oppn parties Address Environmental Concerns, But Development Must Go On

News Snippets

  • P V Sindhu assumes charge as Badminton World Federation council member after she was elected as chair of its Atheletes Commission in December 2025
  • Thomas Cup badminton: India beat Australia 5-0
  • Women's cricket: South Africa beat India by 3 runs in the 5th and final T20 to win the series 4-1
  • IPL: As pacers shine, Delhi just about avoid the lowest IPL total, manage to score 75, which RCB overtake in 6.3 overs losing just one wicket. Josh Hazlewood (4 for 12) and B Kumar (3 for 5) demolish DC
  • Isro plans to send civilians with STEM background to space
  • Government will consider giving law-making powers to local bodies in Ladakh
  • Supreme Court rules that a court can deny or cancel anticipatory bail but cannot direct an accused to surrender
  • Delhi police special cell cop, Neeraj Balhara, shoots and kills a delivery executive in Jafarpur Kalan area of NCR after an altercation. Another person was also injured in the shooting
  • Campaigning for the TMC in Bengal, Arvind Kejriwal asks whether the people of the state are 'terrorists' as the Centre has deployed over 2 lakh CAPF personnel for the polls
  • Campaining heats up in closing stages in the Bengal election with PM Modi leading the charge for the BJP and Mamata Banerjee replying ferociously for the TMC. Second phase polling is in Wednesday, 29th of April
  • Supreme Court panel sets minimum standards of staffing, equipment and infrastrcutre for hospitals having ICU facility
  • Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman says India's domestic consumption is the strongest shield against global shocks
  • Government is planning relief measures for airlines as the Gulf war shows no signs of ending soon
  • Women's cricket - 4th T20 versus South Africa: India win by 14 runs as Deepti Sharma turns in an allround show (39 not out and 5 for 19)
  • Sebastian Sawe of Kenya breaks the two-hour barrier in marathon, winning the London Marathon in 1 hour 59 minutes and 30 seconds
India signs a "once-in-a-generation" trade pact with New Zealand which aims to double bilateral trade to $5bn over the next five years
oppn parties
Address Environmental Concerns, But Development Must Go On

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2016-01-26 18:56:01

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
image courtesy: delhigreens.com

The Supreme Court has, in two recent cases, categorically stated that it cannot stop development or play havoc with the economy in order to save animals or control pollution. While reiterating that saving tigers was important, the court said that it cannot be done at the cost of human beings. It also said that it will do its best to help reduce pollution, but that does not mean it will do so by passing orders that will create havoc in the economy.

The first observation was made in a case filed by some NGO’s, led by Conservation Action Forum, seeking to stop the widening of NH-7 between Nagpur and Jabalpur that passes through the Pench Tiger Reserve in Madhya Pradesh, on the grounds that the same would impede tiger migration routes. The Court said “tigers are important. But what happens to the movement of traffic? It is not the first time that a national highway is passing through a reserved forest. We are for protecting tigers. Tell us what are the mitigating factors that could be implemented by the project proponent so that tiger migration routes are not impeded.”

This is a very logical line of thinking by the SC. NGO’s nowadays seek total ban on development projects which is not a good thing. There are always ways where development can go on by accommodating ecological, animal protection or pollution controls. But these NGO’s do not employ their energies in seeking this. They always appeal to the courts or the NGT to stop the project. This is very restrictive activism that harms the country. In the instant case, animal friendly highways, with flyovers over the areas comprising animal movement corridors is the best solution. But the NGO’s did not pitch for that. Instead, they want to stop the widening of the highway.

But one thing the SC has to guard against and direct the government is the mushrooming of commercial establishments like shops, dhabas and resorts along the highway as it passes through the forest. It is seen that the forest area gives a huge business opportunity to unscrupulous people who set up commercial units, disregarding court established norms by bribing government officials. With time, these units create huge problem in animal movement, as is now being experienced in Kaziranga in Assam. There should be mechanism, or a special force, that monitors and stops, all kinds of construction activity – whether concrete structures or tin sheds – from coming up on either side of the highways as they pass through the forest or across known animal movement corridors.

The second observation was made in the case where application of BS VI norms was being discussed. Since BS VI seeks to make cleaner fuel available for vehicles, the government it would advance the deadline to 2020 from the earlier decided 2023. But advocate G. Shankaraanarayan wanted the court to direct two public sector units, Reliance and Essar, to sell their cleaner fuels in the domestic markets rather than export it, as they were doing now. The Court called it a fancy idea. It said that it cannot ask the government to take over private refineries. It also said that “it is one thing to direct the government to take steps to curb pollution and quite another to direct something that would play havoc with the economy.”

In the first case, the NGO’s also pleaded with the court to let NGT remain the right forum to deal with environmental clearance and other related issues. But the court refused, saying that if a matter was being heard by any High Court, the NGT cannot be allowed to hear it. One feels that the NGO’s are playing a game. In NGT, they find a one-dimensional forum where they can challenge and stop a project by highlighting only its harmful effects. They never suggest how the project can be altered, or what environment friendly things can be added, for it to go ahead. Instead, they seek a total ban. The NGT views the matter only from the environmental point of view and issues orders accordingly. This will, hopefully, not happen now as the Supreme Court has observed that development cannot be stopped on fancy pretexts.