• Today: October 31, 2025

Hanuman Laxman v. Union of India — Goa Airport Case II

31 October, 2025
101
Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India (2020) — Goa Mopa Airport EC | The Law Easy

Hanuman Laxman v. Union of India — Goa Airport Case II

Supreme Court of India • (2020) 12 SCC 1 • India

Environmental Law Sustainable Development & Precaution Supreme Court 2020 ~7 min read (2020) 12 SCC 1
Goa Mopa Airport environmental clearance case hero image
```
Author: Gulzar Hashmi India • Published:
Mopa airport case environmental clearance sustainable development precautionary principle NEERI
```

Quick Summary

Goa planned a second international airport at Mopa. Environmental Clearance (EC) was granted in 2015. It was challenged for non-disclosure and likely ecological harm. The Supreme Court first suspended the EC and asked the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) to revisit concerns. After review and stronger safeguards, the Court lifted the suspension, allowing the project with strict green conditions and independent oversight.

Issues

  1. Were the EAC’s revisions and added conditions legally sound under environmental rules?
  2. Could the Supreme Court safely revoke its suspension of the EC on that basis?

Rules

  • Doctrine of Sustainable Development: Policy must balance growth, society, and ecology; today’s gains must not damage tomorrow’s needs.
  • Precautionary Principle: Where serious or irreversible risk exists, preventive steps are required. Lack of full scientific certainty is not a reason to delay action.

Facts (Timeline)

Goa, India
Timeline graphic for the Goa Airport Case II

2015: Union Ministry of Environment grants EC for Mopa Airport.

2017: Petitioners (Hanuman Laxman Aroskar & NGO) challenge EC before NGT, citing non-disclosure and risk of harm.

2018: NGT upholds challenge; matter reaches Supreme Court.

2019: Supreme Court suspends EC; directs EAC to revisit environmental concerns.

2020: After revised appraisal and added safeguards, Supreme Court lifts suspension with conditions and oversight.

Arguments

Appellant / Petitioners

  • Key ecological data was not disclosed or assessed properly.
  • Construction risked forests, water, and biodiversity.
  • EC should remain suspended until a full, fair appraisal is done.

Respondents / State & Project Proponent

  • Revised studies and EAC review addressed earlier gaps.
  • Mitigation plan aligns with legal norms and best practices.
  • Public interest supports a second airport with safeguards.

Judgment

Judgment illustration
  • The Supreme Court lifted the suspension on the EC and allowed work to continue.
  • It imposed additional environmental conditions, including a push toward zero-carbon operations.
  • The Court directed NEERI to supervise and monitor compliance with the new conditions.

Ratio Decidendi

Balance with safeguards: Courts may allow strategic infrastructure where appraisal gaps are cured and robust mitigation is ensured.

Precaution stays central: Uncertainty triggers preventive conditions, monitoring, and expert oversight.

Process integrity: Transparent, reasoned EAC review can justify lifting interim restraints.

Why It Matters

  • Shows how courts use conditional relief to protect nature while enabling development.
  • Reinforces that appraisal quality and ongoing audits are non-negotiable.
  • Useful precedent on tailoring remedies: suspend → revisit → permit with conditions.

Key Takeaways

  1. EAC must give clear, reasoned, and data-based findings.
  2. Precaution can mean stricter conditions, not a blanket stop.
  3. Independent oversight (e.g., NEERI) builds accountability.
  4. Zero-carbon goals can be judicially encouraged in major projects.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “Evaluate, Enable, Ensure” (3E)

  • Evaluate — EAC revisits and fixes appraisal gaps.
  • Enable — Court lifts suspension with strict terms.
  • Ensure — NEERI oversight + zero-carbon direction.

IRAC Outline

Issue: Can the EC suspension be lifted after a lawful and complete EAC review?

Rule: Sustainable Development and Precaution: development may proceed only with credible mitigation, monitoring, and transparency.

Application: The EAC’s revised appraisal addressed material concerns; added conditions reduced ecological risk; third-party oversight strengthened compliance.

Conclusion: Yes. Suspension lifted; EC stands with tougher safeguards and supervision.

Glossary

Environmental Clearance (EC)
Official approval that a project meets environmental norms with mitigation.
EAC
Expert Appraisal Committee that reviews project impacts and sets conditions.
NEERI
National Environmental Engineering Research Institute; provides scientific oversight.

FAQs

It lifted the suspension and allowed the EC to operate, but with extra green conditions and third-party monitoring.

Because even with uncertain science, serious environmental risks call for preventive steps and strict oversight.

No. Their challenge led to a deeper review, tighter conditions, and independent monitoring to protect the environment.

Build strong environmental baselines, disclose fully, and accept measurable conditions with credible monitoring.
```
Reviewed by The Law Easy
Environmental Law Sustainable Development Precautionary Principle

Comment

Nothing for now