Great Nicobar Project: Centre Asks the Supreme Court to Halt Forest Rights Hearings in the Calcutta High Court

🗞️ Why in News The Union government, through the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), has filed a special leave petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court seeking a stay of the Calcutta High Court proceedings in which a former Environment and Tribal Affairs Secretary, Meena Gupta, alleges that the Forest Rights Act, 2006 was violated in obtaining consent for the Great Nicobar Island project, The Hindu reported on 29 September 2026. The SLP is listed tentatively for 5 October; the High Court has fixed the final hearing for 25 and 26 November.

The Case So Far

What the petitions challenge. Over two years, Ms Gupta has challenged: the Gram Sabha resolutions consenting to diversion of forest land; the constitution of the SDLC under the FRA; the notifications reducing the buffer zones of the Campbell Bay and Galathea National Parks; and a certificate from the Andaman and Nicobar administration that all rights under the FRA had been identified and settled.

What the Centre argues. That she has no standing, that the petitions are an abuse of process, and that the country’s growth cannot be stopped by the claims of private individuals.

What the High Court said in May. The petitioner, who helped draft the bill that became the FRA, has “sufficient interest” and is “espousing the cause of the vulnerable tribal community”. On cost and national importance: “A project involving huge expenditure must proceed in accordance with governing laws holding the field and it is not beyond the scope of judicial review on permissible parameters.”

The Project

The Holistic Development of Great Nicobar Island, conceived by NITI Aayog and executed by the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Integrated Development Corporation (ANIIDCO), has four parts:

Its cost was put at about Rs 72,000 crore when proposed; The Hindu’s report now describes it as a Rs 92,000-crore project. It requires the diversion of about 130.75 sq km of forest.

Why the location matters. Great Nicobar is India’s southernmost island; Indira Point is the country’s southernmost point. The island sits about 40 nautical miles from the main shipping route through the Six Degree Channel and near the western approach to the Strait of Malacca, one of the world’s busiest chokepoints. A transshipment hub here would cut India’s dependence on Colombo, Singapore and Port Klang for container transshipment and add strategic depth in the Bay of Bengal and Indian Ocean.

The Island and Its People

• Shompen: a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG) of hunter-gatherers in the interior forests, numbering a few hundred (229 in Census 2011). The Ministry of Tribal Affairs’ Shompen Policy (2015) says their welfare and integrity must be given priority when large-scale development is considered.
• Nicobarese: a Scheduled Tribe; many coastal villages were displaced by the 2004 tsunami. The Tribal Council of Little and Great Nicobar has disputed the consent process and, in July 2026, called the recorded settlement of forest rights false.
• Protected areas: Campbell Bay National Park and Galathea National Park (both 1992), within the Great Nicobar Biosphere Reserve (1989; UNESCO Man and the Biosphere network, 2013). Galathea Bay is a major nesting beach of the leatherback turtle; the island also has the Nicobar megapode and Nicobar macaque.
• Law: the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Protection of Aboriginal Tribes) Regulation, 1956 protects tribal reserves.

The Legal Questions

1. Forest rights before diversion. The FRA, 2006 recognises individual and community forest rights (Section 3) and bars eviction or removal of forest dwellers until recognition and verification are complete (Section 4(5)). An MoEFCC circular of 3 August 2009 requires, before forest land is diverted, a certificate that FRA rights have been settled and the consent of the Gram Sabha. In the Niyamgiri case (Orissa Mining Corporation v. MoEF, 2013), the Supreme Court held that the Gram Sabha must decide on the community’s claims before diversion. Whether the Great Nicobar certificate reflects a real settlement of rights is the heart of the petitions.

2. Who can sue. Public interest litigation relaxed the rule of locus standi: in S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981), the Court held that where the affected are too poor or disadvantaged to approach the court, any member of the public acting bona fide may do so. The High Court applied this; the Centre’s SLP asks the Supreme Court to reverse it.

3. Development and review. The Supreme Court’s ruling will set the forum and the pace: a stay would pause the only proceeding that examines the tribal-rights question on its merits.

Analysis

For the project. Strategic depth near Malacca; a transshipment hub that keeps Indian cargo and revenue at home; defence infrastructure in a region where China’s naval presence is growing; development of a remote island territory.

For caution. An irreplaceable rainforest and coral ecosystem; a PVTG with little contact with outsiders and high vulnerability to disease; an island in Seismic Zone V whose southern coast subsided in the 2004 earthquake; and a consent process that, if flawed, undermines the FRA’s promise everywhere.

The balance. Strategic importance does not suspend the law. The quickest route to certainty is a full hearing on whether rights were actually settled, followed by strict compliance with the NGT’s safeguards: independent monitoring, compensatory afforestation that is real, protection of turtle nesting beaches, and a Shompen-first approach as the 2015 policy requires.

UPSC Relevance

GS Paper 3. Conservation, environmental impact assessment, infrastructure (ports), security challenges in border areas. GS Paper 2. Mechanisms for the protection of vulnerable sections (PVTGs, forest dwellers); judicial review and PIL. GS Paper 1. Geography of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

A question worth preparing. “The Great Nicobar project is a test of whether strategic infrastructure and the Forest Rights Act can coexist.” Examine. (250 words)

The Mains framing. Explain the project and its strategic logic. State the FRA safeguards (Section 3, Section 4(5), the 2009 circular, Niyamgiri). Present the PVTG and ecological concerns. Use the locus standi dispute to show the role of judicial review. Conclude with conditions under which the project can proceed lawfully.

📌 Facts Corner, Knowledgepedia

Prelims, statement-ready facts:

• Project: ICTT at Galathea Bay, greenfield airport, township, gas-and-solar power plant; conceived by NITI Aayog.
• Forest diversion about 130.75 sq km; executing agency ANIIDCO.
• Shompen: PVTG, hunter-gatherers; Shompen Policy, 2015; Nicobarese are a Scheduled Tribe.
• Campbell Bay and Galathea National Parks (1992); Great Nicobar Biosphere Reserve (1989; UNESCO MAB 2013).
• FRA 2006: Section 3 rights; Section 4(5) no removal till rights are recognised and verified.
• Niyamgiri (2013): Gram Sabha decides on community claims before forest diversion.

Prelims, the traps:

• Indira Point (Great Nicobar) is India’s southernmost point; Kanyakumari is the southern tip of the mainland.
• The Six Degree Channel separates Great Nicobar from Sumatra; the Ten Degree Channel separates Andaman from Nicobar.
• An SLP is filed under Article 136; the Supreme Court may or may not grant leave.

Mains, arguments and keywords:

• Strategic depth near Malacca versus PVTG rights and a biodiversity hotspot; free, prior and informed consent.
• Locus standi in PIL (S.P. Gupta, 1981); judicial review of projects of “national importance”.

Interview, be ready for:

• “Should national security projects be exempt from forest rights law?” No: security needs can be met within the law, and a lawful process makes the project more durable.

Sources: The Hindu, Supreme Court Observer, on the May 2026 order, Mongabay India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs

Source: Great Nicobar Project: Centre Asks the Supreme Court to Halt Forest Rights Hearings in the Calcutta High Court — Ujiyari.com | Free UPSC & State PCS Current Affairs