Skip to main content

Supreme Court Declines To Stop Operations of Noida Metro To Protect Larger Public Interest

Supreme Court Declines To Stop Operations of Noida Metro To Protect Larger Public Interest


Noting that the entire metro rail project is complete and running, the Supreme Court has refused to stop the Noida metro's operations for the want of environmental clearance.

The court was hearing an appeal filed against a May 31, 2016 order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), directing that all metro rail projects need an environmental clearance after conducting a proper environmental impact assessment.


Keeping the question of law open, a bench of Justice M R Shah and Justice C T Ravikumar said the metro services in Delhi and Noida are being used by the public at large.

"In that view of the matter, when the entire metro rail project is complete and the metro rail is running, the clock cannot be put back and the same shall not be even in the larger public interest. Under the circumstances, we propose to dispose of the present appeals, keeping the questions of law open," it said.


The Supreme Court said the NGT order cannot be acted upon in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

"However, the questions of law, if any, more particularly, whether with respect to the rail project or metro rail project, the environmental clearance is required or not and other questions of law, if any, are kept open to be considered in appropriate proceedings and the present order shall not be cited as a precedent in any other matters or cases," the bench said.


The NGT had held that all metro rail projects need an environmental clearance after conducting a proper environmental impact assessment.

It had said the Noida metro, the construction of which was challenged before it, fell under Schedule 8(b) of the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, relating to buildings, construction, and development projects that are mandated to get a prior environmental clearance.


The green panel had also directed the upcoming Noida-Greater Noida metro project to obtain environmental clearance from the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA).

The order was passed on a plea filed by environmentalist Vikrant Tongad, seeking directions to the Noida Metro Rail Corporation (NMRC) to obtain environmental clearance for its project from Noida to Greater Noida after conducting a proper environmental impact assessment.


From the detailed project report (DPR), it is clear that the total land requirement for the project of metro rail from Noida to Greater Noida is around 2,84,762.01 square metres. However, no Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) report was prepared. This fact was verified by the applicant by inspecting the records of the project under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

"It is submitted that as per 8(b) of the schedule of the EIA Notification, 2006, a project having a covering area of more than 50 hectares or a built-up area of more than 1,50,000 square metres requires an environmental clearance and is to be appraised as a category B1 project," the plea, filed through advocate Rahul Choudhary, had said.


Tongad had stated that the metro from Noida to Greater Noida will pass through Hindon and piers would be constructed on a river bed, which can significantly harm the river's aquatic habitat.



(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Lawgic Simplified staff and is posted from a syndicated feed.)
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Patna High Court Declares Bihar’s Reservation Amendments Ultra Vires

  In a landmark decision, the Patna High Court has invalidated the Bihar government's legislative attempt to increase reservations for backward classes. The court's ruling focused on procedural flaws and the absence of a robust empirical basis for the hike, sparking a debate on judicial intervention in affirmative action policies. Background and Rationale Behind Setting Aside Bihar Reservation Increase Law The Bihar government had proposed an increase in reservations to address socio-economic disparities faced by backward classes. However, the court found that the state failed to follow due process, which includes conducting a thorough empirical study to justify the policy change. This procedural oversight led to the court's decision to strike down the increase. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a data-driven approach for policy changes related to reservations. The ruling underscored that without solid empirical evidence, such policies could not be justified within...
Post a Comment
Read more

Pune Porsche Crash: Father of Minor Granted Bail

Image Credit: tv9marathi A Pune court has granted bail to the minor’s father, Vishal Agarwal, who faced charges under the Juvenile Justice Act for neglect and endangering the child by allowing him to drive without a license and consume alcohol. Additionally, bar owners and managers were arrested for serving alcohol to minors. The father, already in custody for other related charges, was implicated in the alleged manipulation of his son’s blood samples and in a separate case of kidnapping his driver. Advocate Prashant Patil argued that Vishal Agarwal's arrest was unlawful, contending that the charges were non-cognizable offenses and required a notice under the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Patil also highlighted contradictions in police reports, where the minor was listed as the accused in one FIR and as a victim in another.  Also Read:  Delhi High Court Stays Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Bail in Excise Policy Case Earlier Proceedings in the Pune Porsche Crash Inc...
Post a Comment
Read more

Counsel's failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review: Bombay High Court

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has observed that “If Counsel has not urged a point, the fact that there were written submissions is immaterial if those written submissions were never in fact argued.” The Bench also added that “Counsel’s failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review or, I dare say, even appeal. It is no ground to assail any order of any judge of any court.”   The bench was hearing a review petition filed for seeking reinstatement of original arbitration petition on grounds some of which were never argued and others never pleaded and the said petition was filed after the original arbitration petition was fully argued, and then decided by pronouncement in open court. Also Read - The Pension Scheme for freedom fighters cannot be construed in a manner that the requirements prescribed are rendered a dead letter: Bombay HC According to Justice GS Patel allowing parties to take grounds in review pleas or in appeals that were not argued initi...
Post a Comment
Read more