Read Time: 06 minutes

A Supreme Court bench of Justices Gavai and Hima Kohli today pulled up the National Green Tribunal for constituting a committee based on a letter by YSR Congress MP K Raghurama Krisham Raju to examine environmental impact of construction made at Rushikonda Hills by AP Tourism Board.

The tribunal had granted a stay against the construction works of the proposed tourism project on Rushikonda Hill next to the Visakhapatnam beach.

The above observations were made in an appeal filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh to vacate the interim order of the NGT.

Appearing for the State of Andhra Pradesh, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv, argued that the State had obtained the requisite permissions well in advance yet the NGT, on a letter written by the Raju, constituted a committee. He told the court that the NGT had constituted another committee despite the first committee telling the tribunal that the state had obtained prior permission.

Singhvi told the court that over 300 people are being employed by the project and Rs. 180 crores have been invested. He told the court that the same petitioner had initiated writ proceedings before the High Court and it had refused to grant any interim relief. It was argued that the NGT had gone ahead and stayed the project despite this. 

Court, on hearing the arguments, asked Singhvi if he could cite any judgment to that effect as NGT, being a tribunal, is subordinate to High Court. Singhvi informed the court that he will circulate the same tomorrow. The matter has accordingly been adjourned to June 1, 2022 for further consideration. 

The NGT had constituted a joint committee to look into the environmental viability of the hotel project and whether Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) clearances granted for the project should be revisited. The committee constituted by NGT consists of National Coastal Zone Management Authority (NCZMA), AP Coastal Zone Management Authority (APCZMA) and National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM).

Earlier the tribunal had constituted a four-member committee with the Central and State Pollution Control Boards, State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority and Vizag District Collector, it however chose to constitute a second committee even as the first committee informed it that there have been no violation. 

Raju, a Lok Sabha MP from YSR Congress wrote to the tribunal stating that there is a violation of environmental norms in the course of construction work. He further alleged that the project is in violation of the Master Plan notified by the Urban Development Department under the AP Urban Development Areas (Development) Act of 1975 and the area is environmentally sensitive and under Public Trust Doctrine, the State needs to protect it as per constitutional mandate by taking suitable measures.

Case title: State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Raghurama Krishnam Raju