NGT clears Nicobar mega project, says adequate safeguards in environmental nod

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has given a significant legal green signal to the ambitious Great Nicobar mega infrastructure project, ruling that there were “no good grounds to interfere” with the environmental clearance granted to the development. The tribunal said the project had adequate safeguards in its environmental clearance (EC) conditions, and highlighted its strategic importance in its order on Monday.

A six-member special bench of the NGT, led by chairperson Justice Prakash Shrivastava, dismissed a batch of petitions challenging clearances for the multi-component project.

In its order, the tribunal directed authorities and regulatory agencies to ensure full and strict compliance with the environmental conditions under which clearance was granted.

The Rs 80,000-crore Great Nicobar project, located on the southernmost and largest of the Nicobar Islands, spans around 166 square kilometres.

It includes plans for a transshipment port, an integrated township, a civil and military use airport, and a 450 MVA gas and solar power plant. The diversion of roughly 130 square kilometres of forest land is part of the project’s development blueprint.

The environmental clearance for the project was initially granted in November 2022, with an in-principle forest clearance following in October 2022. Opponents of the project had argued that aspects of the plan, especially in ecologically sensitive or restricted coastal zones, violated environmental rules and regulations.

Prominent environmental activist Ashish Kothari was among the petitioners. His pleas before the NGT had raised several concerns, including alleged violations of the Island Coastal Regulation Zone (ICRZ) Notification, 2019, which prohibits certain development activities in designated coastal “no-go” areas. Petitions sought exclusion of project components such as parts of the port, airport and township from ICRZ-restricted zones.

Another key issue raised in court filings claimed that a high-powered committee, constituted by the NGT in a previous order to revisit the project’s environmental clearance, did not fully evaluate all environmental implications. The petitioners urged that the tribunal’s earlier direction to reassess the EC had not been complied with in spirit.

The NGT acknowledged these submissions but concluded that the environmental clearance conditions, as structured, were sufficiently robust to guard against significant ecological harm. It also took into account its reasoning from earlier litigation involving the project and noted the infrastructure plan’s strategic and economic significance.

While the NGT has disposed of the latest legal challenges, it reiterated the importance of agencies enforcing the environmental safeguards attached to the EC in full.