The Supreme Court recently criticized the misuse of environmental concerns by certain NGOs to obstruct developmental projects, cautioning that such litigations might be driven by vested interests, including unsuccessful bidders or external entities seeking to hinder India’s progress.

The Court dismissed an appeal challenging the National Green Tribunal’s (NGT) approval of a floating solar power project at Jayakwadi Dam, emphasizing that even environmentally beneficial projects should not be stalled under the pretense of environmental protection.

The case stemmed from a petition filed by the NGO 'Kahar Samaj Panch Committee' before the NGT, opposing the installation of a floating solar power project by Tehri Hydro Development Corporation (THDC) at Jayakwadi Dam, which is designated as a bird sanctuary. The NGO contended that the project would threaten the area’s biodiversity and endanger avian species, as the site had been classified as an eco-sensitive zone by the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change.

THDC, a central public sector undertaking (PSU), had initiated the project in line with the Union government’s renewable energy policies. The NGT, after reviewing submissions, ruled that no legal provision explicitly prohibited the establishment of a floating solar project within an eco-sensitive zone and upheld the project’s approval.

The petitioner argued that the solar installation posed environmental risks, potentially disrupting the ecological balance by affecting aquatic life and bird movements. They also claimed that the project lacked sufficient environmental assessment and regulatory clearance.

Rejecting the appeal, the Supreme Court remarked, "It has become a recurring practice for certain NGOs to obstruct developmental initiatives under the pretext of environmental concerns, often without substantive legal backing. The Court remains sensitive to genuine ecological concerns but will not permit the judicial process to be misused for ulterior motives." The Bench noted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any statutory prohibition against floating solar projects in eco-sensitive zones.

The Court further observed that the NGT had thoroughly scrutinized the issue and sought specific legal provisions restricting such projects, to which the NGO failed to provide a satisfactory response. While underscoring the importance of environmental protection, the Bench asserted that it cannot be misused as a tool to hinder infrastructure and energy projects without concrete evidence of legal or ecological violations.

By dismissing the appeal and upholding the NGT’s decision, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the need for a balanced approach—ensuring that environmental concerns are genuine and substantiated, rather than being used as a pretext to stall progress.

The judgment reinforced the commitment to sustainable development, allowing legitimate environmental issues to be addressed without unwarranted disruptions to growth.