Supreme Court Examines Teesta-III Dam Rebuild After Sikkim Disaster, Issues Notice Over Environmental Concerns

The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) arising from a Sikkim High Court judgment dated August 7, 2025, which had dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the State’s decision to reconstruct and disinvest its stake in the project.

The petition filed through AoR Raghvendra Kumar before the apex court contends that the High Court’s order was “cursory and unreasonable,” and failed to engage with critical ecological and human survival issues stemming from the October 3–4, 2023 disaster. The GLOF event caused massive flooding along the Teesta river basin, leading to large-scale destruction of infrastructure, including the Teesta-III dam at Chungthang, as well as displacement of thousands of people.

According to the plea, at least 1,756 families comprising over 7,000 individuals were displaced, with 55 confirmed deaths and more than 70 persons reported missing. Over 2,000 houses were destroyed, and multiple districts including Mangan, Gangtok, Namchi, and Pakyong suffered extensive damage. The petitioners argue that, despite the scale of devastation, no comprehensive post-disaster assessment report, environmental impact study, or public consultation was conducted before taking the decision to rebuild the dam.

A key challenge raised in the plea is against the environmental clearance granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change in January 2025 for reconstructing the 1200 MW project. The clearance reportedly allows for a significant redesign of the dam, increasing its height from 60 meters to over 118 meters, without any public hearing.

The petition argues that such a move ignores the fragile and seismically sensitive Himalayan ecology, especially in light of repeated warnings by environmental experts and prior studies highlighting the risks associated with glacial lakes and extreme weather patterns in the region. It further alleges that the 2023 disaster itself was a consequence of ignoring these warnings.

Apart from environmental concerns, the plea also questions the State government’s decision to disinvest its 60.02% stake in the project in favour of a private entity. It alleges that the decision was taken in a “hurried, opaque, and arbitrary” manner, just months before the State Assembly elections, and in violation of established disinvestment policies.

The petition claims that the Teesta-III project was a profit-making entity capable of revival, with substantial receivables and cash reserves, and that disinvestment was neither financially necessary nor in public interest. It further alleges that the move resulted in undue private gain at the cost of public resources, raising concerns of potential irregularities.

Importantly, the plea highlights that local tribal communities, particularly the Bhutia and Lepcha populations inhabiting the Teesta basin, were not consulted prior to the decision. It asserts that this omission violates established safeguards governing development in protected and restricted areas, including those requiring Inner Line Permit (ILP) compliance.

The petition also flags broader concerns about increasing ecological vulnerability in Sikkim, pointing to rising incidents of landslides, glacial retreat, and formation of new glacial lakes due to climate change. Studies by institutions such as the Wadia Institute of Himalayan Geology have indicated accelerated glacier loss in the region, heightening the risk of future GLOF events.

Taking note of the submissions, the Supreme Court has issued notice in the plea.

Case Title: Tseten Tashi Bhutia v. State of Sikkim

Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta

Hearing Date: March 23, 2026