Supreme Court Rebukes Authorities for Unauthorized Airport Construction in Silchar, Questions NGT’s Inaction
The Supreme Court on Monday (May 6) expressed its dissatisfaction over the way the National Green Tribunal (NGT) ‘abdicated’ its function of not interfering in the construction of the Silchar Greenfield Airport Project, which was ongoing without obtaining prior Environmental Clearance.
The court also criticized the authorities for clearing the site extensively (almost 41 lakh tea bushes were uprooted, and several shade trees were felled) without obtaining prior EC. The authorities’ contention that tea bushes were cleared as part of regular operations of tea cultivation did not favour the Court.
While setting aside NGT’s order, the Court directed that no activities shall be carried out for the construction of the proposed Greenfield airport at Doloo tea estate unless mandatory environmental clearance is obtained for the said project.
The case pertains to the project of constructing a commercial airport at Silchar, Assam. The area identified for clearance included Doloo, Silkori’s tea estates, spreading over 335 hectares.
The bench comprising CJI Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra noted that shade trees and tea bushes were cut for the project without obtaining prior environmental clearance in terms of the Notification dated September 14, 2006. Though challenged by appellants before NGT, tribunal did not interfere.
Taking a serious view, the bench observed that NGT had an almost lackadaisical approach to handling appellants’ grievances.
“ In this background we have come to conclusion that there has been complete abdication of duties by NGT. As an expert body formed under Act enacted by Parliament in furtherance of environment preservation , it was incumbent upon Tribunal to verify authenticity appellant’s grievance”
National Green Tribunal (NGT), on original appeal being dismissed, noted that since EIA was awaited , the appellants’ case was devoid of merit at present stage
On April 24 , the top court directed the Secretary District Legal Services Authority, Silchar, to visit the site and submit a detailed report regarding (1) the felling of any shade trees ; (2) any eviction at the site which took place ; (3) the nature of activities being carried out. Court also noted that as per affidavit filed on April 22 by the Joint Secretary to Govt. of Assam, General Administration department there was no such ‘felling of shade trees at site in question’; no eviction of individuals or household. The government also claimed that the removal of tea bushes is happening regularly as part of tea cultivation practice, and for this, no environmental clearance was required.
On April 27, Judicial officer Ms Salma Sultana (DLSA Secretary) reported to Supreme Court. As per the Affidavit of Judicial Officer : (1) 89 shade trees have been found cut down; (2) since the entire area was dense forest , other possible feelings of shade trees were not visible.
After examining the report, the court noted that, as per the statement local circle officer, more than 41 lac tea bushes had been destroyed therein.
The Circle Officer, Mr Arun Jyoti Dass statement states that 41,95,909 tea bushes have been uprooted… … … Many of the witnesses examined by the court-appointed officer alleged that in May 2022 in Doloo Tea Estate, Airport Site tea gardens were dug with JCBs for three days. The operation was carried out day and night with about 200-250 JCBs. The witnesses said that trees were also uprooted and cut down. It has to be noted by this Court that these witnesses have not been tested on the touchstone of cross-examination, but at this stage, it would prima facie appear so as to coincide or match with such statements made by Circle officer showing uprooting 41,95,905 tea bushes.
But before the Court filed an application on behalf of the State of Assam seeking initiation against them for ‘misleading the Court’ in obtaining orders dated April 24th, which, however, could be passed over as Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for Respondent Authorities did not press today.”;
“The conduct of the officials is deprecated”
This bench took note of severe damage caused to the land site without prior clearances and EIA and observed that officials have acted in breach of environmental norms”;
“Authorities in this case have violated provisions contained in Para 2 notification dt.14.9.2006 by doing extensive clearance at site even when there was no environment clearance…..Law prescribes rules for activities requiring eco-clearances; hence law must be followed…… Therefore we allow appeal setting aside NGT order dated 25/1/2024..and direct no activity shall be undertaken in breach of Notification date September 14th ,2006”
The court clarified further that any applications for grant of environmental clearances hereafter in respect to the above-said project(s) would be considered only on the basis condition the site stood prior to illegal clearance of shade trees and bushes.
Respondents question District Judge’s report, report upheld by Court
During arguments, SG Mr Tushar Mehta contended that findings contained within the report submitted by the Judicial Officer cannot be relied upon in so far as it states that there is a ‘dense forest’ in the area. According to SG, site only has shrubs and trees.
However, CJI interjected by pointing out that report carries high credibility being from District Judge.
CJI: “No there is a dense forest. She’s a district judge!
SG: “These are bushes My Lordships can ask her what is her definition of Forest”
Highlighting relevance and weightage of the findings expressed CJi , “We appointed her. She is a judge. We appointed a district judge-level officer to go to the site and examine it. We trust her….”
The submission of the state that the removal of tea bushes was part of the regular cultivation practice was countered by advocate Mr Prashant Bhushan appearing on behalf of the appellants. He referred to the statements of tea garden employees who said that vegetation was cleared only after bulldozers and JCBs were used following taking over by authorities. He also supported it with a number of news reports saying so.
There is no practice anywhere in any tea garden cultivation activity at all involving uprooting plants, such as what has been described here,” said senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan while representing intervenors who have joined this case in support for Tapas Guha.
“અમને ગુજરાતી ચા વિશે જો વધુ સાચો બી may ખૂ ન foris. But Assam Tea-111 we know very well how tea bushes functions. Nobody uproots and destroys tea bushes. One or two which are decayed or dead maybe. 4100000! it’s not a practice anywhere to uproot tea bushes”
” I don’t know about Gujarati Tea but as far as Assam Tea is concerned we are very much familiar with how tea bushes functions. Nobody uproots and destroys tea bushes. One or two which are decayed or dead maybe. 4100000! it’s not a practice anywhere to uproot tea bushes” Case Title : Tapas Guha v Union of India | C.A. No. 4603-4604/2024
