The court ruled ex post facto that the law does not prohibit environmental clearance
The court stated Ex post factoThe law does not prohibit environmental clearance
The Supreme Court ruled that any establishment contributing to the country’s economic health and providing livelihoods cannot be closed due to a technical error in not obtaining prior environmental clearance.
Friday’s judgment by a Bench headed Justice Indira Banerjee was based on an appeal filed in Haryana by a plastic manufacturing company.
The National Green Tribunal had ordered that the unit be closed because it did not have prior environmental clearance. However, the apex court pointed out that the unit is home to over 8,000 people. It had sought consent from the statutory authorities to set up and operate. Additionally, the unit had applied for ex post facto environment clearance.
The court noted that other branches of the unit were completely non-polluting units and had zero trade discharge. The court referred to the absence of prior environmental clearance as a simple procedural lapse.
Justice Banerjee, who was the author of the verdict, said that the court cannot be ignorant to the economy and the need to protect the livelihoods hundreds of people employed in the project or dependent on it.
The court stated Ex post factoThe law does not prohibit environmental clearance.
Ex post facto environmental clearance should not be granted. However, ex post facto clearances,/or approvals,/or removal of technical impropriety cannot be declined with pedantic rigidity oblivious to all the consequences of stopping a running steel plant from being operated, the judgment stated.
The court stated that the deviant industries could be punished according to the principle of polluter pays and that it may be subject to a recovery of the cost of restoration of the environment.
