NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a petition seeking expansion of Pipavav port in Gujarat and bluntly asked “show us a project which these environmentalists say we welcome” while also stressing that the country cannot develop without infrastructure.Anitha Shenoy, senior advocate for environmental activist Chetan Kumar Navintray Vyas, strenuously argued that the project had been stalled for more than a decade and environmental clearance was given without taking into account the adverse impact on marine mammals, olive ridley turtles, birds and mangroves.
“You want to stop everything in the name of the environment”
CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymlaya Bagchi said the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report found the concerns to be baseless, National Green Tribunal This was followed by thoughtful proposals for port expansion.While Shenoy went on to highlight the NGT’s failure to consider a series of flaws in the EIA report, the bench said the port development activities were necessary for the development of the country. “You want to stall everything in the name of environment. Without infrastructure, how can the country develop? No doubt, precautionary measures are necessary. But please tell us, where else have sea depths that allow setting up of mega ports like the one in Gujarat,” it asked.“Where else can such a port be established? Do you want the economic activities related to the port to go to other countries?” the judge asked. While refusing to entertain the appeal against the NGT order, it allowed the environmentalist to again approach the Pune-based NGT West, stating that his objections to the project were not considered.The lawyer said that 90% of the fish landings off the Saurashtra coast occur in the Pipavav port area, and the expansion will sound the death knell for fishermen and fishery-related economic activities in the area.The bench said economic activity is not a factor to consider while preparing the environmental impact assessment report. “Your basic objection is that this would disturb a turtle nesting area. The Expert Assessment Committee (EAC) found your claim to be untrue. Their inspection report said so,” the judge said.The tribunal, in its order on November 26, referred to the project’s environmental impact assessment report, stating that detailed studies on plant diversity, marine ecology and biodiversity, including a study on the impact on bird diversity, showed no significant adverse impacts. The study even described the port area as a haven for bird diversity.
