The National Green Tribunal (NGT) on Friday reserved its order on a batch of petitions challenging environmental clearances granted to the Great Nicobar Island mega-infrastructure project, and a fresh plea seeking full disclosure of a panel report on re-examination of the project’s clearances.
A six-member bench, headed by NGT chairperson Prakash Shrivastava, said that it will consider the interlocutory application (IA) filed by petitioner Ashish Kothari, challenging the Centre’s stance of confidentiality on the report of a high-powered committee (HPC). “We are reserving it for orders, at the same time in this order itself we will decide the IA,” Justice Shrivastava said.
The HPC, headed by the former environment secretary Leena Nandan, was formed in April 2023 on orders of the NGT to address “unanswered deficiencies” regarding the impact of the Rs 81,000 crore project on the ecologically sensitive and biodiverse Great Nicobar island.
Friday’s proceedings saw lengthy arguments made by the counsel for petitioner on the IA, which has challenged the Centre’s grounds of confidentiality on making the HPC report public. The petitioner’s counsel also concluded arguments on the batch of petitions against the project’s clearances. One relates to alleged violations of the Island Coastal Regulation Zone for siting the project in no-development zone, and another is on the contents of the HPC report.
Kothari’s counsel said that not having access to information from the HPC report tilted the proceedings in favour of the environment ministry, and it was anathema to open court’s principles.
The Centre during the last hearing on October 30 circulated the HPC report in a sealed cover to the Tribunal. Kothari’s counsel said that the Centre had not argued as to why they were seeking the privilege of a sealed cover and that there was nothing confidential about the report.
He went on to cite several project related documents such as clearances, master plan, environment impact assessment report to argue that over 350 such documents were in public domain, whereas revisiting of the clearances was kept confidential.
Story continues below this ad
The counsel for the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) opposed the IA stating the plea to make the HPC report public was belated as it was disclosed from the beginning that the report will not be made public.
“Whatever was germane in the HPC report is already part of our submissions, everything is there in the counter affidavit…we have submitted that we are not going to be able to submit the HPC report,” the environment ministry’s counsel said.
While summarising arguments on the challenge to the siting of the mega project’s components, the petitioner’s counsel cited government’s own reports and data to stress that nesting sites of leatherback turtles, Nicobar megapode birds, and corals will be damaged.
Rebutting the Centre’s arguments that it was aware of the damage and was taking mitigation measures, Kothari’s counsel said, “We are not asking the ministry to extend protections. I am only saying that the protections already exist, you have recognised it, do not dismantle it surreptitiously to permit your project. The project proponent can do it, not the ministry.”
