The NGT held that an Environmental Impact Assessment Report was awaited and the Environmental Clearance for the airport has not been granted. Yet it held that the 2 NGT3 plea of the appellants for an order of restraint on the grant of site clearances and in principle approvals was without merit at that stage. The NGT also observed that the mere inclusion of a clause under the head 'Environment Clearances' in the form of said Notification does not deem the same to be mandatory for purposes of the EIA assessment study. 7. The Appeals were taken up by this Court on 22 April 2024. The Petitioners have been represented by Mr Prashant Bhushan. Mr Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General appears for the respondents. Mr Gopal Sankaranarayan, senior counsel has appeared for the intervenors. It is an admitted position that an Environmental Clearance is required for the project of setting up the airport and no such clearance has been issued. Paragraph 2 of the Notification dated 14 September 2006 is in