Crime Today News
The Supreme Court on Monday set aside a National Green Tribunal (NGT) order, which had dismissed a petition against the clearing of land for the proposed greenfield airport at Doolo Tea Estate in Assam’s Silchar.
The order was passed by the Bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra on an appeal against the NGT order passed on March 25, which dismissed the plea against the clearing of close to 41 lakh shrubs.
The Apex Court observed that the clearing activities, which were in progress, were done without environmental clearance (EC), which was in breach of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification of 2006.
It said the authorities in the present case acted in violation of the notification by carrying out extensive clearance at the site in the absence of environmental clearance.
Noting that the State of Assam needed a civilian airport, the top court of the country said the decision regarding where the airport should be was a matter of policy but when the law prescribed specific norms for carrying out activities.
The provision of law has to be complied with and no environmental clearance has been issued till date, it added.
Setting aside the order of the Eastern Zonal Bench of NGT, the Bench directed that no activity should be carried out in breach of the 2006 notification.
The Apex Court further noted that the NGT had abdicated its duty by not entertaining the plea.
The petition before the NGT submitted that the EIA report was awaited and that the EC for the airport had not been granted.
During the course of hearing today, the CJI suggested maintaining a status quo until the environmental clearance report was received.
Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta countered the petitioners and suggested that some petitioners, who were 1300 km away, were filing self-serving petitions.
He argued that workers on-site also cut trees for domestic purposes and emphasized the need for considering factors like wind direction for the greenfield project.
The CJI then took note of a report from the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) Secretary stating that tea bushes were uprooted by heavy machinery, and the court-appointed officer couldn’t venture far due to thick forest and dangerous wildlife.
The SG drew the attention of the Bench to some pictures and alleged that the top court of the country was being misled by the petitioners.
Despite the arguments, the Apex Court suggested no further steps until an EIA report was available.
SG Mehta contended that the Court was being misled with false statements that houses were being brought down and forests were being cut.
He alleged that the ‘so-called’ expert did not even visit the site and said that some other land was better than this one.
Appearing for the petitioners, Advocate Prashant Bhushan submitted that trees were also cut along with bushes. He said that the uprooting of 41 lakh tea bushes was admitted and therefore, false statements were made in the affidavit of the joint secretary.
He further said that even the social impact assessment needed to be done. The workers were affected persons as per the new land acquisition act, added Advocate Bhushan.
The Bench observed that prima facie, 41 lakh bushes had been uprooted and the act could not be termed as a routine clearance.
In the present case, the clearance of the site was by no means traceable to the cultivation of the tea estate. The clearance was not a part of regular maintenance of tea estate, it added.
The Bench further observed that the uprooting was in breach of the EIA notification and that the NGT abdicated its duty by dismissing the plea.
It remarked that the NGT should have verified the authenticity of the grievance and instead just dismissed the OA.
Setting aside the NGT order, the top court of the country directed that once the clearance report was received, the State of Assam could again apply for the commencement of work.
In response to a request by SG Mehta to construct the workers’ homes, the Bench observed that such a direction too would be in violation of the EIA Notification.
Source | Powered by Yes Mom Hosting
