Team Herald
MARGAO: Farmers from Loutolim and Borim, who had petitioned the National Green Tribunal (NGT) against the construction of the proposed Borim bridge were left dejected after their hearing was adjourned to April 23. The delay has fuelled concerns that the Public Works Department (PWD) may use the extended time to proceed with the project despite pending legal challenges.
The petitioners, who filed their case in May 2024, were expecting clarity on the next steps. However, before proceedings could begin, the case was marked as adjourned due to the tribunal’s packed schedule in February and March. Their lawyer urged the bench to reconsider and set an earlier date for arguments to continue, but with technical resource personnel from Chennai unavailable, the bench only advised submitting objections and demands next Monday.
Farmers remain skeptical that the matter will be brought forward and fear that repeated adjournments are part of a strategy to allow the state and central authorities to push ahead with the project unhindered. They have already blocked multiple attempts by authorities to carry out site demarcation, but with land acquisition completed and no legal stay in place, they worry that PWD may proceed with construction.
Adding to their frustration, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) did not submit a fresh affidavit as requested in the last hearing, which was meant to clarify environmental clearance (EC) requirements. Similarly, the State government, via PWD’s National Highway division, has yet to file its reply to the farmers’ demand for an interim stay on construction work.
At the core of the case is whether the bridge project exceeds 150,000 square meters, a threshold that would require mandatory EC under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006. The NGT had earlier directed PWD to submit exact project dimensions, but the information remains pending. Without these details, the MoEFCC has stated it cannot determine whether the project falls under category 8(b) of the EIA Notification.
With their hopes for an early ruling dashed, the farmers are now considering approaching the High Court. They plan to discuss their next legal steps before issuing a formal statement.