SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
In Re : T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad – Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India And Ors. & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 202 of 1995
Decided On : 18-08-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applications for interventions and replies scheduled. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. state compliance regarding forest identification. (Para 3) |
ORDER :
[1] I. A. NOS. 37666, 37670 AND 37679/2020
1. Reply, if any, be filed within four weeks.
2. List these applications after four weeks.
[2] I. A. NOS. 196062 AND 174896/2019
1. On 18.05.2023, this Court passed the following order:-
Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General, has accepted the said suggestion. He states that the Union of India would publish a draft notification under the provisions of Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 providing for the constitution of the CEC.
He submitted that the draft notification would contain 8 provisions related to the qualification of the Members to be appointed, their tenure, their powers and responsibilities etc. Learned Solicitor General submits that the draft notification will be published within a period of 15 days from today and that the same shall be placed before the Court on the next date.”
2. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India, has handed over a draft notification to be issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) regarding constitution of Central Empowered Committee (CEC). The said draft has already been shared with Mr. K. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae.
3. Learned Amicus Curiae submits that he has only one suggestion to the draft notification i.e. there should be a provision for periodical audit of the functioning of the CEC by the MoEFCC.
4. Learned Solicitor General does not have any objection to the said suggestion. He states that the suggestion given by the learned Amicus Curiae would be incorporated in the final notification that would be issued by the MoEFCC.
5. We, therefore, permit the Union of India to proceed further with the issuance of notification for constitution of the CEC as a permanent body.
6. We find that rather than CEC functioning as an ad hoc body, it functioning as a permanent body would be in the interest of all the stake holders.
7. We also permit the MoEFCC to proceed further with the constitution of the CEC in accordance with the notification that will be issued by the MoEFCC.
[3] INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 44942/2019
1. In pursuance to the judgment passed by this Court on 12.12.1996 [ T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997) 2 SCC 267], the State of Karnataka has submitted that it has constituted an Expert Committee.
2. In the affidavit, it is further stated that as per the report of the Committee an area ad measuring 3,30,186.93 hectares has been identified as deemed forest and the same has also been approved by the State Government.
3. The said compliance is taken on record.
4. The application stands disposed of.
[4] I. A. NOS. 87544, 87550 AND 91723 OF 2023
[5] I. A. NOS. 107906 AND 107909/2023
[6] I. A. NOS. 115479, 115480 AND 115482/2023
1. As prayed, four weeks’ time is granted for filing reply affidavit.
2. List after four weeks.
I.A. NO.1412/2005 AND I.A. No.117831/2019
These applications were mentioned before the Court.
List these applications on 13.09.2023.
The Supreme Court mandated the establishment of the Central Empowered Committee as a permanent statutory body under the Environment (Protection) Act, enhancing regulatory governance.
Institutionalisation and reconstitution of Central Empowered Committee – Role of Constitutional Courts is to ensure that environmental bodies function vibrantly, and are assisted by robust infrastru....
Office Memoranda extending DEIAA-granted mining EC validity upheld as interim measures for SEIAA re-appraisal; non-reappraised ECs invalid post-deadline, enforcing compliance with environmental safeg....
Environmental Clearances must align with Supreme Court directives to prevent degradation and require thorough reappraisal by SEIAA.
The court emphasized that environmental protection must take precedence in decision-making for tree felling applications, requiring adherence to statutory clearances and rigorous mitigation measures.
Ex post facto environmental clearance is illegal as it undermines the fundamental right to a pollution-free environment and contravenes established environmental laws.
The court ruled that amendments extending environmental clearance validity violate statutory and constitutional mandates, undermining effective environmental governance and public interest.
The amendments to environmental clearance validity in the notification and office memorandum were held unconstitutional, infringing environmental protections and the role of the expert appraisal comm....
The court ruled that amendments to environmental clearance regulations violated statutory requirements, emphasizing the importance of expert appraisal in environmental protection, thus declaring the ....
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.