that may arise during construction and operation. Moreover, developers have committed to compensatory afforestation and adhering to green protocols, further ensuring environmental protection.
Environmentalists raised the issue that parts of the project fall within the Island Coastal Regulation Zone (ICRZ). The ICRZ 2019 notification, as stated, prohibits development in ecologically sensitive coastal areas. However, the NGT found that the clearance granted for the project complied with all relevant environmental regulations while still allowing for development in certain zones.
Petitioners and the Tribunal’s Final Ruling
Environmental activist Ashish Kothari, along with others, filed petitions against the project, citing violations of the ICRZ notification. Additionally, they argued that the project did not comply with the NGT’s 2023 order regarding the review of the environmental clearance. Ultimately, the NGT rejected these allegations, confirming that the project had undergone a thorough legal review and met all necessary requirements.
In its final ruling, the NGT emphasized the need for a balanced approach, taking into account both development and environmental conservation. While recognizing the project’s importance for national growth, the tribunal also stressed the necessity of adhering to environmental protection standards. This decision, therefore, underscores the ongoing challenge of balancing development with ecological preservation in India.
