'Show us one development project they welcomed': SC pulls up ‘so-called environmentalists’

The court remarked that the people coming to the courts should not say that everything should be stalled, as it affects the country’s progress.

The Supreme Court on Monday came down heavily upon the practice of filing petitions to stall developmental projects by so called environmentalist, wondering how the country will progress if such pleas are raised.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked, “Show us even a single project in this country where these so-called environmental activists have said that we welcome this project."

Emphasizing that the attempt should never be to stall developmental projects, the bench, however, clarified that courts have always been concerned with environmental issues. 

The bench said the courts are also critical of anything that affects the environment.

The court was hearing a plea against an order of the National Green Tribunal's western zone bench, which had dismissed an appeal seeking the quashing of the environmental and coastal regulation zone clearance granted for the expansion and modernisation of the Pipava Port in Gujarat.

The bench said, "In this country, the kind of petitions being filed are only to stall development. That is the problem. How is the country going to progress?"

The bench said that it would appreciate, if environmentalists or activists approached the court with effective suggestions aimed at ensuring sustainable development and protection of the environment.

The bench said that when a project is proposed, initially, one may have apprehensions, including genuine ones, regarding the impact on the environment.

However, the people coming to the courts should not say that everything should be stalled, as it affects the country’s progress, it said.

In the case, the bench said the NGT passed a very detailed order in the matter. It granted the petitioner liberty to move a review application before the NGT specifically to point out whether or not the issue raised on his behalf was duly considered in the environmental impact assessment report.