Summary of the order/judgement
The Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal gave its final order in in 1979 which was published by the Central Government in the same year. In the order, Gujarat was directed to complete construction of the dam, fixing its height at RLF 455 ft. Directions regarding submergence, land acquisition, and rehabilitation, and division of utilisable water among the four states were also given. Environment clearance for the project was given in 1987, and construction was commenced. In 1994, ten construction sluices were closed by the Ministry of Water Resources. This writ petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India to stop construction of the Sardar Sarovar dam and to order opening of the sluices that had been closed. Environmental issues, issues regarding relief and rehabilitation, and issues regarding review of the Tribunal’s award were argued. The establishment of an independent judicial authority to review the entire project was sought to see whether it needed to be restructured, till which time further construction should be stopped. It was also prayed that the height of the dame be reduced as it was not possible to have rehabilitation and relief according to the Tribunal’s award and International Labour Organization Convention 107 otherwise.
The Court restricted the scope of the petition to relief and rehabilitation issues as the other issues could not be allowed to be agitated seven years after the environmental clearance had been given. The Court said it would not encroach in the territory of policy decisions, like how a project is to be undertaken, and if such aspects have to be challenged it should be done before execution of the project is undertaken. The matter of relief and rehabilitation was being considered only to ensure that the rights of the oustees under Article 21 were not being violated.
It was held that the displacement of the tribals and other persons would not per se result in violation of their fundamental or other rights and on their rehabilitation at new locations they would be better off than what they were. At the rehabilitation sites they will have more and better amenities than those they enjoyed in their tribal hamlets; and the gradual assimilation in the mainstream of the society would lead to betterment and progress. The Court was also of the view that the Tribunal award was binding on the States and could not be challenged. It provided for relief and rehabilitation measures, and if they were not followed properly, the Court could order their implementation but there was no need to stop execution of the project.
With regard to the necessity for an independent review of the project, the Court expressed its satisfaction with the quality, accuracy, recommendations and implementation of the studies carried out and that independent evaluation of the project was not required. Thus, construction of the dam was allowed to be continued as per the order of the Tribunal. The height of the dam was allowed to be as decided earlier.Height could be raised further with permission of the Narmada Control Authority.