Businesses providing jobs should not be shut down for lacking prior environmental clearance: Supreme Court

The court said ex post facto environmental clearance is not prohibited under the law

Updated - March 27, 2022 08:12 am IST - NEW DELHI

Supreme Court of India.

Supreme Court of India. | Photo Credit: S. Subramanium

The Supreme Court has held that an establishment contributing to the economy of the country and providing livelihoods should not be closed on the ground of a “technical irregularity” of not obtaining prior environmental clearance, irrespective of whether or not the unit actually causes pollution.

The judgment by a Bench led by Justice Indira Banerjee on Friday came in an appeal filed by a plastic manufacturing unit in Haryana.

The National Green Tribunal had ordered the unit to be closed for not having prior environmental clearance. However, the apex court noted that the unit employs over 8,000 persons. It had applied for consent to establish and operate from the statutory authorities. Besides, the unit had already applied for “ex post facto” environmental clearance.

The court recorded that other branches of the same unit were ”totally non-polluting units having zero trade discharge”. The court described the lack of “prior” environmental clearance as a mere “procedural lapse”.

“The court cannot be oblivious to the economy or the need to protect the livelihood of hundreds of employees and others employed in the project and others dependent on the project, if such projects comply with environmental norms,” Justice Banerjee, who authored the verdict, observed.

The court said ex post facto environmental clearance is not prohibited under the law.

“Ex post facto environmental clearance should not ordinarily be granted, and certainly not for the asking. At the same time ex post facto clearances and/or approvals and/or removal of technical irregularities cannot be declined with pedantic rigidity, oblivious of the consequences of stopping the operation of a running steel plant,” the judgment said.

The court added that the “deviant industry” could be penalised on the principle of ‘polluter pays’, and the cost of restoration of environment may be recovered from it.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.