[Cites 24, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
S.K.Ashok Kumar vs The State Industries Promotion ... on 25 February, 2026
Author: Krishnan Ramasamy
Bench: Krishnan Ramasamy
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on 17.11.2025
Pronounced on 25.02.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.Nos.1294, 29724, 10310, 10316, 10323, 29613, 29699, 29706,
7005, 7011, 7000, 7016, 7022 & 10325 of 2025
20544, 20545, 20548, 20539 & 20541 of 2024
& W.M.P.Nos.33317, 33318, 33347, 33351, 7734, 7740, 7742, 7751,
7752, 7763, 11632, 11637, 11638, 17712, 33309, 1538, 1539, 11618,
11619, 7733, 7757, 7758, 7762, 33307, 33194, 33197, 17721, 17722,
17723, 11635, 11623 & 11625 of 2025,
22485, 22487, 22488, 22489 & 22490 of 2024
W.P.No.1294 of 2025:
S.K.Ashok Kumar
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
1/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 2nd
respondent culminating in the impugned notification in Gazette No.340
dated 17.10.2024 bearing number VI(1)/ 692(e-2)/ 204 (CLA-SIP/2024/
40/ 07/ 04/ 0001) issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu
Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 quash the same in
so far as it relates to the petitioners lands in S.Nos. 23/1A, 23/1C, 23/1E,
24/10B, 24/11, 24/12A, 24/13, 24/3, 24/6A, 25/11, 25/13, 25/5, 26/1B,
26/3, 26/6, 27/11A3, 27/11A5, 27/1A, 27/4, 27/7, 27/8, 28/1A, 28/3B,
28/3C1, 28/6 and 27/11A1, admeasuring 2.359 ha, in Manellore village
and direct the respondents to obtain prior environmental clearance under
the EIA Notification, 2006 thereafter conduct enquiry under Section 3(2)
considering the EIA reports, objections of the petitioner and pass
reasoned orders before publication of Notification under Section 3(1) of
the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 for
the 1st respondents proposed industrial estate in Vaniyamalli village and
surrounding villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
2/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
W.P.No.29724 of 2025:
1.C.Elumalai
2.Malarvizhi Elumalai
3.Mithun Chakravarthy E
4.Balaji Elumalai
5.Pushpammal
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 2nd
respondent culminating in the impugned notification dated 25.04.2025
bearing No.VI (1) / 281 (b-2)/ 2025, no.CLA- SIP / 2025/ 40/ 01/ 05/
0001), issued under Section 3 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of land
for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 Published by the 2nd Respondent, in
3/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
respect of the petitioners lands in S.No. 76/1B, 94/1, 80/2, 80/3, 80/4,
80/5, 80/7, 80/8A, 94/1, 76/1B, 76/2A, 76/3A, district and quash the
same and direct the Respondents to obtain prior environmental clearance
under the EIA Notification, 2006, thereafter conduct enquiry under
Section 3 (2) considering the EIA reports, Objections of the petitioner,
and pass reasoned orders before publication of Notification under section
3 (1 ) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for industrial purposes Act,
1997 for the 1st respondents proposed industrial estate in Vaniyamalli
village and surrounding villages in gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur
district
W.P.No.10310 of 2025:
E.Subramani
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Tiruvallur, 1st Floor,
Collectorate, Tiruvallur 602 001
2.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the 1st
respondent culminating in the impugned proceedings of the 1st
4/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
respondent bearing number Na.Ka.No. 9326/2022/A2 dated 26.01.2023
quash the same.
W.P.No.10316 of 2025:
E.Subramani
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Tiruvallur, 1st Floor,
Collectorate, Tiruvallur 602 001
2.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the 1st
respondent culminating in the impugned proceedings of the 1st
respondent bearing number Na.Ka.No. 12162/2020/A2, pertaining to
Soorapoondi Village, dated 07.09.2020 quash the same.
W.P.No.10323 of 2025:
E.Subramani
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep by its Secretary to Government,
5/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Revenue and Disaster Management Department,
Land Disposal Wing (LD 5(2) Section),
Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil
Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the 1st
respondent culminating in the G.O.(Ms.) No. 285 dated 03.08.2018 quash
the same.
W.P.No.29613 of 2025:
C.Elumalai
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
6/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the 2nd respondent culminating in the impugned notification
dated 25.04.2025 bearing No. VI (1) / 281 (b-2) / 2025 no. CLA- SIP/
2025/ 40/ 01/ 05/ 0001 ) issued under section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu
Acquisition of land for Industrial Purposes Act 1997 published by the
2nd respondent in respect of the petitioners land admeasuring 2.714
hectares (6.706 acres) in S.No. 71/1 Vaniamalli village, Gummidipoondi
Taluk, Tiruvallur district and quash the same and direct the respondents
to obtain prior environmental clearance under the EIA notification 2006
thereafter conduct enquiry under section 3(2) considering the EIA
reports, objections of the petitioner and pass reasoned orders before
publication of notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu
Acquisition of land for Industrial Purposes Act 1997 for the 1st
respondents proposed industrial estate in Vaniyamalli village and
surrounding villages in Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur district
W.P.No.29699 of 2025:
Elango Gunasekar
... Petitioner
Vs.
7/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the
records of the 2nd respondent culminating in the impugned notification
dated 25.04.2025 bearing No.VI(1) / 281(b-2) / 2025 No.CLA-SIP/ 2025/
40/ 01/ 05/ 0001) issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu
Acquisition of land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 published by the
2nd respondent in respect of the lands admeasuring 1.1750 ha (or 2.9034
acres) in S.No.71/2B in the petitioners name at Vaniamalli village,
Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur district and quash the same and direct
the respondents to obtain prior environmental clearance under the EIA
8/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Notification 2006, thereafter conduct enquiry under section 3(2)
considering the EIA reports objections of the petitioner and pass reasoned
orders before publication of Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil
Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 for the 1st
respondents proposed Industrial estate in Vaniyamalli village and
surrounding villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.29706 of 2025:
Thamizharasan G
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the 2nd
9/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
respondent culminating in the impugned notification dated 25.04.2025
bearing No.VI(1) / 281(b-2) / 2025 No.CLA-SIP/ 2025/ 40/ 01/ 05/ 0001)
issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of land for
Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 published by the 2nd respondent in respect
of the petitioners lands admeasuring 1.1750 ha (or 2.9034 acres) in
S.No.71/2A Vaniamalli village, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur
district and quash the same and direct the respondents to obtain prior
environmental clearance under the EIA Notification 2006, thereafter
conduct enquiry under section 3(2) considering the EIA reports
objections of the petitioner and pass reasoned orders before publication
of Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land
for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 for the 1st respondents proposed
Industrial estate in Vaniyamalli village and surrounding villages in
Gummudipoondi Taluk Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.7005 of 2025:
G.Indirani
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
10/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records of
the 2nd Respondent culminating in the impugned notification dated
17.10.2024 bearing number No.VI(1/692(e. 1)/2024 (CLA-SIP/2024/
40/07/07/0001) and No.VI(1)/692(e-2)/2024 (CLA SIP/2024/40/07/04/
0001) issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land
for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash the same in so far as it relates to
the petitioners lands in S. Nos. 11/1B (SI.No. 15), 15/7 (SI.No. 160), 15/8
(SI.No. 161), 27/2A (SI.No. 93), 27/6 (SI.No. 100), admeasuring 0 34. 50
ha, in Manellore village and direct the Respondents to obtain prior
environmental clearance under the EIA Notification, 2006, thereafter
conduct enquiry under Section 3(2) considering the EIA reports,
objections of the petitioner, and pass reasoned orders before publication
of Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land
for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 for the 1st Respondent proposed
industrial estate in Manellore village and surrounding villages in
Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
11/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
W.P.No.7011 of 2025:
O.V.Dhamodharan
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the 2nd Respondent culminating in the impugned notification
dated 17.10.2024 bearing number No.VI(1)/692(e 2)/2024
(CLA-SIP/2024/40/07/04/0001) issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil
Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash the
same in so far as it relates to the petitioners lands in S. Nos. 26/1 1B1
(SI.No. 67), 28/3A2 (SI.No. 110), admeasuring 0-5.50 ha, in Manelore
12/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
village and direct the Respondents to obtain prior environmental
clearance under the EIA Notification, 2006, thereafter conduct enquiry
under Section 3(2) considering the EIA reports, objections of the
petitioner, and pass reasoned orders before publication of Notification
under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial
Purposes Act, 1997 for the 1st Respondent's proposed industrial estate in
Manellore village and surrounding villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk,
Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.7000 of 2025:
R.Kesavan
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
13/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the
records of the 2nd Respondent culminating in the impugned notification
dated 17.10.2024 bearing number No.VI(1)/692 (e-1)/2024
(CLA-SIP/2024/40/07/07/0001) issued under Section 3( 1) of the Tamil
Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash the
same so far as ,it relates to the petitioners lands ,in S. Nos. 11/ lAl (SI.No.
