New Delhi: Refusing to entertain a plea against expansion of Pipavav port in Gujarat due to irregularities in environment clearance, the Supreme Court on Monday bluntly said – “Show us even one project where these environmentalists have said we welcome it”, while also emphasizing that the country cannot develop without infrastructure.Senior advocate Anita Shenoy, appearing for environmentalist Chetan Kumar Navintray Vyas, strongly argued that the project was stalled for over a decade and environmental clearance was given without considering the adverse impact on marine mammals, Olive Ridley turtles, avian species and mangroves.

‘You want to stop everything in the name of environment’

A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalaya Bagchi said that the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report has found the apprehensions to be baseless. National Green Tribunal It has since given a considered opinion to give the green signal to the port expansion.When Shenoy continued to emphasize that the NGT did not consider several shortcomings in the EIA report, the bench said port development activities are essential for the development of the country. It asked, “You want to stop everything in the name of environment. How can the country develop without infrastructure? There is no doubt that precautionary measures are necessary. But tell us where the depth of the sea allows big ports like in Gujarat.”The bench asked, “Where else can such ports be established? Do you want port-related economic activities to go to other countries?” Refusing to entertain the appeal against the NGT order, it allowed the environmentalist to again approach the Western Region NGT in Pune pointing out that his objections to the project had not been considered.The lawyer said that 90% of the fish landed off the Saurashtra coast is in the Pipavav port area and this expansion would be the death knell for fishermen and economic activities related to fish business in the area.The bench said that economic activity is not considered while preparing the EIA report. “Your basic objection was that it would cause disturbance to the turtle nesting area. The Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) has not found your claim to be correct. Their inspection report says so,” the bench said.The tribunal, in its November 26 order, had referred to the EIA report of the project, which had said that detailed studies on plant diversity, marine ecology and biodiversity, including avian biodiversity impact studies, showed no significant adverse impacts. The study also describes the port area as a haven for bird diversity.