Full Breakdown
Supreme Court Declines to Intervene in Great Nicobar Project Litigation, Sends Matter Back to Calcutta High Court
By Drooid · · How we work
Supreme Court’s Procedural Ruling
On October 5 2026, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court—Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana—rejected the Union government’s request to stay the Calcutta High Court’s order that permits public-interest litigations (PILs) challenging the Great Nicobar Island development. The Court noted that the maintainability issue had already been decided by the High Court and directed that the pending matters be heard on the dates already fixed, November 25 and 26 2026.
Background & Context
The Great Nicobar Project is a large-scale infrastructure plan aimed at strengthening India’s strategic presence near the Strait of Malacca. The government describes the scheme as vital for maritime connectivity and national security. The proposal includes an international container trans-shipment terminal (capacity 14.2 million TEU), a greenfield airport for 4,000 peak-hour passengers, a 450 MVA gas-solar power plant and a planned township.
Former Indian Administrative Service officer Meena Gupta, who previously served as secretary of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, filed PILs alleging that statutory approvals for the project violate the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006. The petitions contend that the Shompen and Nicobarese tribes were not consulted before forest-land diversion and that eco-sensitive buffer zones around Galathea and Campbell Bay National Parks were reduced.
Data & Statistics
- Estimated project cost: INR72,000 crore (government estimate cited in several sources) and INR92,000 crore (reported by other outlets).
- Forest land slated for diversion: ? 130.75 sq km (about 130 sq km of rainforest).
- Infrastructure components: 14.2 million TEU terminal, 4,000-passenger airport, 450 MVA power plant.
Official Statements & Responses
- Attorney General R V Venkataramani argued that the PILs should be dismissed because Gupta, a resident of Hyderabad, lacks direct cause of action in the islands and because the project is of “great national importance.” He warned that “the door” should remain open for the Centre to make further submissions.
- Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati highlighted that the environmental clearance for the project has already been examined before the National Green Tribunal and cautioned against multiple overlapping proceedings.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- Project Cost: Sources differ, citing either INR72,000 crore or INR92,000 crore. No definitive figure is confirmed in the available reports.
- Environmental Impact Details: While multiple outlets mention forest diversion and loss of rainforest, precise numbers of trees felled and the extent of coral-reef damage are not uniformly reported.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Do they become integrated completely with the mainstream, or do we keep them with their unique identity and the identity of their culture? Preservation of culture is a constitutionally protected fundamental right,” — Justice Bagchi
What’s Next
The Calcutta High Court is scheduled to hear the consolidated petitions on November 25 and 26 2026. Both the Union government and petitioners have pledged full cooperation, and the High Court is expected to address the remaining questions of public interest, tribal rights, and compliance with the Forest Rights Act.