13 ), l l/ lA. 2 (SI.No. 14) 11/6 (SI.No. 31) 14/11B(SI.No. 78), 14/2B
(Sl.No. 109 ) admeasunng 0-21.00 ha, in Manellore village and direct the
Respondents to obtain prior environmental clearance under the EIA
Notification, 2006, thereafter conduct enquiry under Section 3(2)
considering the ElA reports, objections of the petitioner, and pass
reasoned orders before publication of Notification under Section 3( 1) of
the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 for
the 1st Respondent's proposed industrial estate in manellore village and
surrounding villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.7016 of 2025:
V.Govindharaj
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
14/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the 2nd Respondent culminating in the impugned notification
dated 17.10.2024 bearing number No.VI(1)/692(e 2)/2024
(CLA-SIP/2024/40/07/04/0001) issued under Section 3(1) of the Tamil
Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash the
same in So far as it relates to the petitioners lands in S. Nos. 28/3A1
(SI.No. 109), admeasuring 0.0575 ha, in Manellore village and direct the
Respondents to obtain prior environmental clearance under the EIA
Notification, 2006, thereafter conduct enquiry under Section 3(2)
considering the EIA reports, objections of the petitioner, and pass
reasoned orders before publication of Notification under Section 3(1) of
the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 for
the lst Respondents proposed industrial estate in manellore village and
surrounding villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.7022 of 2025:
15/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
A.Purushothaman
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 2nd
Respondent culminating in the impugned notification dated 17 10 2024
bearing number No.VI(1)/692(e -1)/2024 (CLA-SIP/2024/40/07/07/
0001) and No. VI(1 )/692 (e-2)/2024 (CLA SIP/40/07/04/0001) issued
under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial
purposes Act. 1997, quash the same In so far as it relates to the
petitioners lands in S. Nos, 11/14 (SI.No. 7), 11// (S1.NO. 32), 15/14 (SI.
No. 130), 25/7 (S.NO, 54), 26/11B2 (SI.No. 68), 26/11F (S1.NO. 3),
16/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
admeasuring 3.875 ha, in Manellore village and direct the Respondents to
obtain prior environmental clearance under the EIA Notification, 2006,
thereafter conduct enquiry under Section 3(2) considering the EIA
reports, Objections of the petitioner, and pass reasoned orders before
publication of Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu
Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997 for the 1st
Respondents proposed industrial estate in Manellore village and
surrounding villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.10325 of 2025:
E.Subramani
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Tiruvallur, 1st Floor,
Collectorate, Tiruvallur 602 001
2.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the
records of the 1st respondent culminating in the impugned proceedings of
the 1st respondent bearing number Na.Ka.No. 12162/2020/A2, pertaining
to Vaniamallee Village, dated 07.09.2020 quash the same.
17/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
W.P.No.20544 of 2024:
L.Kumaresan
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the 2nd
respondent culminating in the impugned notification dated 09.05.2024
bearing number No. VI(1)/346 (a-5)/2024(CLP-SIP/2024/40/01/04/001),
issued under section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for
Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash the same in so far as it relates to the
petitioners lands in S.No. 72/15,75/16, 73/8 admeasuring 0.77.00 Ha in
Vaniyamalli Village and direct the respondents to obtain prior
18/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
environmental clearance under the EIA notification, 2006, thereafter
conduct enquiry under Section 3(2) considering the EIA reports
objections of the petitioner, pass reasoned orders before publication of
Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land
for Industrial Purposes act, 1997 for the 1st Respondents proposed
industrial estate in vaniyammali Village and surrounding Villages in
Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.20545 of 2024:
S.Aruna
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
19/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the 2nd
respondent culminating in the impugned notification dated 09.05.2024
bearing number No. VI(1)/346 (a-5)/2024(CLP-SIP/2024/40/01/04/001),
issued under section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for
Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash the same in so far as it relates to the
petitioners lands in S.No. 79/1C, 79/2 admeasuring 0.44.00 Ha in
Vaniyamalli Village and direct the respondents to obtain prior
environmental clearance under the EIA notification, 2006, thereafter
conduct enquiry under Section 3(2) considering the EIA reports
objections of the petitioner, pass reasoned orders before publication of
Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land
for Industrial Purposes act, 1997 for the 1st Respondents proposed
industrial estate in vaniyammali Village and surrounding Villages in
Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.20548 of 2024:
Raghunathan
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
20/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the
records of the 2nd respondent culminating in the impugned notification
dated 09.05.2024 bearing number No. VI(1)/346
(a-5)/2024(CLP-SIP/2024/40/01/04/001), issued under section 3(1) of the
Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash
the same in so far as it relates to the petitioners lands in S.No. 79/1A
admeasuring 1.76.50 Ha in Vaniyamalli Village and direct the
respondents to obtain prior environmental clearance under the EIA
notification, 2006, thereafter conduct enquiry under Section 3(2)
considering the EIA reports objections of the petitioner, pass reasoned
orders before publication of Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil
Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes act, 1997 for the 1st
Respondents proposed industrial estate in vaniyammali Village and
surrounding Villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.20539 of 2024:
Sridharan
... Petitioner
21/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the
records of the 2nd respondent culminating in the impugned notification
dated 09.05.2024 bearing number No. VI(1)/346
(a-5)/2024(CLP-SIP/2024/40/01/04/001), issued under section 3(1) of the
Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash
the same in so far as it relates to the petitioners lands in S.No. 79/1B
admeasuring 1.32.50 Ha in Vaniyamalli Village and direct the
respondents to obtain prior environmental clearance under the EIA
notification, 2006, thereafter conduct enquiry under Section 3(2)
considering the EIA reports objections of the petitioner, pass reasoned
22/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
orders before publication of Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil
Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes act, 1997 for the 1st
Respondents proposed industrial estate in vaniyammali Village and
surrounding Villages in Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
W.P.No.20541 of 2024:
Kumar
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Industries Promotion Corporation
of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT),
19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.Commissionerate of Land Administration,
Rep by its Commissioner,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Land Administration Department,
2nd Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/
District Revenue Officer (LA),
SIPCOT Manellore Phase III,
No.26, Samarapuri Nagar, Kavaraipettai,
Thiruvallur 601 206.
... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records of the 2nd
respondent culminating in the impugned notification dated 09.05.2024
23/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
bearing number No. VI(1)/346 (a-5)/2024(CLP-SIP/2024/40/01/04/001),
issued under section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for
Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, quash the same in so far as it relates to the
petitioners lands in S.No. 79/1C,79/2 admeasuring 0.44.0 Ha in
Vaniyamalli Village and direct the respondents to obtain prior
environmental clearance under the EIA notification, 2006, thereafter
conduct enquiry under Section 3(2) considering the EIA reports
objections of the petitioner, pass reasoned orders before publication of
Notification under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land
for Industrial Purposes act, 1997 for the 1st Respondents proposed
industrial estate in vaniyammali Village and surrounding Villages in
Gummudipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Mohan, Sr.counsel
Asst. by Mr.A.Yogeshwaran,
Ms.B.Poonghkulali & Ms.S.Swetha
For Respondent : Mr.J.Ravindran,
Additional Advocate General,
Asst. by Mr.A.Selvendran, SGP
for R1 in WP.Nos.10310, 10316,
10323, 10325 of 2025
for R2 & 3 in WP.Nos.1294, 7005,
7000, 7011, 7016, 7022 of 2025
20539, 20541, 20544, 20545, 20548/24
29613, 29706, 29699 & 29724 of 2025
Mr.R.Viduthalai, Sr.counsel,
Asst.by Mr.Abishek Murthy, St.counsel
for R1 in WP.No.1294, 7005, 7000,
7011, 7016, 7022 of 2025
24/72
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
20539, 20541, 20544, 20545, 20548/24
29613, 29706, 29699 & 29724 of 2025
for R2 in WP.No.10310, 10316, 10323
& 10325 of 2025
COMMON ORDER
The writ petitions, in WP.Nos.20539, 20544, 20545, 20548, 20541
of 2024, 1294, 7000, 7005, 7011, 7016, 7022 of 2025, 29613, 29699,
29706 & 29724 of 2025, have been filed challenging the impugned
Notification dated 09.05.2024, 17.10.2024 & 25.04.2025 (hereinafter
called as “Section 3(1) Notification”) issued under Section 3(1) of the
Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997
(hereinafter called as “1997 Act”).
2. The writ petitions, in WP.Nos.10310, 10316 & 10323 of 2025,
have been filed against the impugned Enter Upon Permission dated
07.09.2020 & 26.01.2023 granted by the District Collector, Thiruvallur
District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
3. The Writ petition, in WP.No.10325 of 2025, has been filed
against the Alienation order passed by the Government of Tamil Nadu
vide GO(Ms)No.285 dated 03.08.2018.
4. Brief Facts of the cases are as follows:
4.1 In these cases, the SIPCOT has identified 1751.67.30 Hectares,
i.e., 4326.62 Acres of land for the establishment of “industrial park” or
“industrial estate” howsoever called. In the present batch of cases, the
challenge was made with regard to the acquisition of more than 1951.88
Acres of Poromboke land and 11.5.0 Hectares, which is equivalent to 28
acres, of Patta land. These subject lands, which includes both Patta lands
and Poromboke lands, are spread across 5 villages, namely, Manellore,
Soorapoondi, Vaniyamalli, Madarapakkam and Sanapthur in Thiruvallur
District.
4.2 With regard to the Poromboke lands, the SIPCOT, being the
Promoter for industrial establishment, got the impugned Enter Upon
Permission from the District Collector and subsequently, obtained a full-
pledged Alienation order from the Revenue Department of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Government of Tamil Nadu, whereupon the said lands are absolutely
vested in SIPCOT.
4.3 For the subject lands pertaining to cases, where the Enter Upon
Permission was granted, the Environmental clearance was obtained by
the respondent on 22.04.2024, whereas, for the subject lands, pertaining
to cases, where the Alienation Order was passed, the Environmental
Clearance was obtained on 10.11.2020.
4.4 Against the Environment Clearance dated 10.11.2020, an
appeal was filed in Appeal Nos.32 & 34 of 2020 and the same were
disposed of, vide order dated 30.09.2022, with a direction to conduct
further study, by keeping the said Environmental Clearance certificate in
abeyance. Pursuant to the said order, a thorough study was conducted by
the concerned Authorities and thereafter, an amended Environmental
Clearance was granted on 17.03.2025, which is also challenged before
National Green Tribunal (NGT) in Appeal No.20 of 2025 and the same is
pending without any interim orders.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
4.5 As far as Environmental Clearance dated 22.04.2024 is
concerned, the same was challenged in Appeal No.46 of 2024. The order
for suspension of Environmental Clearance, given by the Competent
Authority, is challenged by SIIPCOT before the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and the same is pending.
4.6 Under these circumstances, these writ petitions have been filed
challenging the issuance of Section 3(1) Notification by stating that no
such notification can be issued without obtaining the Environmental
Clearance. Further challenge was also made against the Alienation Order
and Enter Upon Permission on the ground that the said orders ought not
to have passed by the respective Authorities before obtaining
Environmental Clearance and the same is against the law laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in Project Director vs. PV Krishnamurthy &
others reported in (2021) 3 SCC 572 (hereinafter referred to as “PV
Krishnamurthy case”).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
5. Petitioner's submission:
5.1 The learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that SIPCOT has identified more than 1700 Hectares of land
spread across 5 villages, which includes both Patta lands and Poromboke
lands. Except houses, all available agricultural lands and open common
lands are earmarked for establishment of industrial estates. The area is
agriculturally productive and fertile. A minimum of 2 crops is grown a
year, with paddy being the dominant crop along with vegetables.
Groundwater is available almost at ground level during monsoon season
and the water level in wells are 2 to 3 meters depth even during summer.
There are several cattle in these villages, which are dependent only on
these commons, now sought to be diverted, which though classified as
Kallankuthu, are in reality used as Meikal lands. There is, thus, a need to
properly assess the environmental and social impact of conversion of
these lands for establishment of an industrial estate, which is sought to be
thwarted by SIPCOT by issuing Section 3(1) Notification for acquisition
of these lands and securing allotment before an Environmental Impact
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Assessment (EIA) is done, public hearing is conducted and clearance is
obtained.
5.2 Hence, he would submit that the challenge involved in these
writ petitions is with regard to the issuance of Section 3(1) Notification
and against the Enter Upon Permission and Alienation Order passed by
the concerned Authorities for transferring Poromboke lands.
5.3 According to the petitioners, it is mandatory to obtain prior
Environmental Clearance in terms of the provisions of Notification dated
14.09.2006 (hereinafter called as “2006 Notification”) and in terms of the
Official Memorandum of Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Change dated 07.10.2014 (hereinafter called as “2014 OM”).
5.4 Further, it was contended that even in terms of the law laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of PV Krishnamurthy case,
before issuance of Section 3(1) Notification, i.e., before vesting of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
property in the hands of acquiring Authorities, the concerned Officials
are supposed to have obtained Environmental Clearance. However, the
said mandatory Law has not been followed in these cases. The
Poromboke lands were handed over to SIPCOT by virtue of Alienation
Order and Enter Upon Permission without obtaining the Environmental
Clearance. Therefore, the issuance of impugned orders is not only
contrary to 2006 Notification and 2014 OM, but also in violation of the
law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in PV Krishnamurthy case.
5.5 That apart, a submission was made to the extent that the
issuance of Section 3(1) Notification is also in violation of the judgment
rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Board vs. C.Kenchappa reported in (2006) 6 SCC 371
(hereinafter referred to as “C.Kenchappa case”) and the order passed by
this Court in M.Velu vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and others reported in
(2010) SCC Online Mad 2736 (hereinafter referred to as “M.Velu case”).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
5.6 By referring all the above case laws, 2006 Notification and
2014 OM, he would submit that impugned Section 3(1) Notification,
Enter Upon Permission and Alienation order are liable to be quashed.
Hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.
