Sushree Mohanty
The Delhi High Court has expressed its opinion that the draft for the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) should be interpreted in all the 22 languages specified in the Eight Schedule of the Constitution. Said Court also directed the Central Government to not take it so “combatively”.
The court added that the people residing in far off areas inside the Indian territory are also citizens of the country. Thus, it would be difficult for them to comprehend the draft if it is published only in English and Hindi.
It said that these individuals too reserve the right to be heard.
“View taken by the court should not be taken so combatively by the Union government,” the special division bench comprising Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan said to the Environment Ministry which has been against interpreting the draft in the vernacular dialects.
The court further questioned on what ground was the Ministry opposing the suggestion and asked what might be the bias caused to the public authority if complaints were invited from their own citizens.
The court said that individuals living in far off regions of the nation probably will not be able to comprehend the substance of the draft of Environment Impact Assessment if its publication is limited to Hindi and English.
It was also stated that the statutory plan as well as standards of good administration seeks that everybody should to be included in the consultative cycle.
The bench added that it would be simple for the government to get the draft of the EIA printed and published in all the prescribed languages and proposed that it very well may be used in the peculiar realities of the case i.e it would not be considered as a reference or precedent.
The Court also issued directions to Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma to present on whether the draft of Environment Impact Assessment can be translated into all the 22 languages for a better consultative interaction.
The court has listed the matter for further deliberation on March 26, 2021.
ASG Sharma, during the proceedings submitted before the seat that interpretation of the draft in all 22 dialects may cause different administrative hindrance and the interpretations may not conform or emphasis on the real substance of the draft.
He additionally submitted to the bench that the government was not being contentious concerning the court’s suggestions.
Sharma further said that more than 20 lakh responses and opinions have been compiled on the draft EIA and hence, it cannot be stated that the consultative interaction or cooperation by the stakeholders was slanted.
The division bench was hearing the Centre’s request for review of its June 30, 2020 order to the Environment Ministry to translate the draft of EIA in the 22 languages within a time frame 10 days of the passing of the plea.
It had likewise extended the date for accepting public opinions and responses on the draft till April 11, 2020.
The verdict was passed in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by activist Vikrant Tongad, who was being represented by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayana, requesting for publication of the concerned EIA draft in all the 22 languages prescribed in the Constitution of India.
The plea additionally sought for extending the date for allowing the opportunity to compile public remarks on it.
The request was at first challenged by the Ministry in the Supreme Court which permitted the public authority to withdraw the appeal and file for a review under the scrutiny of the High Court.
The top court additionally stayed the procedures in the contempt plea recorded by Tongad for not complying to the verdict passed on the June 30 hearing.
Consequently, the Ministry documented a petition requesting for a review of the June 30 decision on grounds that official reports are needed to be published only in Hindi and English.
On January 27, Sankaranarayanan notified the court that while the draft has been interpreted in all the 22 languages by the authority, it was not ready to publish the same and needed to contend on whether such interpretations were holding any substance under the law.
The draft of Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) 2020, as per Tongad’s request, accommodates post facto approval of activities and additionally bars the public conference in certain situations.
The petition documented by Tongad had claimed that the draft EIA 2020 completely overrides and replaces the current environmental standards.
“This draft notification proposes significant changes to the existing regime, including removing public consultation entirely in certain instances, reducing the time for public consultation from 45 days to 40 days, and allowing post facto approvals for projects,” the plea said.
