The proposed Sri Jagannath International Airport in Puri has sparked a fresh political and environmental debate, with the Congress raising serious concerns over its long-term impact on ecology, heritage, and local communities.

Leading the criticism, Bhakta Charan Das, president of the Odisha Pradesh Congress Committee, questioned the Centre’s decision to grant Stage-I clearance for the Greenfield airport project. He warned that the move could impose significant environmental and cultural costs on Odisha, particularly in a region as sensitive as Puri.

At the heart of the controversy is the diversion of nearly 27.8 hectares of forest land for the project, which is planned across 1,164 acres. The airport is expected to handle around 4.6 million passengers annually in its first phase, positioning it as a major infrastructure boost for tourism and connectivity. However, critics argue that the ecological trade-offs may outweigh the benefits.

Das accused the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change of placing an additional burden on the state by approving the project despite its proximity to ecologically fragile zones. The proposed site lies close to critical habitats such as the Balukhand Wildlife Sanctuary and the globally significant Chilika Lake, which supports migratory birds along the Central Asian Flyway.

Environmentalists and opposition leaders have highlighted the potential destruction of coastal forests, including the felling of over 13,000 trees—mostly Casuarina—which act as natural buffers against cyclones. There are also fears that the project could disrupt nesting grounds of endangered species such as Olive Ridley turtles and impact marine life, including dolphins.

Equally significant are the cultural concerns surrounding the airport’s proximity to the revered Shri Jagannath Temple. The temple and its surrounding zone have been designated a “Red Zone” (no-fly area) by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation until September 2028, restricting aerial activities including drones and photography. Das questioned how full-fledged airport operations would align with these restrictions without compromising the sanctity of one of India’s most important pilgrimage sites.

Another point of contention is the project’s necessity. Located just about 60 km from Bhubaneswar, which already has an operational international airport, critics argue that a second airport may be redundant. Das also contrasted the urgency shown for the Puri airport with delays in other infrastructure projects like the Bhubaneswar Metro, suggesting a mismatch in development priorities.

In response, official sources have emphasized that the clearance comes with strict conditions. These include compensatory afforestation over nearly 30 hectares of non-forest land, restoration of degraded forest areas, and biodiversity mitigation measures such as artificial nesting habitats. The state government has also been directed to follow recommendations from institutions like the Wildlife Institute of India and the Zoological Survey of India.

While the government maintains that the project will boost regional development, tourism, and connectivity, the debate underscores a broader dilemma—balancing infrastructure growth with environmental sustainability and cultural preservation.

As the proposal moves forward, the demand from opposition leaders and environmental experts remains clear: a more cautious, transparent, and scientifically grounded evaluation is essential before altering the ecological and spiritual landscape of Puri.