Overview
The Indian National Congress has criticised the Union government for seeking a Supreme Court order to stay all proceedings in the Calcutta High Court on five petitions related to the Great Nicobar Island Project. The move is described as an "astonishing U‑turn" and is said to jeopardise ongoing judicial scrutiny of alleged violations of the Forest Rights Act. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh warned that the government is pushing ahead with an ecological disaster.
Key Developments
- Union government approached the Supreme Court to stay further hearings in the Calcutta High Court on petitions challenging the Great Nicobar Island Project.
- The petitions allege violations of the Forest Rights Act, especially the lack of genuine Gram Sabha consent.
- The final hearing in the Calcutta High Court is scheduled for 25‑26 November 2026, while the Supreme Court plea is likely to be heard on 5 October 2026.
- Congress has urged Defence Minister Rajnath Singh to revisit the rejection of a full expansion of the INS Baaz runway and asked Tribal Affairs Minister Arun Oram to ensure strict implementation of the FRA.
Important Facts
The project cost has been revised upward to ₹92,000 crore from the earlier estimate of ₹72,000 crore. Critics argue that the environmental clearances were "deeply flawed" and that impact‑assessment reports were pre‑fixed. The proposed trans‑shipment port at Galathea Bay is feared to damage coral colonies and marine biodiversity. A senior official who has served in both the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change and the Ministry of Tribal Affairs filed one of the petitions, and the Calcutta High Court upheld her right to challenge the project.
Exam Relevance
This case touches upon several GS topics: environmental governance (GS4), the role of judicial review in large infrastructure projects (GS2), the implementation of the FRA and tribal rights, and the interplay between executive decisions and parliamentary opposition. Understanding the procedural aspects of high‑court and Supreme‑court interventions is essential for answering questions on the Indian legal system and environmental policy.
Way Forward
For the government, securing a Supreme Court stay could buy time to address procedural lapses, but it risks further criticism if ecological concerns are not resolved. Opposition parties are likely to continue pressing for transparent consent from the Gram Sabha and strict compliance with the FRA. Civil‑society groups may file additional petitions, and the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing on 5 October 2026 will shape the next phase of the project and set a precedent for future large‑scale infrastructure approvals in ecologically sensitive zones.