National Green Tribunal
Kaiga Anuvidyut Sthawarad vs Nuclear Power Corporataion Of India Ltd ... on 5 July, 2022
Bench: K. Ramakrishnan, Satyagopal Korlapati
Item No.12: Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Appeal No. 14 of 2019 (SZ) &
I.A. Nos. 19 of 2020 (SZ) & 110 of 2022 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Kaiga Anuvidyut Sthawarad and Ors.
...Appellant(s)
Versus
Nuclear Power Corporation of
India Ltd. (NPCIL) and Ors.
...Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 05.07.2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Mr. B.S. Pai.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Krishna Srinivasan, Mr. Shivathanu Mohan
Mr. Vadiraj Anirudh, Mr. Jagvir Singh Ruhaz,
Dr. Jitendra Singh, Mr. S. Venu Gopal for
M/s. Ramasubramaniam Associates for R1.
Mrs. M. Sumathi represented
Mrs. Me. Saraswathy for R2.
Page 1 of 4
ORDER
I.A. No. 110 of 2022 (SZ):
1. This is an interlocutory application filed by the applicant/first respondent in the appeal to receive document which the learned counsel relied on at the time of argument on the last hearing date to place the same on record.
2. So, the interlocutory application [I.A. No.110 of 2022 (SZ)] is allowed and the document is received subject to its admissibility, reliability and relevancy which can be considered at the time of considering the appeal and [I.A. No.110 of 2022 (SZ)] is disposed of accordingly.
Appeal No. 14 of 2019 (SZ):
3. I.A. No. 110 of 2022 (SZ) is allowed and the document produced along with the application is received subject to its relevancy and admissibility to be considered while considering the appeal.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in reply to what was stated by the learned counsel appearing for the project proponent.
5. During the course of hearing, there was some dispute regarding the question as to whether the project area in this case has been covered by the map attached along with the 2017 Draft Notification issued by the MoEF&CC regarding eco-sensitive zone of Western Ghats and it is on Page 2 of 4 that basis, that 2013 direction issued under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 was amended by the 2018 direction issued under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 by the MoEF&CC.
6. So, in order to ascertain as to whether the map covers this area also, it is necessary for the parties to produce the map attached along with the 2017 Notification in respect of State of Karnataka.
7. When this was pointed out, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the project proponent wanted some time.
Considering the sensitive issue and also importance of the ecologically sensitive area, we feel it is necessary to grant time to produce the documents as well. The MoEF&CC is directed to take steps to clarify these aspects, if it is with them.
8. So under such circumstances, we adjourn the case to 18.07.2022 for further hearing. In the meantime, the MoEF&CC is also directed to produce the entire file relating to issuance of Environmental Clearance (EC) and also the file of Expert Appraisal Committee which was directed to be produced even on the earlier occasions, but not produced so far.
9. In meantime, parties are also directed to produce the above said documents and also written submissions in support of their respective points that they want to rely on.
Page 3 of 410. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the MoEF&CC for their information and compliance of directions.
11. For further hearing, post on 18.07.2022.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M. Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, E.M. Appeal No.14/2019 (SZ) I.A. No.19/2020 (SZ) & I.A. No.110/2022 (SZ) 05th July 2022. Mn.
Page 4 of 4