Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 21 (4.29 seconds)The Right to Information Act, 2005
Utkarsh Mandal vs Union Of India on 26 November, 2009
55. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants relied on the decision
reported in English Indian Clays Limited Vs. District Collector11 of the
Hon‟ble High Court of Kerala, Utkarsh Mandal Vs. Union of India12 of
the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, Gram Panchayat Navlakh
Umbre Vs. Union of India & Ors.13 of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay,
Bengaluru Development Authority Vs. Mr. Sudhakar Hedge & Ors. 14 of
the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, S.P. Muthuraman Vs. Union of India & Ors.
and other connected case in O.A. No.37 of 2015 and O.A. No.213 of 2014
dated 07.07.2015 of the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal, New
Delhi, Samata & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.15 dated 13.12.2013 and
Mathew Thomas Vs. State of Kerala & Ors.16 of this Bench and Prafulla
Samantra Vs. Ministry of Environment & Forest and Ors. 17 of Hon‟ble
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in support of their case.
11 (2019) 1 KLT Online 2113
12 Writ Petition (Civil) No.9340 of 2009
13 Public Interest Litigation No.115 of 2020 and other connected case
The Water (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1974
English Indian Clays Limited vs The District Collector on 4 October, 2018
The same was the case in the Appeal
No.09 of 2011(SZ) of this Bench between Samata Vs. Union of India &
Ors. and in O.A. No.168 of 2015 (SZ) Mathew Thomas Vs. State of Kerala
& Ors. dated 21.12.2015 and the decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi in Prafulla Samantra Vs. Ministry of Environment &
Forest and Ors. W.P. (C) No.3126 of 2008 and the same view has been
expressed by the Hon‟ble High Court of Kerala in English Indian Clays
Limited Vs. District Collector (2019) 1 KLT Online 2113 as well.
Prafulla Samantra vs Ministry Of Environment & Forests & Ors. on 6 May, 2009
The same was the case in the Appeal
No.09 of 2011(SZ) of this Bench between Samata Vs. Union of India &
Ors. and in O.A. No.168 of 2015 (SZ) Mathew Thomas Vs. State of Kerala
& Ors. dated 21.12.2015 and the decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of
Delhi at New Delhi in Prafulla Samantra Vs. Ministry of Environment &
Forest and Ors. W.P. (C) No.3126 of 2008 and the same view has been
expressed by the Hon‟ble High Court of Kerala in English Indian Clays
Limited Vs. District Collector (2019) 1 KLT Online 2113 as well.
Common Cause (A Regd. Society) vs Union Of India on 9 March, 2018
i. The Director of Mines and Geology, State of Kerala of the
respective district is directed to assess the value of the
minerals extracted by the 6th respondent during the period
including the excess mining (if any) done while they were
doing the mining activity without obtaining Environmental
Clearance (EC) till they had closed the same as directed by the
Department during 2015, as has been observed by the Hon‟ble
Apex Court in Common Cause Case reported in (2017) 9 SCC
499 and take steps to realize the amount from the 6th
respondent by taking legal action in accordance with law.
S.P. Muthuraman vs The Union Of India Rep. By The Secretary on 4 November, 2020
56. Further, in the decisions relied on by the appellant namely, S.P.
Muthuraman Vs. Union of India & Ors. and other connected case in O.A.
No.37 of 2015 and O.A. No.213 of 2014 dated 07.07.2015, the Principal
Bench only observed that it is an ex-post facto clearance, but only imposed
environmental compensation for construction made without obtaining
prior Environmental Clearance (EC).
The Air (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1981
Save Mon Region Federation & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 14 March, 2013
39. It is an admitted fact that appeal has to be filed within 30 days from the
date of communication of the order under Section 16 of the National Green
Tribunal Act, 2010 and proviso to Section 16 of the Act provides further
condonable period of 60 days and the Tribunal has no power to extend any
further time to condone the delay and receive the appeal, if it is filed
beyond the outer time limit of 60 days provided under proviso to Section
16 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. Further, in the case of a party
to the proceeding, the date of communication can be reckoned very easily
as the date on which it was received by them can be reckoned as the date
of communication. The question as to whether what amounts to
communication has been considered by the Principal Bench of National
Green Tribunal, New Delhi in Save Mon Region Federation & Anr. Vs.
Page 24 of 41
Union of India & Ors.7 wherein, the Principal Bench has held that the date
of communication as regards the non-party to the proceedings will be the
date on which the Environmental Clearance (EC) was made available in
the public domain for the general public to obtain without any difficulty
and this aspect has been considered by this Bench in Meenava Thanthai
K.R. Selvakumar Vs. Chairman, NCZMA & Ors. 8 dated 26.02.2020 as
well. Further, when three or four modes were provided by different
parties to be complied with under the EIA Notification regarding the
publication of issuance of Environmental Clearance (EC), then first of such
occurrence will be reckoned as the date of communication or knowledge to
the general public. But in all these cases, unless the Environmental
Clearance (EC) is made available in the public domain to be obtained
without any difficulty for the people, then mere publication in the
newspapers will not be of any avail to reckon the period of limitation to
file the appeal as the date of communication.