6.Respondent's submissions:
6.1 Mr.J.Ravindran, learned Additional Advocate General and
Mr.R.Viduthalai, learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents
had strongly opposed for the submissions made by the petitioners and
would submit that as far as Poromboke land is concerned, there is no bar,
in the provisions of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, to grant
any Enter Upon Permission and Alienation Order in favour of SIPCOT
and a mere granting of said Enter Upon Permission and Alienation Order
does not mean that the SIPCOT can commence the implementation of
project and construct the industries therein.
6.2 As per 2006 Notification and 2014 OM, the prohibition is only
with regard to the commencement of construction and other
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
developmental activities, whereas, issuance of Section 3(1) Notification
and granting of Enter Upon Permission and Alienation Order is not at all
prohibited in the said Notification and OM and also it is not against the
law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court in the
judgements referred by petitioners.
6.3 As far as Patta lands are concerned, initially, a Section 3(2)
Notification was issued and enquiry was conducted, prior to which, a
thorough study was also conducted by the respondents as ordered by the
Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in M.Velu case. After conducting
the impact assessment study, the respondent had proceeded to issue
Section 3(1) Notification.
6.4 As stated above, a mere issuance of Section 3(1) Notification
itself does not mean that the SIPCOT is going to implement its project
and start the construction works and further developmental activities. At
the stage of issuance of Section 3(1) Notification, only the property is
going to be vested with the Government. Until the receipt of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Environmental Clearance and disbursement of award amount to the land
owners, certainly, the SIPCOT cannot commence any construction work
or further developmental activities at the subject lands. Now, they are
only in the process of securing the lands, which includes vesting of
properties.
6.5 Further, by referring the provisions of 1 st and 2nd proviso to
Section 4(1) of the 1997 Act, they would submit that admittedly, if no
Environmental Clearance is obtained or if any conclusion is arrived to the
extent that the subject lands are not required for purpose of establishment
of industrial estate, the said lands will be reverted back to the respective
land owners. Further, the said land owners are also entitled for
compensation for the period from the date of taking over of the lands by
Government till the date of reverting back of the same to the land
owners. Hence, he would contend that all the protections have been
provided to the land owners/petitioners in the 1997 Act. However, in the
National Highways Act, no such provisions is available for reverting
back the lands to the respective land owners and that is why, in PV
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Krishnamurthy case, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that Section
3D Notification, which is equivalent to Section 3(1) Notification, can be
issued only after the obtaining of Environmental Clearance.
6.6 Further, in the said PV Krishnamurthy case, the challenge was
made with regard to the issuance of Section 3A Notification and the
arguments were made only on the aspect as to whether Section 3A
Notification, which is equivalent to Section 3(2) Notification in 1997
Act, can be issued prior to the obtaining of Environmental Clearance.
However, no submissions were made with regard to commencement of
construction work and other developmental activities as referred in 2006
Notification and hence, the Hon'ble Apex Court had no occasion to dealt
with the same.
6.7 Therefore, they would contend that the question of
commencement of construction works and preparation of lands by the
project management would come into picture only subsequent to the
entrustment of the lands with SIPCOT and thereupon, allotment of land
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
to various allotees. Until then, no such activities will be carried out. Now,
the issuance of Section 3(1) Notification is only for the purpose of
vesting of subject lands with the Government.
6.8 Further, by referring 2006 Notification, they would submit that
absolutely, there is no prohibition for issuance of Section 3(1)
Notification, whereby only the vesting of property occurs. Also, there is
no prohibition for passing Alienation Order as well as Enter Upon
Permission to SIPCOT for the Poromboke lands. Hence, they pray for
dismissal of these petitions.
7. I have given due consideration to the submissions made by the
learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional
Advocate General and the learned Senior counsel appearing for the
respondents and also perused the entire materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
8. In the present batch of cases, two issues, that arises for
consideration, are as follows:
i) Whether the issuance of Section 3(1) Notification
can be construed as commencement of construction work or
preparation of land by the project management? And what
would be the stage, at which, the actual construction work or
preparation of land would occur?
ii) Whether Section 3(1) Notification can be issued,
under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial
Purposes Act, 1997, before obtaining the Environmental
Clearance ?
9. Issue No.1: Whether the issuance of Section 3(1) Notification
can be construed as commencement of construction work or
preparation of land by the project management? And what would be
the stage, at which, the actual construction work or preparation of
land would occur?
9.1 To answer the 1st issue, it would be apposite to extract the
relevant portion of Notification dated 14.09.2006, which reads as
follows:
(i) Clause 2 of 2006 Notification:
“2. Requirements of prior Environmental
Clearance (EC):-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
The following projects or activities shall require
prior environmental clearance from the concerned
regulatory authority, which shall hereinafter referred to be
as the Central Government in the Ministry of Environment
and Forests for matters falling under Category 'A' in the
Schedule and at State level the State Environment Impact
Assessment Authority (SEIAA) for matters falling under
Category 'B' in the said Schedule and at District level, the
District Environment Impact Assessment Authority
(DEIAΑ) for matters falling under Category 'B2' for mining
of minor minerals in the said Schedule, before any
construction work, or preparation of land by the project
management except for securing the land, is started on the
project or activity:
(i) All new projects or activities listed in the Schedule
to this notification;
(ii) Expansion, modernisation or any change in the
product mix or raw material mix in existing projects or
activities, listed in the Schedule to this notification,
resulting in capacity beyond the threshold limits specified
for the concerned sector in the said Schedule, subject to
conditions and procedure provided in the sub-paragraph
(ii) of paragraph 7.
(ii) Paragraph No.7(c) of the Schedule:
Project or Activity Category with threshold limit Conditions, if any
A B
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
7 Physical infrastructure including Environmental Services
7(a) to ........ .......... .......... ..........
7(b)
7(c) Industrial If at least one Industrial General as well as specific
Estates/Park industry in the estates conditions shall apply.
s/Complexes/ proposed industrial housing at
Areas, estate falls under least one Note:
Export the category A, Category B 1.Industrial Estate of area
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
processing enter industrial industry and below 500 ha. and not
Zones area shall be area <500 ha. housing any industry of
(EPZs), treated as Category category A or B does not
Special A, irrespective of Industrial require clearance.
Economic the area. estates of area 2.If the area is less than 500
Zones >500 ha. and ha. but contains building and
(SEZs), Industrial estates not housing construted projects >20,000
Biotech with area greater any industry sq.mtr., and developmental
Parks, than 500 ha. and belonging to area more than 50 ha., it will
Leather housing at least one Category A or be treated as activity listed at
Complexes Category B B. Serial No.8(a) or 8(b) in the
industry. Schedule as the case may be.
9.2 A reading of the above notification would reveal that prior to
the receipt of Environmental Clearance, no construction works or
preparation of lands by the project management would occur. Once
Section 3(1) Notification is issued, the lands will be vested with the
Government. Thereafter, the Government has to take steps to entrust the
said lands to SIPCOT. Even after entrustment of lands to SIPCOT, the
SIPCOT will not commencement any construction work or preparation
work for the purpose of establishment of industries. Once the property is
entrusted to SIPCOT, they would allot the lands to various industries.
After obtaining all the approvals only, they can commence the
construction works and other development activities as referred in 2006
Notification. Hence, as per the procedures provided in 2006 Notification,
the commencement of construction work and other development
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
activities is far away from the stage of issuance of Section 3(1)
Notification.
