DEEPAM GRANITES MURINGAMALA Vs. DISTRICT LEVEL ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY(DEIAA) PALAKKAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. Standing Counsel takes notice for the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority.

(2.) Heard.

(3.) The petitioner has been issued with quarrying licence for the extraction of granite building stone as per Ext.P1 dated 30.08.2017. As per Ext.P1, lease has been granted for a period of 12 years commencing from 30.08.2007 and ending on 29.8.2029. The petitioner was issued with the Environmental Clearance ('EC' for short) by the 1st respondent as per Ext.P2 on 21.4.2017 with a validity period of 5 years. The grievance of the petitioner is that EC cannot be restricted to 5 years and should actually have been issued for the project life. Reliance is placed on Ext.P5 judgment dated 02.11.2020 in W.P.(C)No.18929/2020 and connected cases wherein this Court had considered several writ petitions raising the same issue and had held that the decision to limit the validity of the EC is against the terms and spirit of the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 issued by the Central Government. The said writ petitions were disposed of directing the regulatory bodies to call for additional recommendations from the Appraisal Committee, after estimating the life of the project of the petitioners therein in respect of which ECs had been issued to them and thereafter revalidate the ECs on the basis of the estimated life of the projects. It is however made clear that recommendations of the Appraisal Committees will not be binding on the regulatory bodies and in case of disagreement with the recommendations regarding the project life, regulatory bodies will be free to follow the procedure mentioned in clause 8 of the 2006 notification mentioned above for arriving at a decision regarding the life of the projects. The petitioner also relies on Ext.P6 judgment dated 04.05.2021 in W.P.(C)No.10928/2021, which was also disposed of in the same lines.