Summary
The Court upheld the NGT’s directions concerning an expanded residential project undertaken without the prescribed environmental appraisal. Under the notification as applicable, expansion beyond the capacity covered by an existing clearance required the paragraph 7(ii) process even within the Schedule’s upper threshold. A purported amendment without updated application and expert review was insufficient. Because construction was complete, the expert committee was to assess remedial measures and compensatory exaction; the Rs 1 crore deposit direction stood.
Issues
- Whether expansion within the Schedule’s upper threshold required fresh appraisal beyond the capacity already cleared.
- Whether the amended clearance and NGT’s remedial directions could stand.
Provisions considered
- Paragraphs 2(ii), 7(ii) and Schedule entry 8(a), Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006Read together, they required appraisal of expansion beyond the capacity covered by the existing clearance despite remaining within the upper area threshold. (¶¶ 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17)
Held
- Paragraph 2(ii) could not be read in isolation from paragraph 7(ii). Expansion beyond the capacity for which clearance had been granted required a fresh application and scrutiny, even without crossing the Schedule’s upper threshold. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14, 16)
- Allowing incremental expansion through amendments without expert appraisal would defeat environmental oversight. The Court would not itself create a marginal-expansion exception absent a provision in the governing notification. (¶¶ 14, 15, 16)
- The increase from 32,395.17 to 40,480.88 square metres, including sixteen additional flats, was approved without an updated Form 1 or SEAC evaluation. The purported amendment could not replace the prescribed holistic assessment. (¶¶ 4, 9, 17)
- Completed construction had deprived the authorities of prior assessment and mitigation opportunities. The NGT’s deposit and expert-committee directions were upheld, with continued evaluation of remedial measures and proposed compensatory exaction. (¶ 18)
Result
Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs. NGT’s Rs 1 crore deposit and expert-committee directions upheld. Committee to continue evaluating measures bringing impact as close as possible to the original clearance and suggest compensatory exaction. Pending applications disposed of.