ALEMBIC PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. versus ROHIT PRAJAPATI & ORS.

ALEMBIC PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. versus ROHIT PRAJAPATI & ORS.

The circular dated 14 May 2002 permitting ex post facto environmental clearances is unsustainable as it is contrary to the EIA Notification 27 January 1994 which mandates prior ECs; the circular is an administrative measure not protected by Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 and the NGT had...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited; Respondent: Rohit Prajapati; Respondent: United Phosphorous Limited; Respondent: Unique Chemicals Limited; Respondent: Darshak Private Limited; Respondent: Nirayu Private Limited; Respondent: Union of India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From National Green Tribunal Judgment Dated 08.01.2016
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part; impugned NGT judgment set aside insofar as it directed revocation of ECs and closure of the industries; other directions modified.
Legal Topics
EIA Notification 1994, Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearance, Jurisdiction of NGT, Precautionary Principle, Sustainable Development, Proportionality
Environmental Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law EIA Notification 1994 Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearance Jurisdiction of NGT Precautionary Principle Sustainable Development +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited

Appellant

Rohit Prajapati

Respondent

United Phosphorous Limited

Respondent

Unique Chemicals Limited

Respondent

Darshak Private Limited

Respondent

Nirayu Private Limited

Respondent

Union of India

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From National Green Tribunal Judgment Dated 08.01.2016

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the MoEF circular dated 14 May 2002 validly permitted ex post facto environmental clearances contrary to the EIA notification 1994
  2. 2 Whether the NGT had jurisdiction to examine/strike down an administrative circular extending time for ECs
  3. 3 Whether the industrial units qualified for the Clause 8 exemption to the EIA notification 1994

Ratio Decidendi

The circular dated 14 May 2002 permitting ex post facto environmental clearances is unsustainable as it is contrary to the EIA Notification 27 January 1994 which mandates prior ECs; the circular is an administrative measure not protected by Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 and the NGT had jurisdiction to examine its vires; the three industries did not qualify for the Clause 8 exemption and were not entitled to ex post facto treatment, but revocation of ECs and closure directed by the NGT was disproportionate; instead the industries were ordered to pay compensation of Rs.10 crores each to GPCB in addition to amounts directed by the NGT.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part; impugned NGT judgment set aside insofar as it directed revocation of ECs and closure of the industries; other directions modified.

Orders

  • The NGT judgment dated 08.01.2016 is set aside in so far as it directed revocation of environmental clearances and closure of Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited, United Phosphorous Limited and Unique Chemicals Limited and the order in review dated 17.05.2016 is set aside to that extent
  • Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited, United Phosphorous Limited and Unique Chemicals Limited shall each deposit compensation of Rs.10 crores with the Gujarat Pollution Control Board within four months from receipt of certified copy of the judgment; the deposit is in addition to amounts directed by the NGT