The Hindu : National : Plea against Chemplast dismissed

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Mar 11, 2010
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

National

National

Plea against Chemplast dismissed

Legal Correspondent

No substance in charge against Chemplast
Tamil Nadu's CZM plan of 1996 to be final

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a batch of appeals and petitions that challenged the clearance given by the Tamil Nadu Public Works Department to Chemplast for laying a 2.5-km underground pipeline to draw raw material Vinyl Chloride Monomer from the jetty at Tiyagavalli village to its plant at Semmankuppam in Cuddalore district.

A Bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices R.M. Lodha and B.S. Chauhan held that the Uppanar river and its banks at the place where the pipeline passed did not fall under the Coastal Zone Regulations zone as per the 1996 plan, and no environmental clearance was needed for laying such pipelines.

Writing the judgment, Justice Lodha said: “The project has been established by investing a huge amount of Rs. 600 crore and has already been commissioned after obtaining necessary approvals, and therefore it shall not be in the interest of justice, nor in the public interest, now to interfere with the project.”

The Bench pointed out that Tamil Nadu submitted its Coastal Zone Management plan to the Ministry of Environment and Forests on August 23, 1996. The plan, containing 31 sheets corresponding to the maps of different stretches of the State's coastline, was approved on September 27, 1996. It said the Ministry of Environment and Forests had stated that based on sheet no. 10, “the land portion of the banks of the Uppanar river where the pipeline crosses the Uppanar does not come under the CRZ area.”

The Bench noted that while granting approval, the Ministry imposed a condition that the Tamil Nadu government would not make any change in the approved categorisation of the CRZ area without prior approval. “Seen thus, the 1996 plan for the purposes of demarcation and classification of the CRZ area in the State … has to be treated as final and conclusive and has been rightly treated as such by the Ministry of Environment and Forests.”

The Bench held that there was no substance in the contention that Chemplast had suppressed the existence of the Uppanar in its proposals. “We do not find any infirmity in the permission granted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests [for the project] on December 19, 2005.”

It dismissed a special leave petition filed by M. Nizamudeen against an October 31, 2008, Madras High Court judgment, rejecting his plea against the clearance granted by the PWD to Chemplast. The Bench also dismissed a writ petition filed in the Supreme Court challenging the approval granted by the Union Ministry, and three petitions transferred from the Madras High Court.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National