Team Herald
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday barred construction of the greenfield international airport at Mopa and ordered an expert committee to examine allegations of the GMR Group illegally felling trees.
The Bench comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hemant Gupta scrapped the environment clearance secured by the group for building the airport from the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests in October 2015 and directed the committee to submit its report within one month.
Justice Chandrachud, who pronounced the judgment on the petition by Hanuman Aroskar, also barred all courts in the country from entertaining any plea relating to this airport.
Attorney General K K Venugopal had argued on behalf of the Centre to throw out the petition while those who argued against the petition also included Additional Solicitor General Atmaram Nadkarni hailing from Goa.
The Court had reserved the judgment on February 27 after lengthy hearings. It had already ordered status quo earlier that is seen as a setback to the GMR Group that had won the contract to build this as a second airport in Goa.
ONUS ON EXPERTS
The Supreme Court has put the entire onus on the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) of the MoEF for resumption of work on the Mopa airport project while continuing the ‘status quo’ ordered in an earlier hearing.
The EAC has been directed to revisit its recommendations that led to grant of environment clearance to the Mopa airport project, keeping in view the specific concerns highlighted in the judgment.
It asked either the Goa government or the ministry to file the EAC recommendations before it for passing appropriate orders and the earlier environment clearance granted in October 2015 shall remain suspended pending fresh report by the EAC within one month.
NGT FAULTED
The Court also passed strictures on the National Green Tribunal (NGT) for failing to carry out a review of the environment clearance as the adjudicatory body vested with appellate jurisdiction. “The NGT has not discharged any adjudicatory function which properly belongs to it.”
Noting that the need for a new airport is a matter of policy, the Court said the decision makers, however, have to ensure that every important facet of the environment is adequately studied and carefully assessed to mitigate adverse consequences to the environment. The flaws in environment impact assessment (EIA) process should not be disregarded, it stressed.
The Court said if the EAC allows construction to proceed, it will impose additional conditions which in its expert view will adequately protect the concerns about the terrestrial eco systems noted in the judgement.
“The EAC would be at liberty to lay down appropriate conditions concerning air, water, noise, land, biological and socio-economic environment,” the court said in its 93-page judgment.
It also asked the EAC to take note of the assurances given by concessionaire GMR Group that it is willing to adopt and implement necessary safeguards bearing in mind international best practices governing the greenfield airports.
