Top court junks clause exempting big projects from green clearance

The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the January 29 notification of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change on environmental clearance even as it struck down a contentious clause exempting certain large buildings, including educational institutions, and construction projects from prior environmental clearance.

A Bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran held that projects with a built-up area above 20,000 square meter, whether industrial, educational, or otherwise, cannot be exempted from the environment impact assessment (EIA) 2006 regime. No exemption can be granted to the education sector in this regard, it said.

“Nowadays education has also become a flourishing industry and thus no reason to exempt such projects from the 2006 notification,” the CJI said.

“If any construction activity in any area more than 20,000 sq km is carried out it will have environmental impact even if it's for industrial or educational purposes and discrimination cannot be made with similar such institutes,” it said.

The top court upheld the notification, except clause 8 which granted exemptions to industrial sheds, schools, colleges, and hostels with built-up areas up to 150,000 square meter. The notification would also apply to Kerala, it clarified.

“It has been consistently held that natural resources are to be held in trust for the next generation. At the same time, courts have always taken note of development activities and the country cannot progress without it,” the CJI said.

Upholds powers of Pollution Boards 

Reiterating the “polluter pays” principle of environmental jurisprudence, a Bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra has upheld the powers of the pollution control boards to impose restitutionary and compensatory damages for environmental harm, saying that prevention and remediation must be at the heart of environmental governance.

UP govt defends temple ordinance

n The UP Government on Tuesday defended the Shri Banke Bihari Temple Ordinance promulgated by it even as the SC suggested formation of an interim committee led by former high court judges to manage the affairs of the temple at Vrindavan until it finally decided the matter

n “The Ordinance is solely to improve the temple administration...fund mismanagement needs to be prevented,” Additional Solicitor General KM Natraj said