Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Devan Ramachandran, M.B.Snehalatha
Anirudh Karthikeyan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala Represented By Its Secretary To Government, Home Department – Respondent
ORDER :
Devan Ramachandran, J.
Our consideration is catalyzed by an order of reference made by a learned Judge of this Court dated 23.07.2025, impelling the question whether, in spite of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Noble M.Paikada v. Union of India [Civil Appeal Nos.1628- 1629/2021] dated 21.03.2024, the concessionaires enjoying valid Work Orders from the National Highways Authority of India (‘NHAI’), issued prior to the date of the said judgment, would stand outside the rigour of having to obtain Environmental Clearance (‘EC’) for the purpose of extraction, or sourcing, or borrowing of ordinary earth, to complete linear projects such as roads, pipelines, etc.
2. We discern from the Reference Order that the reason why it came to be was because, an argument was porpoised that, even if the various notifications in question allowed the ‘NHAI’ to extract, source or borrow ordinary earth for the purpose of its works without having to obtain an ‘EC’, the same benefit would not extend to the concessionaires acting under ‘Work Orders’.
3. Our path, in offering the answer to the reference, is illuminated substantially and to a significant extent by the judgment of the Hon’ble S
Court clarifies that concessionaires under valid Work Orders prior to a specific date are exempt from needing Environmental Clearance for certain operations.
The court ruled that quarrying permits issued without valid Environmental Clearance are invalid, emphasizing that all excavation activities must comply with Environmental Protection Act requirements.
Permits for quarrying activities require mandatory environmental clearance; failure to obtain such clearance renders the permits illegal.
Clarification from the Supreme Court regarding Environmental Clearance applicability is binding on concessionaires engaged in quarrying, irrespective of their direct association with NHAI projects.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the exemption granted for the removal of ordinary earth for linear projects was found to be arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Const....
Ex post facto environmental clearances should not be routine and must be limited to exceptional circumstances to uphold environmental protections.
Environmental Clearances must align with Supreme Court directives to prevent degradation and require thorough reappraisal by SEIAA.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