9.3 The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in PV Krishnamurthy
case, had elaborately discussed on the aspect of requirement of obtaining
Environmental Clearance. In the said judgement, it has been clearly
stated that Environmental Clearance is required to be obtained before the
commencement of construction work or preparation of land by project
management for the purpose of development, which would occur
subsequent to the entrustment of lands to NHAI. There is no dispute on
the aspect that the Notification, under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu
Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, is equivalent to
Notification, issued under Section 3D of the National Highways Act,
1956. While dealing with the land acquisition matter, pertaining to the
National Highways Act, 1956, in the matter of PV Krishnamurthy, the
Hon'ble Apex Court has held as follows:
“79. Reverting to the notification issued by the
MoEF dated 14.9.2006, even this notification does not
constrict the power of Central Government to issue
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
notification under Section 2(2) or Section 3A of the 1956
Act. There is nothing to suggest that before expressing
intention to acquire any land for the purpose of the 1956
Act, prior environmental/forest clearance is required. The
environmental/forest clearance, however, is, required to
be obtained by the executing agency in terms of this
notification “before commencing the actual work or
executing the proposed work/project”. That would
happen only after the land is vested in the NHAI or the
NHAI was to be entrusted with the development work of
concerned national highway by the Central Government
in exercise of powers under Section 5 of the 1956 Act
read with Section 11 of the 1988 Act. The land would vest
in the Central Government under the 1956 Act only after
publication of declaration of acquisition under Section
3D. And until then, the question of Central Government
vesting it in favour of NHAI under Section 11 of the 1988
Act would not arise. However, until the vesting of the land,
the Central Government and its authorised officer can
undertake surveys of the notified lands by entering upon it
in terms of Section 3B of the Act. Pertinently, the activities
predicated in Section 3B are of exploration for verifying
the feasibility and viability of land for construction of a
national highway. These are onetime activities and not in
the nature of exploitation of the land for continuous
commercial/industrial activities as such. There is remote
possibility of irretrievable wide spread environmental
impact due to carrying out activities referred to in Section
3B for assessing the worthiness of the land for using it as a
national highway. Thus, the question of applying
notification of 2006 at this stage does not arise, much less
obligate the Central Government to follow directives
thereunder.
80 to 85. ..............
86.Suffice it to observe that the subject notification
of 2006 and Office Memorandum dated 7.10.2014 ordain
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
that such permission is required to be obtained (only)
before commencement of the work of the new project or
activities or on the expansion or improvisation of the
project or activities based on their potential environment
impact.
87 to 92 ...........
93. For the purpose of considering the question
posed before us, suffice it to observe that the prior
environmental clearance in terms of 2006 notification
issued under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection)
Act, 1986 Act read with Rule 5 of the Environment
(Protection) Rules, 1986, is required to be taken before
commencement of the “actual construction or building
work” of the national highway by the executing agency
(NHAI). That will happen only after the acquisition
proceedings are taken to its logical end until the land
finally vests in the NHAI or is entrusted to it by the
Central Government for building/management of the
national highway.
94 to 96. ..........
97.Considering the provisions of the 1956 Act and
the 1988 Act, NHAI can take over the work of
development and maintenance of the concerned national
highway only if the notified land is vested in it or when
the same is entrusted to it by the Central
Government. ..................”
(*** Emphasis supplied)
9.4 In all the above paragraphs, the Hon'ble Apex Court had dealt
with 2006 Notification, 1956 Act, 1998 Act and Environmental
Protection Act, 1984, and categorically held that the Environmental/
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Forest Clearance is required to be obtained before commencing actual
work or executing of proposed work/project. Further, it has been held that
the said aspect would arise only subsequent to the entrustment of lands
with NHAI. Prior to entrustment of lands to NHAI, the lands are required
to be vested with the Central Government and that would happen by
issuance of Section 3D Notification. Merely, the issuance of Section 3D
Notification would not be considered as commencement of actual work
or execution of proposed work/project. Such commencement/execution
will happen only after the entrustment of lands by the Government to
NHAI.
9.5 In terms of the 1956 Act, once the land is vested with the
Government by virtue of issuance of Section 3D Notification, thereafter,
they have to take possession in terms of Section 3E of the 1956 Act. Such
possession can be taken only after the determination of compensation for
the land by the Competent Authority in terms of Section 3G of the 1956
Act and depositing the same in terms of Section 3H(1) of the 1956 Act.
Therefore, it is not that the physical possession of the land can be taken
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
by the Government immediately upon issuance of Section 3D
Notification. As stated above, such taking over of possession will happen
only after quantification of the compensation amount and deposit of the
same in accordance with the provisions of Section 3G and 3H of the 1956
Act. Hence, at any cost, one cannot construed that immediately upon
issuance of Section 3D Notification, the Government can commence the
construction work or execute the proposed work/project automatically.
9.6 Therefore, the Hon'ble Apex Court was conscious of the fact
that the commencement of actual work or execution of proposed
work/project would happen in terms of 2006 Notification, only after
entrustment of land with NHAI. Thus, merely by virtue of issuance of
Section 3D Notification, the land will not be entrusted to NHAI but it
will only be vested with the Government. Merely, vesting of land with
the Government would not amount to automatic commencement of
construction work or execution of proposed work/project.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
9.7 Therefore, the Hon'ble Apex Court, held in clear terms that the
commencement of actual work or execution of proposed work/project
will not happen, or cannot construed to be happened, immediately upon
issuance of Section 3D Notification. By virtue of Section 3D notification,
only the land is going to be vested with the Government. Except vesting
of land, nothing is going to happen with regard to commencement of any
construction works or development activities, which are all subsequent
events. As per the provisions of 2006 Notification, the bar is only for
commencement of construction work or execution of proposed
project/works, prior to the obtaining of Environmental Clearance and the
same would happen once the land is entrusted to NHAI. Therefore, a
mere issuance of Section 3D Notification itself cannot not be considered
or construed as commencement of construction work.
9.8 Now, it would be apposite to extract the Office Memorandum
of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change dated
07.10.2014 (2014 OM), which reads as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Office Memorandum
Subject: Status of land acquisition w.r.t. project
site while considering the case for environment
clearance under EIA Notification, 2006-regarding
It has been brought to the notice of this Ministry
that in the absence of a guidelines, different
EACS/SEACs adopt different criteria about the extent to
which the land w.r.t. the project site should be acquired
before the consideration of the case for environment
clearance (EC). Some of the Ministries in the
Government of India and some industrial associations
have represented that full acquisition or land for the
project site should not he insisted upon before
consideration of the case for EC and instead Initiarn of
land acquisition process should be sufficient for the
consideration of such cases. The argument being that
land acquisition process can go on in parallel and that
consideration of EC need not await full far acquisition.
2. The matter has been examined in the Ministry.
The EC granted for a project or activity under the EIA
Notification: 2006, as amended, is site specific. While full
acquisition of land may not be a pre-requisite for the
consideration of the case for EC, there should be some
credible document to show the status of land acquisition
w.r.t project site when the case is brought before the
concerned EAC/SEAC for appraisal. It has been
accordingly decided that the following documents
relating to acquisition of the project site may be
considered as adequate by EACS/SEACs at the time of
appraisal of the case for EC.
(i) In case the land w.r.t. the project site is
proposed to be acquired through Government
intervention, a copy of preliminary notification issued by
the concerned State Government regarding acquisition of
land as per the provisions of Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement, Act, 2013.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
(ii) In case the land is being acquired through
private Showing the intent of the land owners to sell the
land negotiations with the land owners, credible documer
the proposed project.
3. It may, however, be noted that the EC granted
for a project on the basis of aforesaid documents shall
become invalid in case the actual land for the project site
turns out to be different from the lang considered at the
time of appraisal of project and mentioned in the EC.
4. This issues with the approval of the competent
authority.”
9.9 Subsequent to the issuance of 2006 Notification, different
Environmental Authorities adopted different criteria with regard to which
extent of project site should be acquired before consideration of the case
for Environmental Clearance. The said aspect was brought to the
knowledge of Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change and
hence, the aforesaid 2014 OM came to be issued.
