Subscribe
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has cleared the way for a controversial mega port project in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, rejecting a series of petitions that warned of potentially devastating ecological damage and violations of environmental norms and coastal regulations.
The NGT has granted approval for the proposed port at Galathea Bay on Great Nicobar Island, allowing the project to proceed subject to the environmental clearance (EC) already granted and compliance with the Island Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019 (ICRZ-2019).
Galathea Bay, on Great Nicobar Island in the Andaman and Nicobar archipelago, is considered both ecologically sensitive and strategically significant. The area was once a nesting site for rare leatherback turtles and is now set to host the International Container Transshipment Port, which would become India’s 13th major port.
The NGT’s Eastern Regional Bench in Kolkata issued its order on 16 February on behalf of NGT Chairperson Justice Prakash Srivastava, alongside Justices Dinesh Kumar Singh and Arun Kumar Tyagi, and expert members A Senthil Vel, Afroz Ahmed and Ishwar Singh.
The tribunal said the project could proceed in line with the conditions of the environmental clearance and the Coastal Zone Regulations. It also made clear that no construction would be permitted in areas classified as CRZ-IA, the most ecologically sensitive coastal zones.
The tribunal acknowledged that the wider Great Nicobar project holds “vital importance” from the perspectives of national security, strategic location and economic development.
Addressing environmental concerns, the court noted that the clearance conditions included provisions for coral conservation and recorded that the project site did not contain significant coral reefs. It said affected coral colonies would be relocated using scientific methods.
The NGT also referred to the findings of a high-powered committee, which concluded that environmental data from one non-monsoon season was sufficient under existing guidelines for port projects. On that basis, the tribunal said there was no reason to interfere with the approval.
The project’s environmental impact assessment (EIA), based on single-season data, was upheld, as was the review conducted by the high-level committee set up earlier by the tribunal.
The court approved a coral translocation plan submitted by the Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), stating: “Corals are required to be protected and their destruction cannot be permitted in violation of the ICRZ Notification, 2019, but the stand of the respondents is to protect the corals through translocation.”
As reported by ZSI, no large coral reefs have been found in Galathea Bay, but the small corals that are there will be translocated, the court said.
“The above explanation reveals that no coral reef exists within the work area of the project. For existing scattered coral reefs, with quick growth characteristic in the adjoining area, translocation was suggested by ZSI,” the order stated.
Following site verification by the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM), the bench noted that no part of the project fell within the ICRZ-IA category.
The project site was located in CRZ-III areas and that there had been no violation in construction activity to date, it stated. “We find that the construction work under the project will be carried out within CRZ-III only and no activity will be carried out in CRZ-IA area in view of the protection of coastal areas,” the court said.
The tribunal directed that all construction must strictly comply with the environmental clearance conditions and coastal zone regulations, warning that any violation could result in a stay on the project.
“Considering the strategic importance of the project and taking into account the other relevant considerations, we do not find any good ground to interfere,” the order stated.
The project had been challenged before the NGT on grounds including alleged violations of environmental clearance conditions and the ICRZ Notification, 2019. Petitioners argued that the development could damage coral ecosystems, relied on incomplete environmental data and was situated in an environmentally sensitive area.
This marks the second phase of litigation over the project. In an earlier order dated 3 April 2023, the tribunal had upheld the environmental clearance on most counts and constituted a high-powered committee to examine specific outstanding issues.
The NGT observed that the environmental clearance imposed stringent safeguards, including the establishment of research centres, conservation measures for species such as the leatherback turtle and the Nicobar megapode, and the formation of committees to monitor pollution, biodiversity and tribal welfare.