BALANCING PROGRESS: SUPREME COURT WEIGHS IN ON DOLOO AIRPORT PROJECT AMID ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
Category: JUDGEMENT REVIEW
「 ✦ Content ✦ 」
Fact of the case:
The ministry of Civil Aviation has planned to establish a new airport at Doloo and for this reason they want to cut the tea bushes and shade trees without an Environmental Clearance. The appellant contended this is the breach of environmental laws. Many people who are against the project have complained and a report of investigation stated that a large area of land has already been cleared Which includes the tea bushes and also the shade trees without following any proper mechanism.
Legal Provisions:
The EIA Notification, 2006: It stated that prior Environmental Clearance for projects listed in its Schedule.
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986: It mandates prior Environmental Clearance (EC) for certain types of projects, including airport.
Contentions of Petitioner-
The petitioners, represented by Mr. Prashant Bhushan, argued that they are building an airport without maintaining any environmental laws and they cleared the tea bushes and trees without any environmental clearance and this violates the environmental laws and harms the environment and local people.
Contentions of Respondent-
The respondents, represented by Solicitor General Mr. Tushar Mehta, argued that no environmental clearance is required for remove the trees and tea bushes as these activities are routine in tea cultivation. The government claimed that the land was clear legally they followed all the protocols with necessary approval from the government and no people are affected for this. They also stated that clearance was just a regular maintenance, not related to the airport construction.
Judgement and Analysis-
The Supreme Court held that the land clearance for building the airport violates the provisions of environmental laws. The supreme court also slammed the lower court for not properly investigating the claims and ordered that no further work can be done without proper environmental clearance. The court also stated the importance of protecting the environment and ordered restoration of the land to its original state.
