PIL claims non-compliance of EC conditions by project proponents: HC seeks Centre stand

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Apr 16 2019 | 7:05 PM IST

The Delhi High Court Tuesday sought a response of the Centre on a plea alleging that conditions imposed while granting environmental clearances were not being complied with by project proponents.

A bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice A J Bhambhani issued a notice to the Environment Ministry and asked for its stand on the petition which has sought monitoring and compliance of the conditions imposed during grant of environmental clearances (ECs) or consent to operate and establish.

The petition by a lawyer, Anup Kumar, has claimed that non-compliance of the conditions would result in "grave damage to ecology, human health and also economic loss".

The plea, filed through advocates Samar Vijay Singh and Amit Ojha, has sought directions to the ministry to make it mandatory for the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) and project proponents to upload action taken reports and half-yearly compliance reports on their respective websites.

It has also sought directions to the government to carry out physical inspection of the project site to verify compliance of the conditions imposed when clearances were granted.

The petitioner has claimed in his plea that "Expert Appraisal Committee of the ministry or SEIAA at the state-level are over-burdened with the task of studying Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) reports and granting EC and other consents".

"Most times than not, many non-compliances go unnoticed by authorities due to lack of manpower, expertise and infrastructure and sometimes due to paucity of time," the plea has said.

Referring to a 2016 report of the Comptroller and Auditor General on environmental clearance and post clearance monitoring, the petition has said that it indicated the non-compliance of EC conditions by project proponents.

The petitioner has sought development of a mechanism to ensure the environmental clearance conditions are fulfilled in a safe and time-bound manner.

"...for effective compliance of the conditions, there has to be a mechanism for imposition of penalty.

"For regulation to prove effective, not only there must be a meaningful penalty for non-compliant behaviour, but also a reasonable chance for the regulator to detect non-compliance and, once detected, a reasonable likelihood that the regulator will enforce the penalty," the petition has contended.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*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: Apr 16 2019 | 7:05 PM IST

Next Story