Guwahati, June 23 (NationPress) The anticipated Greenfield Doloo Airport initiative in Assam's Cachar district made remarkable progress on Monday as the required public hearing wrapped up without any issues.

Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma celebrated this advancement in a post on X, describing it as "A Significant Advancement" in the state’s mission to develop Barak Valley into a bustling center of connectivity and economic growth.

"The public hearing for the Greenfield Doloo Airport project in Cachar district concluded without incident today — a pivotal achievement in our quest to make Barak Valley a nexus of connectivity and development," Sarma stated.

"We are now one step closer to realizing our ambitious vision for the area. Thank you to all stakeholders for their collaboration and support."

The public hearing, an essential component of the environmental clearance process, included participation from government officials, local inhabitants, and environmental specialists.

This peaceful conclusion is perceived as a favorable sign of public backing and a green light for the subsequent stages of approvals and groundwork.

Upon completion, the Doloo Airport project is anticipated to enhance tourism, increase regional accessibility, and create new opportunities for trade and employment in southern Assam.

Last year, the Supreme Court overturned a decision from the National Green Tribunal (NGT) that had denied a plea against land clearance at the Doloo Tea Estate in Silchar, Assam, for the proposed greenfield airport.

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification of 2006 was violated by the ongoing clearing activities, according to a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra.

Consequently, it annulled the Eastern Zonal Bench of NGT's ruling and mandated that no actions be taken that would breach the 2006 notification. The court further stated that the NGT had failed in its responsibilities by not considering the plea.

Importantly, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stated in an affidavit to the Supreme Court that no work would proceed until environmental clearance was obtained. The NGT ruling from March 25 that dismissed the argument against the removal of approximately 41 lakh bushes was under appeal in the court.

The petition presented to the NGT asserted that the airport's environmental clearance (EC) had not been granted, and the EIA report was still pending. During Monday's hearing, the CJI suggested maintaining the status quo until the environmental clearance report was procured.

In response to the petitioners, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta claimed that many of the petitioners, located about 1300 kilometers away, were submitting self-serving petitions. He maintained that on-site laborers had also cut down trees for personal use and emphasized the importance of considering the greenfield project's wind direction.

The CJI noted a report from the secretary of the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) in Cachar district that indicated the court-appointed officer faced challenges in accessing the area due to dense forest and hazardous wildlife, and that tea bushes had been uprooted using heavy machinery. The SG argued that the petitioners were misleading the court with certain images submitted.

The court advised against taking further action until an EIA report was available, despite the arguments. SG Mehta contended that erroneous claims about houses being demolished and trees being cut down were misleading the court.

"This is a clear example of the abuse of this court's jurisdiction. The so-called expert claims that some other land is more suitable and has never even visited the site," he stated.

However, the petitioners' advocate Prashant Bhushan highlighted that trees were also cut down alongside shrubs. He pointed out that it was acknowledged that 41 lakh tea bushes had been uprooted, arguing that the joint secretary's affidavit contained misleading information.

The court acknowledged that 41 lakh bushes had been removed, indicating that this act could not be classified as routine maintenance. It stated, "It is crucial to note that in this case, the site clearance was not related to the cultivation practices of the tea estate, nor did it constitute regular maintenance of a tea estate."

The court determined that the uprooting violated the EIA notification and criticized the NGT for "abdicating" its duty by dismissing the plea. The apex court nullified the NGT order and directed that the Assam government could again apply to commence work at the site once the clearance report was obtained.