Former Civil Servants, Activists Raise Concern Over CJI’s Remarks on Environmental Litigation

A group of former civil servants from the All India and Central Services has expressed serious concern over recent remarks made by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant during a Supreme Court hearing related to the expansion of the Pipavav Port project in Gujarat.

The Constitutional Conduct Group, an association of retired bureaucrats, issued an open letter signed by 71 former officials, stating that the comments reflected “bias and prejudice” and were alarming coming from the country’s highest judicial authority.

Remarks During Pipavav Port Hearing

The observations were made while hearing an appeal against an order of the National Green Tribunal (Western Region), which had upheld environmental and Coastal Regulation Zone clearances for the Pipavav Port expansion project.

During the proceedings, the Bench comprising the CJI and Justice Joymalya Bagchi reportedly questioned environmental objections to development projects, asking whether environmental activists had ever welcomed any project in the country.

Retired Bureaucrats Express Alarm

In their statement, former civil servants argued that such remarks could create fear among citizens and discourage public-interest environmental litigation. They warned that oral observations from the Supreme Court, though not part of formal orders, often receive wide publicity and may influence future judicial and administrative decisions.

The group said the comments risk weakening environmental safeguards and could encourage lower courts to adopt a dismissive attitude toward ecological concerns.

Environmentalists Demand Retraction

Several environmental activists and civil society organisations also wrote to the CJI seeking withdrawal of the remarks. At a gathering held at the Press Club of India, activists from multiple states voiced concern over threats to India’s ecological systems.

Noted Odisha-based environmental activist Prafulla Samantara strongly objected to the use of the term “environmentalist” in a derogatory manner. He said citizens raising concerns over development projects were fulfilling their constitutional duty under Article 51A(g), which calls upon citizens to protect and improve the natural environment.