IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.Jayachandran, J.
M/s. Chettinad Cement Corporation Pvt Limited – Petitioner
Versus
The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and ors. – Respondents
Crl.O.P.Nos.17614, 17616, 19869 & 20877 of 2024 & Crl.M.P.Nos.10462, 10464, 10466, 10467, 11563, 11564, 11993 & 11944 of 2024
Decided On : 17-10-2024
ORDER :
G.Jayachandran, J.
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to Private complaint in C.C.No.46 of 2024 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioner alone. Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to Private complaint in C.C.No.47 of 2024 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioner alone.
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to Private complaint in C.C.No.176 of 2023 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur and quash the said proceedings.
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records pertaining to private complaint in C.C.No.48 of 2024 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur and quash the same as illegal.
The petitioners facing criminal prosecution under Section 15 read with Section 16 & 19(a) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 are before this Court to quash the complaints on the ground that they have not violated the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, since their activity of mining minerals in land measuring less than 5 hectares does not require Environment Clearance. Further, for violation or deviation of the provisions of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, there cannot be prosecution but only levy of penalty in view of decriminalization under Jan Vishwas Act 2023, with effect from 01.04.2024.
2. The sum and substance of the complaint against these petitioners is that the petitioners were carrying on mining operations without Environment Clearance, from SEIAA which is mandatory as per the Notification 141(E) dated 15.01.2016 issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India. As per the said notification, new projects or activities listed in the schedule to its notification entailing capacity addition with change in process and or technology shall be undertaken only after the prior Environment Clearance from the Central Government or, as the case may be, the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority SEIAA.
3. Crl.O.P.No.17614 of 2024 (C.C.No.46 of 2024 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur), is the complaint against the M/s.Chettinad Cement Corporation Private Limited and having a Lime Stone Mines at Nakkambadi Village. They have license for mining from 05.02.2013 to 04.02.2033. The petitioner project falls under Serial No.1(a) - Mining of Minerals with list of projects or activities requiring prior Environmental Clearance specified under the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 (EIA) dated 14.09.2006 and Notification 141 (E) dated 15.01.2016. The District Collector, Ariyalur issued demand notice dated 20.08.2019 to the petitioner company to pay 100% costs of the mineral mined during the violation period i.e., 15.01.2016 to 10.01.2017 as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 02.08.2017 rendered in W.P.(Civil).No.114 of 2014.
4. The petitioner company submitted application for Environmental Clearance to the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) vide letter dated 13.04.2018. Later, they gave a letter dated 28.12.2022 informing that they have not pursuing further the process of obtaining the Environmental Clearance since they have decided to surrender the mining lease to IBM and submitted the final mine closure plan.
5. The petitioner company falls under violation category since it continues the quarrying operations without obtaining Environmental Clearance till 02.01.2017. The State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority requested to initiate action against the unit invoking powers under Section 19 of Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986 since the mining activity continued by the petition
Common cause Vs. Union of India
Deepak Kumar Vs. State of Haryana
B.Manna Vs. State of West Bengal
A.K.Sarkar & Co and another Vs. The State of West Bengal & others (2024 INSC 186)
All mining operations require Environmental Clearance post-15.01.2016, and the Jan Vishwas Act does not retroactively decriminalize past violations of the Environment (Protection) Act.
Mining without Environmental Clearance constitutes unlawful extraction, mandating 100% recovery of the mineral's market value as compensation under Section 21(5) of the MMDR Act.
Mining operations are deemed illegal without valid Environmental Clearances, and compliance with ecological regulations is essential, especially in sensitive areas straddling state borders.
ECs for minor mineral mining granted by DEIAA are void ab initio without SEIAA re-appraisal per Supreme Court/NGT directives; illegal mining mandates CPCB-based environmental compensation and strict ....
Mining activities must comply with environmental laws, ensuring safety and oversight, especially regarding operations near residential areas.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that prosecution under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 may be considered an abuse of process of law if environmental clearance is granted af....
The court declared the notification extending environmental clearances for mining projects unconstitutional, citing lack of public consultation and violation of statutory procedures under the Environ....
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.