Jharkhand High Court
Electrosteel Steels Limited vs Jharkhand State Pollution Control ... on 15 October, 2024
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 1873 of 2018
Electrosteel Steels Limited ... ... Petitioner
Versus
Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board and Ors.
... ... Respondents
With
W.P.(C) No. 4850 of 2018
Electrosteel Steels Limited ... ... Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and Ors. ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
: Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate General
For the UOI : Mr. Anil Kumar, Addl. SGI
: Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGC
---
36/15.10.2024 Learned counsel for the parties are present.
2. Learned Additional Solicitor General of India has referred to an
affidavit filed in W.P.(C) No. 4850 of 2018 on behalf of the Ministry
of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India -
respondent no. 1 dated 07.08.2023 and has submitted that the said
affidavit could not be placed by him on earlier occasions when the
case was taken up as there was transfer of file from the earlier counsel.
However, by referring to the aforesaid affidavit the learned Addl. SGI
submits that on 05.06.2023 there was a conscious decision of the
respondent no. 1 to revoke the stage -I clearance.
3. The learned Addl. SGI has also submitted that the order
refusing interim relief was taken up by the petitioner before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court had given 3
months' time for the purposes of seeking the required approval and it
was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that till such approval is
obtained, the unit of the petitioner be not disturbed. He submits that
the order regarding revocation of stage -I clearance has been passed on
05.06.2023 and therefore, the interim protection granted by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court is already over long back.
4. The learned Addl. SGI has further submitted that so far as this
Court is concerned, there is no interim order passed in favour of the
petitioner after the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The
learned Senior counsel has submitted that though no affidavit has been
filed with regard to further orders after the decision dated 05.06.2023,
but the respondent no. 1 has taken up the matter with the State
government to ensure all compliances and once the stage-I clearance
has been revoked, the continuation of the unit of the petitioner cannot
be sustained as per the environmental law governing the petitioner.
5. The learned Advocate General has submitted that he shall file a
response to the affidavit dated 07.08.2023 filed by the respondent no.
1 in W.P.(C) No. 4850 of 2018 and as per his knowledge, there has
been subsequent developments.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
Hon'ble Supreme Court had passed interim orders till decision in
connection with revised environmental clearance which was subject
matter of consideration before respondent no. 1 in W.P.(C) No. 4850
of 2018 and no decision in that regard has been communicated to the
petitioner so far.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that on
account of non-availability of required land, it has become difficult to
comply with the requirements of stage-I clearance and the petitioner
has taken up the matter with the respondent no. 1- Ministry of
Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India and
the same is under consideration, however, no such affidavit as such
has been filed by the petitioner in that regard. He also submits that he
shall file an affidavit in response to the counter affidavit of respondent
no. 1 dated 07.08.2023.
8. Learned Senior counsel for the Union of India, in response, has
submitted that once the stage-I clearance has been revoked, there is no
question of grant of environmental clearance as the condition
precedent for grant of environmental clearance includes the stage-I
approval.
9. Learned Senior counsel for the Union of India has further
submitted that the order was passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by
referring to the post-facto approval granted to the petitioner on
17.12.2019 and by the order dated 05.06.2023, the order dated
17.12.2019 has itself been revoked. The learned counsel submits that
the very basis on which the interim order was passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has been revoked. He submits that the matter be
finally heard at the earliest.
10. To the aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that it has also been recorded in the judgment
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that it is the specific case of the
petitioner that no part of the unit of the petitioner is situated on forest
land which has been recorded in paragraph 91 of the judgment passed
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He has submitted that irrespective of
the requirement of forest clearance, the petitioner has a full proof case.
11. The affidavits be exchanged between the parties latest by 05 th
December 2024.
12. Post these matters on 10th December 2024.
13. It is made clear that no adjournment will be granted and the
case will be taken up on merits on the next date of hearing. It is also
clarified that after the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this
Court has not passed any interim relief in favour of the petitioner.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Pankaj
