Supreme Court seeks Centre, Assam's response to Oil India's plea over drilling proposal at national park

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 3) sought responses from the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and the Assam government on Oil India’s plea challenging the rejection of its proposal to undertake Extended Reach Drilling for hydrocarbon extraction beneath Assam’s Dibru-Saikhowa National Park. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana took note of the submissions of senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for Oil India, that the plea was extremely urgent as the PSU was unable to carry out the oil exploration work in the area.

He said the area surrounding Dibru-Saikhowa National Park is estimated to hold around three per cent of India's total hydrocarbon reserves. Dwivedi added that exploration would be carried out using Extended Reach Drilling (ERD), with drilling extending to depths of over 4,000 metres below the surface, and would not harm the national park's flora and fauna.

SC may consider ERD exploration based on authorities' research report; hearing after November 17

The bench said it may permit the exploration work based on the research and development report of the authorities, including the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The matter will now be taken up after November 17. On September two, the bench had permitted Oil India to withdraw an interlocutory application and file a fresh plea seeking to overturn the rejection of its proposal by the Centre for ERD-linked hydrocarbon extraction beneath the national park.

"This is extremely urgent because the area is on the fringes of a national park. All permissions have been granted, but the government considers itself bound by a 2023 order of this court banning mining. This is not mining. The pipeline is being laid outside the park. It goes 4,000 metres underground and then proceeds horizontally," Dwivedi had said.

Oil India cites national energy needs, seeks fresh plea in pending forest conservation case

He had said the application was filed in a pending case titled TN Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India of 1995, a landmark piece of litigation that has played a pivotal role in shaping forest conservation and environmental jurisprudence. Dwivedi had highlighted the urgency of the matter and said the proposed project was crucial to the country's energy requirements. The CJI said if there was a fresh cause of action, the applicant could file a new petition.

"We wanted to close that entire matter. If there is a fresh cause, file a fresh petition, and we will entertain it. The registry cannot list the interlocutory application because there is an order to that effect," the CJI said.

Dwivedi had urged the bench to allow the withdrawal of the interlocutory application, granting liberty to file a fresh petition. He also requested that the matter be listed either at the beginning or towards the end of the day's proceedings.

"The interlocutory application, as requested, is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition," the bench said. The PSU, in its plea, has challenged the Forest Advisory Committee's decision and the subsequent action of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) refusing approval for the diversion of 0.069 hectares of forest land for the project in Tinsukia district.

OIL argues Extended Reach Drilling cannot be equated with conventional mining in protected areas

The company said the authorities wrongly applied the Supreme Court's April 26, 2023 judgment prohibiting mining within national parks and wildlife sanctuaries and within one km of their boundaries. According to OIL, hydrocarbon exploration and production through Extended Reach Drilling cannot be equated with conventional mining. The company has submitted that oil and gas operations are governed by a separate legal and regulatory framework and that ERD involves drilling from pads located outside the protected area to access hydrocarbon reservoirs several kilometres below the surface.

OIL said the proposed drilling would target hydrocarbon deposits at depths of around 3,500 to 4,000 metres beneath the Dibru-Saikhowa National Park, while the drilling infrastructure would remain outside the park boundary. The company has also relied on earlier orders of the top court in 2017, when it was permitted, subject to conditions and safeguards, to extract hydrocarbons beneath the national park using ERD technology.

OIL cites NBWL recommendation, SC nod for sub-surface hydrocarbon extraction

It said the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife had recommended the proposal and that the top court subsequently allowed sub-surface hydrocarbon extraction, subject to compliance with environmental and wildlife protection conditions. The plea further referred to the Eco-Sensitive Zone notification issued for Dibru-Saikhowa National Park in January 2020, under which the eco-sensitive zone extends from zero to 8.7 km around parts of the park's boundary.

OIL said it had received environmental clearance in May 2020 for extended reach drilling and hydrocarbon testing at seven locations beneath the national park. However, it noted that drilling activities in forest areas required separate prior approval. The company sought the setting aside of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change's (MoEFCC) August 2, 2024 order, along with the minutes of the Forest Advisory Committee meeting held on July 4, 2024.

In its plea, OIL also sought a direction to the authorities to grant approval under Section 2(1)(ii) of the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980, for the non-forestry use of 0.069 hectares of forest land to undertake Extended Reach Drilling beneath Dibru-Saikhowa National Park from Baghjan PML in Tinsukia Wildlife Division, Assam.