This is an archive article published on March 17, 2025

Supreme Court sets aside NGT order on Auroville Township Project: ‘there is a need for sustainable development’

The Supreme Court also noted there was no environmental law violation in the Auroville matter, and that NGT’s directions were “legally untenable.”

The bench noted that there was no environmental law violation in the matter and the Tribunal’s directions were “legally untenable.” (File Photo)

By: Express News Service

4 min readNew DelhiMar 18, 2025 02:21 AM IST First published on: Mar 17, 2025 at 01:34 PM IST

The Supreme Court Monday set aside the National Green Tribunal (NGT) order restraining Auroville Foundation from proceeding with a proposed township project in Puducherry without environmental clearance, underlining the need to strike a balance between the right to development and the right to a clean environment.

While allowing the appeal by the Foundation challenging the April 28, 2022, order, a bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and P B Varale said, “Though it is true that precautionary principle and polluter pays principle are part of the environmental law of the country, it is equally true that while the right to clean environment is a guaranteed fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, the right to development equally claims priority under the fundamental rights, particularly under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, there is a need for sustainable development striking a golden balance between the right to development and the right to a clean environment”.

The bench noted that there was no environmental law violation in the matter and the Tribunal’s directions were “legally untenable.”

The NGT order came on a plea by environmental activist Navroz Kersasp Mody against the cutting of a large number of trees by the Foundation for the project, and allegedly intending to destroy the green areas developed in 1970. Mody contended the lands in question fit the dictionary meaning of forests and are entitled to protection as mandated in the T N Godavarman’s case by the Supreme Court.

Mody said in his plea that the Foundation failed to consider the objections of a section of the Auroville residents to the manifestation of roads in the project and was not willing to follow the due process of dialogue, consultation and adaptation of the Master Plan.

Mody contended that after the first tree nurseries were started with the help of grants from the Point Foundation, the Tamil Fund and friends abroad, large-scale tree planting began and in the next 10 years, as part of a massive soil and water conservation programme, over a million trees — timbers, ornamentals, fencing, fruit and fodder trees, nut trees etc — were planted here. As the trees grew, and micro-climates formed, many species of bird life and animals returned, further accelerating the dissemination of seeds and enriching the environment. Endangered floral species were planted and thrived in these forests.

The Foundation, on the other hand, said since its inauguration, Auroville has been developed as an international cultural township and not as a forest. The Foundation added it was established by The Auroville Foundation Act, 1988, to realise the ideals of Auroville including the building of a township with a population of 50,000. It said the Auroville Master Plan has been prepared and was approved under the authority of the Act and the Auroville Universal Township Master Plan (Perspective 2025) was approved by the Centre.

The NGT asked the Foundation to carry out any further activity only after obtaining the necessary prior Environmental Clearance (EC).

The Tribunal also appointed a committee comprising of the “District Collector who is the Chairman of the District Green Committee of the concerned district along with (ii) the Forest Officer not below the rank of Conservator of Forest, as deputed by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Head of Forests Force), State of Tamil Nadu to inspect the area in question and ascertain whether any modification can be made in the width of the road or by slight realignment (if any) required so that the number of trees to be cut can be minimized, find out whether there is any water body existing within that area and if that be the case, how the road will have to be constructed without obstructing the water flow by providing elevated bridge or other methodology without affecting the water flow inside the project area.”

The Foundation was directed to carry out further work only on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee.

While allowing the Foundation to carry out work on a proposed road in the township area, NGT directed it not to cut any further trees from the property till the Committee submitted its recommendations.