Supreme Court Slams Authorities For Starting Airport Construction At Silchar Without Obtaining EC; Criticises NGT For Its Non-Interference

The Supreme Court on Monday (May 6) came down heavily upon the manner in which the National Green Tribunal (NGT) 'abdicated' its duties by not interfering in the construction of the Silchar Greenfield Airport Project which was proceeding without obtaining the mandatory prior Environmental Clearance.

The Court also slammed the authorities for carrying out extensive clearance of the site (nearly 41 lakh tea bushes were uprooted and several shade trees were felled) without the prior EC. The argument of the authorities that the tea bushes were cleared as part of regular operations of tea cultivation did not convince the Court.

The Court, while setting aside the order of the NGT, 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 matter pertains to the project of constructing a commercial airport at Silchar, Assam. The area identified for clearance included the tea estates of Doloo, Silkori expanding around 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 the prior environmental clearance in terms of the Notification dated September 14, 2006. Though the activities were challenged by the appellants before the NGT, the Tribunal did not interfere.

Taking a stern view of the matter, the bench observed that NGT had a rather lackadaisical approach in handling the grievances of the appellants.

" In this background, we have come to the conclusion that there has been a complete abdication of duties by the NGT. As an expert body formed by a Statute enacted by the Parliament in the interest of the preservation of the environment, it was upon the duty of the Tribunal to verify the authenticity of the grievance of the appellants" 

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) dismissed the original appeal noting that since the EIA was awaited, the case of the appellants was devoid of merit at the present stage. 

On April 24 , the Top Court had directed the Secretary of 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) nature of the activities being carried out. The Court also noted that as per the affidavit filed on April 22 by the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, General Administration department there was no such felling of 'shade trees at the site in question'; no eviction of individuals or household. The Government also claimed that the removal of the tea bushes was happening regularly as part of the tea cultivation practice, and for this, no environmental clearance was required. 

On April 27, the Judicial officer Ms Salma Sultana (DLSA Secretary) reported to the Supreme Court.  As per the Affidavit of the Judicial Officer : (1) 89 shade trees have been found to be cut down; (2) since the entire area was a dense forest, other possible feelings of shade trees were not visible.

After examining the report, the court noted that more than 41 lac tea bushes had been destroyed as per the statement of the local circle officer therein 

" According to the statement of the Circle Officer Mr Arun Jyoti Dass, 41,95,909 tea bushes have been uprooted.....several witnesses who were examined by the officer appointed by this court has stated that tea bushes were uprooted from Doloo Tea Estate, Airport Site with the help of JCBs in the month of May 2022 and the entire operation which took over 3 days involved around 200-250 JCBs day and night. The witnesses have said that the shade trees were uprooted and cut as well. The Court must take cognisance of the fact that these witnesses have not been tested on the anvil of cross-examination. At the same time, at this stage, it would prima facie appear that these statements would match with the statements of the Circle officer to the effect that 41,95,905 tea bushes have been uprooted." 

The State of Assam had however filed an application before the Court seeking directions to initiate proceedings against the present appellants for 'misleading the Court' in obtaining the orders dated April 24. The application was however not pressed by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the respondent authorities, today.

The court deprecates the conduct of the officials

Observing the severe damage caused to the land site without prior clearances and EIA, the bench observed that the conduct of the officials was in violation of the environmental norms. 

" The authorities in the present case have acted in violation of the provisions contained in Para 2 of the notification dated 14.9.2006. by carrying out an extensive clearance at the site even in the absence of an environment clearance.....When the law specifically prescribes norms for carrying out the activities requiring environmental clearance, the provisions of the law have to be duly complied with....In the above view of the matter, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the NGT dated 25.1.2024. In consequence, there shall be a direction that there shall be no activity shall be tendered in breach of the notification date of September 14, 2006." 

The Court further clarified that any applications for grant of environmental clearances in future for the said project will be processed only on the basis of the condition of the site as it stood prior to the illegal clearance of shade trees and bushes took place.  

Respondents question the report of the District Judge; the Court stands by the report

During the hearing, the Solicitor General Mr Tushar Mehta (SG) contended that the findings of the report submitted by the judicial officer could not be relied upon as far as it was stated that the area contained a 'dense forest'. As per the SG, the site only contained bushes and trees. 

However, the CJI interjected, reiterating that the report has high credibility since it comes from a District Judge. 

"No, there is a dense forest. She's a district judge!" 

To which the SG replied, "These are bushes, My lordships can ask her what is her definition of Forest" 

CJI highlighting the relevance and weightage of the findings of the report expressed, "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 ...."  

Advocate Mr Prashant Bhushan appearing on behalf of the appellants countered the submission of the State that the removal of tea bushes was part of the regular cultivation practice. He directed the attention of the bench to the statements of the tea garden employees who stated that the vegetation was removed with the help of bulldozers and JCBs only after the site was taken into possession by the authorities. He further supplemented the argument with the help of various news reports which stated the same. 

Appearing on behalf of the intervenors, Senior Advocate Mr Gopal Sankaranarayanan said that there existed no such practice of uprooting tea bushes as part of any tea garden cultivation. 

" I don't know about Gujarati Tea but as far as Kerala 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

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 370

Click here to read the judgment