REPORTED BY: Aamna Rabiya Shaikh
Location: Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
Case Details:
Case: Union of India v. Meena Gupta & Ors.
Diary No.: 44246/2026 Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana
The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with a Calcutta High Court order which had allowed a Public Interest Litigation concerning alleged violations of the Forest Rights Act in obtaining consent for the Great Nicobar Island mega-infrastructure project. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana heard the matter on October 5, 2026. The Union Government had challenged the Calcutta High Court’s decision concerning the maintainability of the PIL.
The PIL concerns allegations relating to the rights of tribal communities and compliance with laws governing forest rights and environmental protection in connection with the Great Nicobar development project. The Union Government argued that the PIL should not proceed, pointing to other proceedings concerning the project’s environmental clearance before the National Green Tribunal. The Attorney General also submitted that the project was of significant national importance and questioned the maintainability of the PIL.
Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Dr. S. Muralidhar argued that the case concerned Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups and that the PIL raised issues affecting vulnerable communities. The Supreme Court declined to interfere at this stage because the matter is already pending before the Calcutta High Court. The High Court has fixed the lead matter for hearing on November 25 and 26.
The Supreme Court requested the Calcutta High Court to take the matter up as scheduled and make an effort to complete the proceedings. The Supreme Court also noted that both sides had assured the Court of their cooperation. During the hearing, Justice Joymalya Bagchi also raised broader questions concerning the constitutional protection of the identity and culture of indigenous communities. The Court’s observations highlighted the importance of protecting the identity and culture of vulnerable tribal communities while considering development projects.
The development is significant because it involves questions relating to Public Interest Litigation, tribal rights, environmental protection and judicial review of major infrastructure projects. The Supreme Court’s order does not finally decide the underlying PIL; the substantive proceedings will continue before the Calcutta High Court.
