Disposed

Credai Chennai v. Government of India

Madras HC18 Jan 2017WP/42201/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court closed a writ petition challenging the applicability of pollution control acts to residential construction projects. The court noted that recent notifications exempted most residential constructions, rendering further litigation unnecessary for the general class of applicants.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos. 36107 and 36108 of 2016 were also closed.

Credai Chennai Vs Government of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 18.01.2017

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶7

W.P. No.42201 of 2016

¶8

and

¶9

W.M.P.Nos.36107 and 36108 of 2016

¶10

CREDAI CHENNAI

¶11

Rep. By its President Suresh Krishn ... Petitioner

¶12

-Vs-

¶13

Government of India Ministry of Environment & Forests, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003.

¶14

Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Rep. By its Member Secretary, Thalamuthu Natarajan Building, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road,

¶15

Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

¶16

Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,

¶17

76, Mount Salai, Guindy, Chennai 600 032.

¶18

State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, 3^rd Floor, Panagal Maaligai, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015. ... Respondents

¶19

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Declaration to declare that the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, are inapplicable to residential construction projects and that the actions of the respondents in applying the same to residential construction projects is unconstitutional.

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.Satish Parasaran, Senior Counsel for Mr.R.Parthasarathy For Respondents : Mr.V.T.Balaji for R-1 : Mr.N.Sampath for R-2 : Mr.Kalayanaraman for R-3

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶24

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states that in view of the notification issued on 09.12.2016, the construction of residential building upto 1,50,000 sq.mtrs. has been exempted from purview of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. He submits that this takes care of practically most of the cases, but the issue would remain qua cases where construction exceeds 1,50,000 sq.mtrs.

¶25

2.In view of the aforesaid position, we are not inclined to maintain the writ petition any further. If there is any affected party as stated aforesaid, that party may approach the Court.

¶26

Writ petition is, accordingly, closed. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos. 36107 and 36108 of 2016 also stand closed.

¶27

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

sra

¶29

¶30

The Government of India Ministry of Environment & Forests, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003.

¶31

The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Thalamuthu Natarajan Building, No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

¶32

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶33

The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, 76, Mount Salai, Guindy, Chennai 600 032.

¶34

The State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, 3^rd Floor, Panagal Maaligai, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.

¶35

+1cc to Mr.V.T.Balaji, Advocate, S.R.No.3424 +1cc to Mr.N.Sampath, Advocate, S.R.No.3786 +1cc to Mrs.Rita Chandrasekaran, Advocate, S.R.No.3440

¶36

W.P.No.42201 of 2016 SSI(CO) CA(31/01/2017)

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Credai Chennai v. Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Credai Chennai v. Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Palanichamy, S/o.v.Perappan, Vs The District Collector

Mani, S/o.Jadaiya Gounder Vs The District Collector

M.Sridharan, S/o.Muthumalai Vs The Commissioner, Corporation

Hyder Ali Tippu Sulthan Dhakni Vs The Chairman

V.B.R.Menon, Advocate, Vs The District Collector

V.B.R.Menon, Advocate, Vs The District Collector