Environment Ministry’s memorandum stayed
[ad_1]
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday granted an interim keep on the operation of an workplace memorandum issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, which offered a process for the grant of put up facto clearance to tasks which have come up with out environmental clearance underneath the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification, 2006.
A Division Bench of Justices T.S. Sivagnanam and S. Ananthi granted the keep on a public curiosity litigation petition filed by activist R. Fatima of Thoothukudi. The petitioner challenged the workplace memorandum issued on July 7. The legislation mandated prior clearance, and there was no provision for the grant of put up facto clearance underneath the EIA notification. The memorandum offered a backdoor entry to violators, she mentioned.
By approach of the memorandum, violators of the EIA notification may acquire clearance and regularise violations. The EIA was an essential software to make sure the optimum use of pure sources for sustainable growth. Its goal was to determine, study, assess and consider the possible and possible affect of a proposed venture on the atmosphere, the petitioner mentioned.
She mentioned a venture could possibly be granted sanction to start exercise solely after an exhaustive evaluation of dangers. The mandate of guaranteeing compliance earlier than the graduation of building and operation was an essential facet of the EIA notification and it helped to make sure safety and preservation of the atmosphere.
The ex-post facto clearance was alien to the environmental jurisprudence, she mentioned.
Post facto clearances destroyed the very material of the environmental regulation. The workplace memorandum ran counter to the EIA notification and had no authorized validity.
It was in opposition to the ideas of pure justice, and the appropriate of the folks to take part in environmental decision-making. If this process was allowed to be adopted, it could trigger an irreversible injury to the atmosphere. It was violative of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, she mentioned.
[ad_2]