The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that the ₹10,000 crore Salem-Chennai eight-lane green corridor road project was of “national importance” and did not require environmental clearance prior to land acquisition.
Appearing before a Bench led by Justice Arun Mishra, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said “there is a separate procedure” in place for the NHAI projects. This was different from the normal acquisition process.
The court, however, decided to hear the case on August 6.
Also read: Eight-lane Salem-Chennai green corridor: The land acquisition conundrum
Earlier, in a hearing, Mr. Mehta had compared getting environmental clearance before acquisition to “putting the cart before the horse”.
The authority has moved the Supreme Court with a plea to vacate an April 8, 2019 order of the Madras High Court , which held that prior environmental clearance was mandatory for the sensitive project.
‘Protests at this point baseless’
Mr. Mehta, for the NHAI, said the protests for environmental clearance at this point of the project was baseless as the government should be allowed to first acquire the land and then seek green clearance from the authorities concerned.
Acquisition came first, followed by environmental nod, Mr. Mehta maintained in court.
The High Court’s order had come on a batch of petitions filed by 35 landowners and PMK leader Anbumani Ramadoss. The pleas had challenged the land acquisition proceedings.
The High Court had made it clear that the grant of prior environmental clearance would undoubtedly require a thorough study of the area, and a public hearing should be conducted before that.
The ambitious 277.3-km-long eight-lane greenfield project connecting Salem and Chennai under the Centre’s ‘Bharatmala Pariyojana’ scheme aims to cut travel time between the two cities by half to about two hours and 15 minutes. However, it has been facing opposition from a section of locals, including farmers, over fears of losing their land, besides environmentalists who are against felling trees for it. The project runs through reserve forest and water bodies.
The High Court had wanted the project report by a consultant to be scrapped. It wanted a proper study, detailing the impact of the proposed project on forest lands, water bodies, wildlife, flora and fauna.
