IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. SUNDAR, K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, JJ.
Fatima - Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India, rep by its Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Paryavaran Bhawan, Jor Bagh, New Delhi-110 003 – Respondent
W.P.(MD)Nos.8866 and 11757 of 2021 and W.P.No.18829 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.6666 and 12052 of 2021 in W.P.(MD)No.8866 of 2021 W.M.P.(MD)No.9241 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.6193 of 2022 in W.P.(MD)No.11757 of 2021 W.M.P.Nos.20128 and 20130 of 2021 in W.P.No.18829 of 2021 AND Contempt Petition No.56 of 2022 and Sub Application No.629 of 2023 in Cont.P.No.56 of 2022
Decided On : 30-08-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitions challenge actions of the ministry of environment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. court's observations on procedural adherence in judicial hierarchy. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. arguments presented regarding ex post facto environmental clearances. (Para 11 , 12 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. summary of significant precedents relevant to ex post facto clearances. (Para 13) |
| 5. court's reasoning regarding environmental laws and regulations. (Para 14 , 15 , 26) |
| 6. final ruling on the validity of the office memoranda concerning environmental clearances. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 7. final judgment allowing petitions and clarifying non-compliance actions. (Para 29) |
ORDER :
(M. Sundar, J.) :
This common order will govern the captioned three 'Writ Petitions' ('W.Ps' in plural and 'W.P.' in singular for the sake of brevity), captioned 'writ miscellaneous petitions' thereat ('W.M.Ps' in plural and 'W.M.P' in singular for the sake of brevity), captioned Contempt Petition and Sub Application thereat.
2. In 'captioned W.P.(MD)No.8866 of 2021' (hereinafter 'I Fatima WP' for the sake of convenience) inter-alia a 'Office Memorandum' [hereinafter 'OM' in singular and 'OMs' in plural, though plural of 'memorandum' is 'memoranda' for the sake of brevity] dated 19.02.2021 issued by the sole respondent thereat ['Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change' (hereinafter 'MoEF' for the sake of brevity)] has been assailed. This 19.02.2021 OM issued by MoEF shall hereinafter be referred to as 'I impugned OM' for the sake of convenience. In this I Fatima WP, vide an interim order dated 30.04.2021 made in W.M.P.(MD)No.6666 of 2021, another Hon'ble Division Bench has stayed this I impugned OM prospectively, this interim order has been assailed in Hon'ble Supreme Court by 'Union of India' {hereinafter 'UOI' for the sake of brevity} vide S.L.P.(C)Diary No.33840 of 2023, notice has been issued and interim stay {interim stay qua interim stay order of Madras High Court Division Bench, i.e., in effect suspending the interim stay granted by another Division Bench of Madras High Court} had been granted by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 04.09.2023 which is operating and Hon'ble Supreme Court is in seizin of the SLP.
3.In 'captioned W.P.(MD)No.11757 of 2021' (hereinafter 'II Fatima WP' for the sake of convenience), inter-alia a OM dated 07.07.2021 issued by the sole respondent thereat, i.e., MoEF has been assailed and an interim order dated 15.07.2021 made in W.M.P.(MD)No.9241 of 2021 in this II Fatima WP reported in 2021 SCC OnLine Mad 12936 staying the operation of this 07.07.2021 OM issued by MoEF {hereinafter 'II impugned OM' for the sake of convenience and clarity} is operating.
4.The aforementioned II impugned OM along with a notification dated 28.01.2022 issued by MoEF has been assailed in Hon'ble Supreme Court by way of a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution by a 'Non Governmental Organization' ('NGO' for the sake of brevity) which goes by the name 'Vanashakti', Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued notice, granted an interim order (subsequently clarified the interim order saying that the same will not come in the way of the competent authorities considering proposals for modifications/alterations in Environmental Clearances) and therefore, Hon'ble Supreme Court is in seizin of challenge to aforementioned II impugned OM.
5. In 'captioned W.P.No.18829 of 2021' (hereinafter 'III WP' and/or 'Bharathi WP' for the sake of convenience) inter-alia aforesaid I impugned OM (dated 19.02.2021) issued by first respondent thereat, i.e., MoEF has been assailed. In other words, the prayer is same as in I Fatima WP and III WP.
6.Captioned Contempt Petition No.56 of 2022 has been filed complaining of violation of an order dated 13.10.2017 made by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in 'W.P.No.11189 of 2017' (hereinafter 'Puducherry WP' for the sake of convenience) wherein inter-alia a notification dated 14.03.2017 issued by MoEF was called in question. To be
Padma Sundara Rao Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2002) 3 SCC 533
State Of Assam vs Barak Upatyaka D.U. Karmachari Sanstha reported in (2009) 5 SCC 694
State of Gujarat Vs. Utility Users'' Welfare Association and others reported in (2018) 6 SCC 21
Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs. Rohit Prajapati reported in (2020) 17 SCC 157
Common Cause Vs. Union of India reported in (2017) 9 SCC 499
Electrosteel Steels Limited Vs. Union of India and others reported in (2023) 6 SCC 615
Electrosteel Steels Ltd. v. Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board
Herrington v. British Railways Board
Lafarge Umiam Mining Private Limited Vs. T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad reported in (2011) 7 SCC 338
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Escorts Ltd. and others reported in (1986) 1 SCC 264
(1) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 does not prohibit ex post facto Environmental Clearance – Grant of ex post facto EC in accordance with law, in strict compliance with Rules, Regulations, Notifi....
Environmental Clearance – Where adverse consequences of denial of ex post facto approval outweigh consequences of regularization of operations by grant of ex post facto approval, and establishment co....
Ex post facto environmental clearance is illegal as it undermines the fundamental right to a pollution-free environment and contravenes established environmental laws.
Post facto environmental clearance is impermissible as it contradicts statutory requirements established by the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2019, which mandates prior clearance.
Requirements of prior Environmental Clearance - It is a trite law that a writ cannot be issued on ground of violation of principles of natural justice if only one conclusion is possible in a given si....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for fresh appraisal and prior clearance for changes in the scope of construction projects, as well as the applicability of penal pr....
The National Green Tribunal's jurisdiction under Section 16 permits aggrieved parties to challenge environmental clearances to ensure compliance with ecological protection standards.
Court held that amendments to the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, which shifted authority and reduced public consultation, were unconstitutional and violated environmental protections u....
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.