SC directive on national ecology regulator

Image
BS Reporter New Delhi
Last Updated : Jan 20 2013 | 10:58 PM IST

The Supreme Court today asked the central government to appoint a national regulator for appraising projects from an ecological angle, enforcing environmental conditions for approvals and to impose penalties on polluters.

A bench, headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia, gave this direction in the Lafarge cement case, as part of a 15-point guideline for the future.

The court further declared that the National Forest Policy, 1988, which laid down far-reaching principles, must necessarily govern the grant of permissions under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, as it provided a road map to ecological protection and improvement under the Environment (Protection) Act.

Explaining the necessity for this, the court said it was because there was no machinery for implementation of the National Forest Policy and the Forest (Conservation) Act.

One more reason for having a regulatory mechanism in place, said the court, was because identification of an area as a forest area was solely based on the declaration to be filed by the user agency (project proponent). It is required to undertake an environment impact assessment (EIA) by an expert body/institution. In many cases, the court is not made aware of the terms of reference or the study area undertaken by the expert body.

Consequently, the Union environment ministry (MoEF) or state government acts on the “rapid report” undertaken by the institutions, which though accredited give answers according to the terms of reference given by the project proponent. This is not a happy situation.

The judgment said at times the court was faced with conflicting reports. Similarly, the government is also faced with a situation on the ground which, ultimately, leads to grant of ex facto clearance. To obviate these difficulties, “we are of the view that a regulatory mechanism should be put in place and till the time such mechanism is put in place, the MoEF should prepare a panel of accredited institutions from which alone the project proponent should obtain the Rapid EIA and that too on the terms of reference to be formulated by the MoEF.”

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jul 07 2011 | 12:21 AM IST

Next Story