9.10 As discussed in paragraph Nos.1 & 2 of 2014 OM, after
examining all the aspects, the Authorities have categorically arrived at a
conclusion that while full acquisition of land may not be a pre-requisite
for the consideration of the case for EC, there should be some credible
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
document to show the status of land acquisition with respect to project
site when the case is brought before the concerned EAC/SEAC for
appraisal. Therefore, insisting of the acquisition of land in full extent by
the concerned Authorities has been relaxed by virtue of the aforesaid OM
to the extent to show some documents relating to acquisition of project
site. Thus, the acquisition of land in full extent at the time of preliminary
notice was relaxed to the aforesaid extent.
9.11 Further, at paragraph Nos.3 & 4 of 2014 OM, it was
concluded that the Environmental Clearance, granted based on the
aforesaid documents, would become invalid in case the actual land for
the project site turns out to be different from the land considered at the
time of appraisal of project and mentioned in the EC. When such being
the case, if the Environmental Clearance is granted after entrustment of
lands to NHAI/SIPCOT, the question of carrying out the construction
work and commencement of project in any land, different from the actual
project site submitted before the Environmental Authorities for which the
EC was granted, would not arise and otherwise, entire exercise for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
getting EC will become wasteful exercise and the respondent is required
to follow the entire exercise of land acquisition from the beginning.
9.12 At this juncture, it would be apposite to extract paragraph
No.95 of the PV Krishnamurthy case, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court
had dealt with the aforesaid 2014 OM and it has been held as follows:
“95. Applying the tenet underlying this notification,
it is amply clear that before the process of acquisition of
land is ripe for declaration under Section 3D of the 1956
Act, it would be open to the executing agency (NHAI) to
make an application to the competent authority for
environmental clearance. That process can be commenced
parallelly or alongside the acquisition process after a
preliminary notification under Section 3A of the 1956 Act,
for acquisition is issued. ”
9.13 In terms of the above paragraph No.95, the Hon'ble Apex
Court has held that NHAI shall make applications for Environmental
Clearance even before the issuance of Section 3D Notification. Further, it
was held that the process of obtaining Environmental Clearance can be
commenced parallelly or alongside the acquisition process after a
preliminary Notification, under Section 3A of the 1956 Act, for
acquisition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
9.14 Further, at paragraph Nos.100 & 102, in the case of PV
Krishnamurthy, the Hon'ble Apex Court had dealt with the aspect of
reverting back of the subject lands to the respective land owners and the
relevant portion reads as follows:
100. Reverting to the dictum of this Court
in Karnataka Industrial Areas Development
Board (supra), it must be understood to mean that the
declaration under Section 3D regarding acquisition of
notified land, be made only after environmental/forest
clearance qua the specific land is granted. To put it
differently, the necessity of prior environmental/forest
clearance would arise only if finally, the land in
question (site specific) is to be notified under Section
3D, as being acquired for the purposes of building,
maintenance, management or operation of the national
highway or part thereof. Such interpretation would
further the cause and objective of environment and forest
laws, as also not impede the timeline specified for
building, maintenance, management or operation of the
national highway or part thereof, which undeniably is a
public purpose and of national importance. This would
also assuage the concerns of the land owners that even
if eventually no environment permission or forest
clearance is accorded, the land cannot be reverted to the
original owner as it had de jure vested in the Central
Government upon issue of notification under Section
3D of the 1956 Act and no power is bestowed on the
Central Government under this Act to withdraw from
acquisition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
101. ........
102.The argument of the writ petitioners that the
expression “shall” occurring in Section 3D(1) be
interpreted as “may”, though attractive on the first blush,
deserves to be rejected. If that interpretation is accepted,
it would render the efficacy of Section 3D(3) of lapsing of
the acquisition process otiose. It is a mandatory
provision. Instead, we have acceded to the alternative
argument to give expansive meaning to the proviso
in Section 3D(3) of the 1956 Act by interpretative
process, including by invoking plenary powers of this
Court under Article 142 of the Constitution to hold that
the dictum of this Court in Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Board (supra) be regarded as stay granted
by the Court to all notifications issued under Section
3A of the 1956 Act until the grant or nongrant of
permissions by the competent authorities under the
environmental and forest laws, as the case may be,
including until the stated permissions attain finality. In
other words, time spent by the executing agency/Central
Government in pursuing application before the concerned
authorities for grant of permission/clearance under the
stated laws need to be excluded because of stay by the
Court of actions (limited to issue of notification
under Section 3D), consequent to notification
under Section 3A. Thus, the acquisition process set in
motion upon issue of Section 3A notification can go on
in parallel until the stage of publication of notification
under Section 3D, which can be issued after grant of
clearances/permissions by the competent authority
under the environment/forest laws and attaining finality
thereof.
(*** Emphasis supplied)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
9.15 In the above paragraphs, it has been stated that “after the
issuance of Section 3D Notification, even if no environment clearance is
accorded, the land cannot be reverted to the original owner since no
power is bestowed on the Central Government under the National
Highways Act to withdraw from acquisition”, which means, in terms of
the National Highways Act, if no clearance is obtained or even if any
conclusion arrived at to the extent that the subject lands will not be used
for the purpose of that Act, no provision is available for reverting back of
the land to the respective land owners. May be, by keeping the said
aspect in mind, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held at paragraph Nos.100 &
102 that Environmental Clearance has to be obtained prior to the issuance
of Section 3D Notification, in order to protect the interest of land owners.
9.16 As far as the observation made, at paragraph No.102 of PV
Krishnamurthy case, with regard to the receipt of Environmental
Clearance is concerned, it is not in consonance with the paragraph
Nos.79, 86, 93 & 97 of the very same judgement, 2006 Notification &
2014 OM, wherein it has been categorically held that the Environmental
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Clearance is required to be obtained only prior to the commencement of
actual construction work or execution of proposed work, which would
occur only after the entrustment of land to NHAI and even after
entrustment, NHAI cannot commence the construction work or proposed
work until the receipt of Environmental Clearance. Therefore, this Court
is inclined to go with the findings of the Hon'ble Apex Court at paragraph
Nos.79, 86, 93 & 97, which is in consonance with 2006 Notification and
2014 OM.
9.17 As stated above, at paragraph No.79 of PV Krishnamurthy
case, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the Environmental Clearance is
required to be obtained not prior to the issuance of Section 3D
Notification but before the commencement of any construction work at
the project site. Such commencement would occur only after the
entrustment of subject lands to NHAI. At the time of issuance of Section
3D Notification, the lands will only be vested with Government.
Therefore, it is crystal clear that Environmental clearances is not required
to be obtained before issuance of Section 3D Notification but prior to the
commencement of construction work by NHAI.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
9.18 To substantiate the above aspect, it would be apposite to,
once again, extract the relevant portion of paragraph No.79 of PV
Krishnamurthy case, wherein the procedures for land acquisition was
elaborately explained and it was categorically held that the
clearance/permission has to be obtained prior to the commencement of
construction work or implementation of the project, which would happen
only after the land is vested in the NHAI or the NHAI was to be entrusted
with the development work of concerned National Highway by the
Central Government. The relevant portion reads as follows:
“79. ...................The environmental/forest
clearance, however, is, required to be obtained by the
executing agency in terms of this notification “before
commencing the actual work or executing the proposed
work/project”. That would happen only after the land is
vested in the NHAI or the NHAI was to be entrusted with
the development work of concerned national highway by
the Central Government in exercise of powers
under Section 5 of the 1956 Act read with Section 11 of
the 1988 Act. The land would vest in the Central
Government under the 1956 Act only after publication of
declaration of acquisition under Section 3D. And until
then, the question of Central Government vesting it in
favour of NHAI under Section 11 of the 1988 Act would
not arise. However, until the vesting of the land, the
Central Government and its authorised officer can
undertake surveys of the notified lands by entering upon it
in terms of Section 3B of the Act. Pertinently, the activities
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
predicated in Section 3B are of exploration for verifying
the feasibility and viability of land for construction of a
national highway. ................”
