सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने ग्रेट निकोबार परियोजना के पीआईएल की वैधता पर कोलकाता हाई कोर्ट के आदेश को बरकरार रखा

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to interfere with a Calcutta High Court order upholding the maintainability of a PIL alleging violations of the Forest Rights Act in obtaining consent for the proposed Great Nicobar Island mega-infrastructure project.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana noted that the matter is already pending before the High Court and is scheduled for hearing on November 25-26. The Court requested the High Court to endeavour to take up the matter on the dates fixed.

Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the Union, submitted that the issue was of “great national importance” and questioned the maintainability of the PIL. He pointed out that the project’s environmental clearance had already been challenged before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), expressing concern over multiple proceedings challenging the project on different grounds.

The Attorney General questioned the belated filing of multiple petitions challenging the issue through distinct grounds. Calling the fundamental maintainability of the case a central issue, he asked the court for liberty to make additional submissions.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati also referred to the NGT proceedings.

Senior Advocate Dr S Muralidhar, appearing for a Tribal Council that had been impleaded, submitted that the case concerned Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) and that a PIL was therefore maintainable.

Justice Bagchi observed that since the High Court had already ruled on maintainability, questions concerning the scope of the PIL and the public interest involved could be left open.

He also raised broader questions concerning the constitutional protection of indigenous communities, referring to demographic changes among tribal populations in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

Justice Bagchi deliberated on the constitutional safeguards for indigenous populations, weighing full societal integration against the preservation of their distinct cultural identity. He observed that safeguarding a community’s unique culture constitutes a fundamental right under the Constitution.

The CJI thereafter indicated that the Supreme Court would request the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to take up the matter at the earliest. The Court was subsequently informed that other proceedings concerning the same issue were pending before the High Court.

In its order, the Supreme Court directed the High Court to complete pleadings in the other matters and make an endeavour to hear them on the dates already fixed. It also recorded assurances from both sides to cooperate with the proceedings.

The PILs before the Calcutta High Court were filed by a retired IAS officer challenging governmental actions concerning the Great Nicobar project, including alleged violations of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, and reduction of eco-sensitive buffer zones.

The Union had challenged the petitioner’s locus standi, noting that she was a Hyderabad resident. The High Court, however, held that there could be “no thumb rule” governing locus standi in PILs involving vulnerable communities.

It also held that the project’s national importance or substantial expenditure did not place it beyond judicial review, prompting the Union to approach the Supreme Court.

Powered by Nyaya 247 News