K. M. JOSEPH, B. V. NAGARATHNA, J. B. PARDIWALA
K. T. V. Health Food Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.M. JOSEPH, J.
1. The Appeals are lodged under Section 22 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
C.A. NO. 3626 OF 2020 (THE FIRST APPEAL)
2. The appellant challenges the Order passed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), Southern Zone. By the impugned Order, the NGT has allowed the appeal filed by Respondent No.5 and set aside proceedings dated 08.03.2019. By the said proceedings, Respondent No.1 had granted ex post facto clearance purporting to invoke paragraph-4.3 of the Notification issued in the year 2011 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the 2011 Notification’) under the Environment Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’). By the said clearance, the appellant was given clearance for the laying of pipeline for transfer of edible oil from the Chennai Port to the storage terminal tank and for the establishment of the storage transit terminal of the appellant. The NGT has found that while the ex post facto clearance could be granted under paragraph-4.3, and that it would have prospective operation, however, the activity of putting up a storage tank transit terminal, being contrary to the 2011 Notification, the same was illegal. It was found to be illeg
M. Nizamudeen v. Chemplast Sanmar Limited and Others.
Electrosteel Steels Limited v. Union of India and Others
Pahwa Plastics Pvt. Ltd. and Another v. Dastak NGO and Others
Gajubha Jadeja Jesar v. Union of India and Others
Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Rohit Prajapati and Others
K.P. Varghese v. Income Tax Officer, Ernakulam and Another
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India
S. Jagannathan v. Union of India and others
Piedade Filomena Gonsalves v. State of Goa
Vaamika Island (Green Lagoon Resort) v. Union of India
Kapico Kerala Resorts (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala
Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority v. State of Kerala
Every port falling under Indian Port Act and Major Port Act may not be on their own become a customs port – Violation of ‘norms’ would disentitle a person to post facto clearance.
Post facto environmental clearance is impermissible as it contradicts statutory requirements established by the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019, which mandates prior clearance.
Constructions in ecologically sensitive CRZ-I and on seaward side of roads in CRZ-II are prohibited; even temporary structures on concrete bases illegal, mandating demolition and restoration to prote....
Point of law: Basis of categorisation of projects and activities under the EIA notification lies in the expanse of the built-up area of the proposed project.
CRZ-2011 prohibits constructions in ecologically sensitive CRZ-I and seaward CRZ-II; even temporary structures on permanent bases illegal; mandatory demolition required irrespective of nature to prot....
Legislature intended to create a specialist body in the form of National Green Tribunal to consider the validity of orders granting or rejecting applications for EC. The remedy of an appeal with the ....
The construction of public utility jetties in CRZ-I areas is permissible without mangrove destruction, aligning with sustainable development principles.
Construction in ecologically sensitive CRZ I areas is prohibited, reaffirming the precedence of environmental protection laws over local development interests.
The court ruled that challenges to environmental clearances necessitate factual inquiry beyond Article 226, allowing petitioners to seek remedies under the National Green Tribunal Act.
Point of Law; General rule, the Courts consider it expedient in the interest of justice to start prosecution as contemplated by Section-476 of the old Code i.e., Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, whi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.