PANAJI
The Supreme Court, while red-flagging the double-tracking project through the Molem wildlife sanctuary, pointed to the CEC’s recommendations on “alternate routes for transportation of coal were available.”
The apex court maintained, “We are in agreement with the CEC that the requirement of coal can be met by utilising the Krishnapatnam port which is a viable alternative for transportation of coal. The said suggestion would also prevent the degradation of the Western Ghats,” it asserted.
The Railway authorities have not adequately justified the destruction of the ecologically sensitive Western Ghats for an additional railway line, the court said in its order.
The apex court also cited the lack of a “detailed study and analysis of the impact of the proposed project on the biodiversity and ecological system of the protected areas under wildlife sanctuary.”
“The Ministry of Railways or RVNL have failed to provide any substantial basis for the requirement of doubling the railway line by addressing the impact which it would have on the habitat and the damage that it would cause to the environment,” the court bench of Justices L Nageshwara Rao, B R Gavai and Aniruddha Bose said in their judgement.
“In view of the difficult terrain having sharp curves and gradient as high as 1:37 for the proposed project, any further construction would invite a great disaster in the sensitive areas of Western Ghats as well,” the court said.
Crucially, despite protestations by the government that there would be no hiking the coal handling at the Mormugao port, the railway authorities, in arguments before the Supreme Court, justified the project claiming that “there is a likelihood that the requirement of coal and other raw materials would be doubled in the future and the proposed project is very much essential for the transportation of said goods.”
They pointed to a parliamentary clarification dated 02.02.2022 and a letter of the Ministry of Power, Government of India, to argue that there is no likelihood of a shift from a coal-based economy.
The court, while stating that a comprehensive study was necessary before the project can be undertaken said that its orders will not “preclude the RVNL to carry out a detailed analysis on the impact of the proposed project on the biodiversity and ecology of the protected areas under the wildlife sanctuary as indicated hereinabove and then submit a fresh proposal to the Standing Committee of NBWL which shall be considered in accordance with law.”
This, the court said, was because current studies were inadequate to allow the project to go ahead.
“It is necessary that there should be a detailed study and analysis of the impact of the proposed project on the biodiversity and ecological system of the protected areas under wildlife sanctuary. A detailed study undertaken by NTCA on the viability of the project for the Goa part is essential in view of the Bhagwan Mahaveer Wildlife Sanctuary being an important tiger corridor. The impact of the increase of section capacity by 2.5 times than by doubling the railway line in comparison to the single line along with increased mobility on wildlife problems in terms of sound pollution, vibrations etc. has not been taken into account by the Standing Committee of NBWL while recommending the project,” the SC said.
“Assessment of the impact which the project would have on the environment, especially in the protected area and wildlife sanctuary taking into account all the major factors such as the impact on the habitat, species, climate, temperature etc. caused due to felling of trees (not only for the laying of railway tracks but also for the secondary works such as setting up machinery, disposal of waste, and putting in place various mitigation measures etc.), movement of trains, human-wildlife interactions would have to be strictly undertaken before the project is considered by the NBWL,” the Supreme Court said.
“There is also no credible supporting data for the projections that are given by RVNL relating to the traffic between Karnataka and Goa project for the period 2022-2023 and 2030-2031 and there is no explanation regarding the projected traffic for the next 4-5 years which is required for the completion of the construction of the project. Such data, projections and speculations will have to be supported by an independent and credible source before undertaking any kind of construction activity in the Western Ghats which are the world’s eight hotspots of biological diversity,” the Court said.
