Explained: NGT Cleared the Rs 80,000-crore Great Nicobar Mega Project 

In a significant ruling, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) has upheld the environmental clearance granted to the Rs 80,000-crore Great Nicobar mega infrastructure project. Calling the project “strategic” in nature, the Tribunal said it found no “good ground” to interfere, noting that “adequate safeguards” had been built into the environmental clearance.

The decision is likely to serve as an important reference point for future large-scale infrastructure projects in ecologically sensitive areas.

What is the Great Nicobar Mega Project?

The project is proposed on Great Nicobar Island, the southernmost island of India in the Bay of Bengal. Spread over nearly 166 sq km, it includes:

• A transshipment port
• An international civil and military airport
• An integrated township
• A 450-MVA gas and solar power-based plant

To execute this, around 130 sq km of forest land will be diverted and nearly one million trees are expected to be felled.

The scale of the project and its ecological footprint have triggered intense debate since its environmental clearance was granted in 2022.

Why Was the Project Challenged?

Petitions were filed before the NGT alleging:

• Violations of the Island Coastal Regulation Zone (ICRZ) Notification, 2019
• Non-compliance with an earlier 2023 NGT order
• Ecological risks, including coral reef damage
• Threats to endangered species
• Insufficient baseline environmental data

Environmental activist Ashish Kothari was among those who moved the Tribunal, arguing that portions of the project fell within prohibited coastal regulation zones.

There were also concerns from sections of the Nicobarese community about displacement from ancestral lands, especially in light of the devastation caused by the 2004 tsunami.

What Did the NGT Say?

A six-member special bench of the NGT, headed by Justice Prakash Shrivastava, examined whether the environmental clearance granted to the project was legally and procedurally sound.

The Tribunal framed the issue as requiring a “balanced approach” — weighing ecological protection against strategic national interest.

Key Findings of the NGT

1. No Ground to Interfere with Environmental Clearance

The Tribunal held that it did not find any sufficient legal basis to cancel or suspend the environmental clearance. It observed that:

• The project had been reviewed by a High-Powered Committee (HPC).
• Specific environmental safeguards had been incorporated.
• Conditions imposed in the 2022 clearance were binding on the government.

2. Strategic Importance Acknowledged

The NGT specifically noted the “strategic importance” of the project. Given Great Nicobar’s location near key international shipping routes, the transshipment port and military-civil aviation infrastructure are viewed as significant from a national security and trade perspective.

The Tribunal made it clear that strategic considerations cannot be ignored while evaluating such projects.

3. ICRZ Violation Allegations Rejected

A major question was whether parts of the project fell within prohibited zones under the Island Coastal Regulation Zone (ICRZ) Notification, 2019.

The NGT relied on the report of a High-Powered Committee headed by former Environment Secretary Leena Nandan. It concluded that no part of the project fell within prohibited ICRZ areas.

Although the full HPC report was not made public due to confidentiality and strategic concerns, the Tribunal relied on findings placed on record by the Centre through an affidavit.

What About Coral Reefs and Marine Ecology?

One of the most serious concerns raised was potential damage to coral reefs.

The NGT referred to past submissions of the Zoological Survey of India and concluded:

• No coral reef exists directly within the project area.
• Scattered coral patches, if affected, would be translocated.
• Coral regeneration measures must be implemented using proven scientific methods.

The Tribunal directed the Environment Ministry to ensure protection of coral reefs along the coastal stretch.

What Safeguards Did the NGT Highlight?

The Tribunal pointed to specific mitigation measures included in the environmental clearance:

• Protection of leatherback sea turtles
• Safeguards for the Nicobar megapode
• Measures for saltwater crocodiles
• Conservation of the robber crab
• Protection of the Nicobar macaque
• Safeguards for endemic bird species

It also directed that:

• Foreshore development must not cause erosion or shoreline changes.
• Sandy beaches must be preserved as they serve as nesting sites.
• No loss of beaches should occur due to construction activity.

Importantly, the NGT emphasised that the government is legally bound to comply with every condition in the environmental clearance.

Why Is This Order Significant?

This ruling could become a benchmark for future projects in ecologically sensitive regions.

The key takeaway from the judgment is the emphasis on a “balanced approach.” The Tribunal recognised that:

• Environmental safeguards must be strict and enforceable.
• Strategic infrastructure cannot be rejected solely on environmental apprehensions, if safeguards are in place.

This signals that courts may not lightly interfere with clearances granted to projects of strategic national importance, provided procedural compliance and mitigation measures are demonstrated.

What Happens Next?

With the NGT disposing of the batch of petitions, the project is cleared to move forward from the environmental litigation standpoint.

However, compliance monitoring will be crucial. The Tribunal has clearly stated that:

• All environmental conditions must be strictly implemented.
• The Environment Ministry must oversee enforcement.
• Ecological safeguards cannot remain on paper.

Future challenges, if any, may arise based on implementation failures rather than the validity of the original clearance.

The Larger Debate: Development vs Ecology

The Great Nicobar project sits at the intersection of three major questions:

1. Can large-scale infrastructure coexist with fragile island ecosystems?
2. How should “strategic importance” be weighed against biodiversity concerns?
3. Should high-level committee reports remain confidential when environmental stakes are high?

The NGT has taken a clear position — that with adequate safeguards and oversight, such projects can proceed.

Whether this balance holds in practice will depend on how rigorously environmental conditions are enforced on the ground.

In Summary

The NGT has upheld the environmental clearance for the Great Nicobar mega project, citing:

• Strategic national importance
• Adequate environmental safeguards
• No violation of prohibited coastal regulation zones
• Binding compliance conditions

The order reinforces a judicial trend that prioritises procedural compliance and mitigation mechanisms while acknowledging national infrastructure imperatives.

As construction advances, the real test will lie not in the courtroom, but in ecological compliance and ground-level monitoring.