Nicobar Port Has No 'Strategic Goals', Finance Ministry Body Said in 2024
UPSC-standard MCQs with explanations, trap analysis, and approach guide. Answer after the test — not before.
1
Easy
1
Medium
1
Hard
Practice this set
3 questions · full analysis after submission · no sign-up required
Article summary
A Finance Ministry body — part of a High Powered Committee (HPC) constituted to assess the cumulative environmental impact of the ₹81,000-crore Great Nicobar Island Project — reportedly flagged in 2024 that the proposed transshipment port lacked clearly defined strategic objectives. The Centre has refused to make the HPC report public, citing the 'strategic' nature of the project, creating a contradiction: the government invokes strategic sensitivity to withhold information while its own advisory body questioned the strategic rationale of the port component. The Great Nicobar Project, being developed by ANDAMAN AND NICOBAR ISLANDS INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (ANIIDCO), involves a transshipment port, an international airport, a township, and a power plant on one of India's most ecologically sensitive and biodiversity-rich islands. The project has faced sustained criticism from environmentalists, scientists, and former bureaucrats over threats to leatherback sea turtles, tropical rainforests, and the Shompen tribal community. For UPSC, this case sits at the intersection of environmental governance, transparency obligations, strategic infrastructure policy, and the rights of particularly vulnerable tribal groups.
What this tests
Sample questions — answers revealed after test
Q1. With reference to the Great Nicobar Island Project, which of the following statements is correct?
Q2. A civil society organisation files an RTI application seeking the High-Powered Committee (HPC) cumulative impact assessment report for the Great Nicobar Project. The government denies disclosure citing national security under Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act 2005. Which of the following scenarios would most strongly undermine the government's legal justification for this denial?
Q3. Consider the following statements regarding the governance and environmental framework surrounding the Great Nicobar Island Project: 1. The EIA Notification 2006 requires cumulative impact assessments for large projects in ecologically sensitive zones, and such reports must ordinarily be accessible to affected communities and civil society as part of the public appraisal process. 2. Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act 2005 permits withholding of information that would prejudicially affect national security, but courts have held that such exemptions must be applied narrowly and with stated reasons. 3. The Forest Rights Act 2006 requires Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of gram sabhas of affected tribal communities before diversion of forest land, and this obligation applies even to PVTGs such as the Shompen. 4. The High-Powered Committee (HPC) constituted under MoEFCC norms for the Great Nicobar Project was set up specifically to replace the statutory Environmental Appraisal Committee, thereby bypassing standard EIA procedures. Which of the statements given above are correct?