9.19 In the above paragraph, the Hon'ble Apex Court had clearly
explained the procedures involved in acquisition of land. Initially,
Section 3D Notification has to be issued, by virtue of which, the subject
lands have to be vested with Government. Thereafter, the said lands will
be entrusted to the concerned executing agency, after which, the NHAI
would commence the actual work or execution of proposed work/project.
Therefore, as per the ruling at paragraph No.79 of the PV
Krishnamurthy case, upon the issuance of Section 3D Notification, only
the lands will be vested with the Government and it will not amount to
entrustment of lands with NHAI. Only subsequent to the entrustment, the
NHAI would commence the construction of building and other
developmental activities, that too, after the receipt of Environmental
Clearance.
9.20 At this juncture, it would also pertinent to note that the issue
before the Hon'ble Apex Court was as to whether the Environmental
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Clearance is required to be obtained prior to Section 3A Notification or
not. The said judgements was passed only on the aspect as to whether the
Environmental Clearance is required to be obtained before issuance of
Section 3A Notification or not. Ultimately, the Hon'ble Apex Court had
concluded that before issuance of Section 3A Notification, there is no
requirement for obtaining the Environmental Clearance and the same
shall be obtained prior to the commencement of construction work.
9.21 Therefore, at no stretch of imagination, one could construed
that immediately upon issuance of Section 3D notification, the
construction works or preparation of lands would commence. In terms of
the order passed by Hon'ble Apex Court at paragraph No.79 of PV
Krishnamurthy case, unless and otherwise the land is entrusted with
NHAI by the Central Government, the question of developmental
activities, as mentioned in 2006 Notification, would not arise and even
NHAI cannot commence the project prior to the obtaining of
Environmental Clearance.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
9.22 When such being the case, the view took by the Hon'ble Apex
Court by way of restrictions at paragraph No.102 of the PV
Krishnamurthy case, to the extent that Environmental Clearance is
required to be obtained prior to the issuance of Section 3D Notification,
is only to safeguard the interest of the land owners since there was no
provision for withdrawal of acquisition and reverting back the lands to
the original owners in terms of National Highways Act. However, in the
present matter, sufficient protection is available to the land owners by
virtue of 1st and 2nd proviso to Section 4(1) of the 1997 Act and the said
restrictions will not apply for the present case. Even assuming if the said
protection is not available for reverting the land back to the land owners,
and if the purpose, for which the lands were acquired under Section 3 of
the 1997 Act, was not achieved, certainly, the respective land owners
shall make an application for returning the land, in which case, the
respondent-Department is bound to return the same.
9.23 As contended by the respondents, the present case is
pertaining to the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
Act, 1997. Unlike the National Highways Act, in the 1st and 2nd proviso to
Section 4(1) of the 1997 Act, sufficient protection is provided to the land
owners and the relevant provisions are as follows:
4.Land acquired to vest in Government free from all
encumbrances.- (1)When a notice under sub-section (1)of
Section 3 is published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette,
the land to which the said notice relates shall, on and from the
date of such publication, vest absolutely in Government free
from all encumbrances:
Provided that if before actual possession of such land is
taken by, or on behalf of the Government, it appears for the
Government, that the land is no more required for the purpose
of this Act, the Government, may, by notice published in the
Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, withdraw the land from
acquisition. On the publication of such notice the land shall
revert with retrospective effect in the person from whom it was
divested on the issue of order under sub-section (1) of section
3, subject to such encumbrances, if any, as may be subsisting
at that time:
Provided further that the owner and other persons
interested shall be entitled to payment of an amount as
determined in accordance with the provisions of section 7 for
the damage, if any, suffered by them in consequence of the
acquisition proceedings.
9.24 From the above, it is clear that as per the 1 st proviso, if no
clearances/permission is obtained by the respondent, certainly, the subject
lands have to be reverted back to the respective land owners and as per
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
the 2nd proviso, the said land owners are entitled for compensation/
damages for the period from the date of acquisition till the date of
reverting back. Therefore, the interest of the land owners are duly
protected vide the above provisions.
9.25 Therefore, I am of the considered view that except securing
the land, all the other construction activities would happen only when the
property is entrusted by the Government with the SIPCOT. At the stage
of issuance of Section 3(1) Notification, only the property will be vested
with Government and the entrustment of the said property with the
SIPCOT will be subsequent event. Only after such entrustment, the
commencement of construction work or preparation of land for
project/work would arise, that too after the allotment of land to respective
allottees to set up the Industries.
9.26 In view of the above, it is crystal clear that Section 3(1)
Notification cannot be construed as commencement of construction work
or preparation of land by project management. The actual construction
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
work or preparation of land would happen only after the entrustment of
subject lands to SIPCOT. Therefore, there is no bar either under the
Statute or by the Apex Court Ruling, in PV Krishnamurthy and
C.Kenchappa cases, for obtaining Environmental Clearance up to the
stage of entrustment of land to SIPCOT by the Government, but before
the commencement of construction work or preparation of land, the
SIPCOT must obtain Environmental Clearance Certificate. Accordingly,
the 1st issue is hereby answered.
10. Issue No.2: Whether Section 3(1) Notification can be issued,
under the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes
Act, 1997, before obtaining the Environmental Clearance ?
10.1 This issue can be answered by referring the provisions of
Clause 2 of 2006 Notification (extracted supra). In the said Notification,
it has been clearly stated that prior to the receipt of Environmental
Clearance, no construction works or preparation of lands by the project
management would occur.
10.2 While answering the 1st issue, this Court had elaborately
discussed about the procedures involved in acquisition of land and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
arrived at a conclusion that at any cost, issuance of Section 3(1)
Notification cannot be construed as commencement of construction work
or preparation of land by the Project Management. Upon issuance of
Section 3(1) Notification, the properties will vest with the Government.
Thereafter, the Government has to take steps to entrust the said lands to
SIPCOT. Even after the issuance of Section 3(1) Notification, no
construction work or preparation of land by project management would
happen in the land of Government.
10.3 As per the 2006 Notification, before obtaining Environmental
Clearance, there is no prohibition for securing the land, i.e., there is no
bar for vesting the land in favour of the Government by virtue of issuance
of Section 3(1) Notification. As discussed above, once the vesting of land
is completed, the same will not amount to automatic commencement of
any construction works or preparation of lands by the project
management.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
10.4 Further, as per Schedule 7(c), the subject lands, pertaining to
the present batch of petitions, fall under the category A, for which, the
Environmental Clearance is required to be obtained prior to the
commencement of construction works or preparation of land by the
Project Management. As already held by this Court, at no stretch of
imagination, one could construed that the construction works or
preparation of lands by the project management would occur
automatically upon issuance of Section 3(1) Notification.
10.5 Hence, it is clear that Section 3(1) Notification is issued only
for vesting of properties with the Government. Merely by issuing said
Section 3(1) Notification, the question of commencement of construction
work or preparation of land by project management would not arise. As
per 2006 Notification, the said aspect would happen only after the
entrustment of subject lands to SIPCOT. Even after such entrustment, the
SIPCOT cannot commence any construction work without obtaining
Environmental Clearance.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
10.6 In view of the above, this Court has no hesitation to hold that
immediately upon issuance of Section 3(1) Notification, no
commencement of construction work or preparation of land by project
management would occur as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in PV
Krishnamurthy case. No such mandate has been provided either in 2006
Notification or in 2014 OM. When such being the case, there is no bar for
the respondents in issuing Section 3(1) Notification since the same would
not amount to commencement of construction work or preparation of
land by the project management. The said aspect would happen only after
the entrustment of land by the Government to the SIPCOT. Even after
such entrustment, the SIPCOT has to wait until the approval of
Environmental Clearance for commencement of construction work or
preparation of land in the project site. Accordingly, the 2nd issue is
answered.
11. Other case laws referred by the petitioners:
11.1 Further, a reference was made to the judgment in
C.Kenchappa case, wherein at paragraph No.100, it has been stated as
follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
“100. The importance and awareness of
environment and ecology is becoming so vital and
important that we, in our judgment, want the appellant to
insist on the conditions emanating from the principle of
`Sustainable Development'.
(1) We direct that, in future, before acquisition of
lands for development, the consequence and adverse
impact of development on environment must be properly
comprehended and the lands be acquired for development
that they do not gravely impair the ecology and
environment.
(2) We also direct the appellant to incorporate the
condition of allotment to obtain clearance from the
Karnataka State Pollution Control Board before the land
is allotted for development. The said directory condition
of allotment of lands be converted into a mandatory
condition for all the projects to be sanctioned in future.”
11.2 A reading of above paragraph would makes it clear that a
direction was issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court to the extent that the
consequence and adverse impact of development on environment must be
properly comprehended and the lands acquired for development that they
do not gravely impair the ecology and environment.
11.3 Keeping the above order in mind, the Notification 2006 was
issued by stating that before starting the acquisition process, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
respondent had to conduct a thorough Environment Impact Study.
Accordingly, a study was conducted and after satisfaction of the
respondents only, they have proceeded to acquire land and set up the
project. Therefore, the direction issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court, vide
C.Kenjappa case, has been duly followed by the respondents in this case.
11.4 Yet another reference was made to the order passed by the
Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in M.Velu case and the relevant
portion of the said order reads as follows:
“45. Since the land acquisition proceeding is only in
the preliminary stage now, we are of the view that before
issuing the notification under Section 3(1) of the Act the
authorities have to approach the statutory authority
constituted under the environment (Protection) Act for
environmental clearance. The report of the statutory
authority must also be considered by the Government
while dealing with the objections submitted by the land
owners and the other interested persons, including the
petitioner and the fifth respondent in pursuance of the
notice issued under Section 3(2) of the Industrial
Purposes Act.
DIRECTIONS:-
46. Therefore keeping in view the direction given by
the Supreme Court in the Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Board case, (cited supra) we are inclined to
issue the following directions:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
(1) The petitioner is granted liberty to make a
comprehensive representation within fifteen days from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order before the statutory
authority constituted to hear objections relating to the
land acquisition in question in pursuance to the notice
issued under Section 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of
Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997. Similar liberty is
granted to the fifth respondent also.
(2) The statutory authority exercising powers under
the Industrial Purposes Act, simultaneous with the process
of hearing the objections from the land owners, petitioner,
fifth respondent and other interested persons should
approach the State Level Environmental Impact
Assessment Authority for prior environmental clearance
before proceeding further in the matter of issuance of
notice under Section 3(1) of the Act.
(3) In case the State Environmental Impact
Assessment Authority gives clearance for the project in
question, it would be open to the Government to proceed
further with the acquisition of property.
(4) As undertaken by SIPCOT in their counter
affidavit dated 6 February, 2007, appropriate provisions
should be incorporated in the Lease Agreements
mandating preservation of ecology and to maintain the
ponds and other natural streams by the concerned
industrial units.
11.5 As far as the Paragraph No.45 is concerned, in above case, it
was recorded that no Environmental Assessment Study was made after
obtaining acquisition order. However, in this case, as contended by the
respondents, a thorough Environmental Impact Assessment Study was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
conducted and after that only the land acquisition process was initiated.
Therefore, the question of obtaining acquisition order/initiating the
acquisition process without conducting Environment Impact Assessment
Study would not arise in this case.
11.6 As far as the directions issued at Paragraph Nos.46(2) & 46(3)
are concerned, in above case, the Hon'ble Division Bench had no
occasion to consider the 2006 Notification. As discussed above, in terms
of the said 2006 Notification, the question of obtaining Environmental
Clearance would arise only before the commencement of any
construction work or preparation of land by the project management,
which would occur subsequent to the entrustment of land by the
Government to SIPCOT as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
PV Krishnamurthy case at paragraph Nos.79, 86, 93 & 97. Therefore,
the said directions will not apply to the present case at the stage of
issuance of Section 3(1) Notification.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
12.Findings:
12.1 In the present cases, the procedures mentioned in 2006
Notification, 2014 OM and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in PV Krishnamurthy case and C.Kenjappa case, have been duly
adopted by the respondents. Therefore, I am of the considered view that
Section 3(1) Notification was issued duly in accordance with 2006
Notification, 2014 OM and in compliance with paragraph Nos.79, 86, 93
& 97 of the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in PV
Krishnamurthy case.
12.2 As discussed above, in these cases, merely by vesting of land
to Government would not amount to commencement of any construction
work or preparation of land by the Project Management. Admittedly, the
construction or other development works would commence only after
obtaining the Environmental Clearance. Until then, the acquisition
process shall go on parallelly as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court at
paragraph Nos.93 & 95 of PV Krishnamurthy case.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
12.3 As far as the cases in which, the Environmental Clearance is
yet to be obtained are concerned, certainly, the respondents cannot
commence any construction work until the receipt of said Environmental
Clearance. The question of such commencement of construction work
would arise only after the entrustment of subject land to SIPCOT. Thus,
all the process can be completed, including the entrustment of land by the
Government to SIPCOT. Subsequent to the entrustment of land to
SIPCOT, it has to wait to commence the construction work and other
developmental activities until the receipt of Environmental Clearance.
12.4 (a) In cases, wherever the Environmental Clearance was
issued and no stay was obtained, there is no prohibition for the SIPCOT
to commence the work or preparation of land.
(b) In cases, where enter upon permission as well as alienation
order was issued and Environmental Clearance is granted, against which
stay order is obtained, the SIPCOT shall defer the commencement of
work until the vacation of said stay order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
(c) In all other cases, the SIPCOT can commence the work after
obtaining Environmental Clearance. As held by the Hon'ble Apex Court
at paragraph No.79 of PV Krishnamurthy case, the lands can be
entrusted to the SIPCOT. However, the SIPCOT has to wait for the
purpose of commencement of construction work until the receipt of
Environmental clearance. Therefore, as stated above, all the acquisition
process, including the entrustment of land to SIPCOT, shall go on, but
the commencement of construction work and other developmental
activities shall be deferred until the receipt of Environmental Clearance.
12.5 Further, it is made clear that the order passed in the appeals,
pending before the NGT, is only pertaining to the issue of Environmental
Clearance and the same will not stall the acquisition process since the
process of acquisition and the process of obtaining Environmental
Clearances are parallel procedures until the stage of commencement of
construction work. Therefore, mere pendency of appeals before NGT will
not be a bar for acquisition process but the construction work and other
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
development activities shall commence after the receipt of
Environmental Clearance.
13.Result:
For all the reasons stated above, this Court is not inclined to
entertain the present batch of cases. Therefore, all these writ petitions are
dismissed as devoid of merits. All the interim stay/injunction orders
granted in these writ petitions stand vacated. No cost. Consequently, the
connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
25.02.2026
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index: Yes / No
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
nsa
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., batch
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J.,
nsa
W.P.Nos.1294 of 2025, etc., Batch
25.02.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/03/2026 01:55:37 pm )
