Centre’s flip-flop on Noida memorial angers apex courtAugust 20th, 2010 - 11:09 pm ICT by IANS
New Delhi, Aug 20 (IANS) The central government came under fire in the Supreme Court Friday for yet another flip-flop on the status of the controversial Noida Park - a dream project of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati.
The centre’s affidavit is “neither here nor there” in terms of the provisions of the Schedule II of the Environmental Impact assessment Notification of 2006, an apex court forest bench of Chief Justice S.H.Kapadia, Justice Aftab Alam and Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan was told by the amicus curiae Harsh Salve.
Salve told the court not to decide Noida Park matter on the strength of central environment and forest ministry affidavit as it would open the floodgates for clearing other similar projects. He said that the court should first hear the matter and then decide.
In its affidavit, the ministry said that the Noida project was nothing more than an “area development activity” as it involved development of a park, and thus required no environmental clearance - a position in total contrast to its earlier stance.
During the course of hearing July 30, the ministry, in its then affidavit, said that it could not grant environmental clearance to the project until and unless the Uttar Pradesh government complied with all the conditions laid down by the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) and the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC).
The latest affidavit, of Aug 18, had come in response to the apex court seeking to know the definition of “building and construction projects” and “township or area development projects”, and also seeking to know from the ministry the “objective criteria” for the purpose and classifying any project under two categories.
And, finally the court wanted to know under which category the Noida project came.
The ministry said that Noida park project has a built-up area of 6,999 square metres while the land area is 33.43 hectares, thus it fell in the category of an area development project.
Salve told the court that the ministry was trying to separate the built-up area from rest of the activities area of the park under the sky and it was a mistaken understanding of the provision of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) notification of 2006.
Opposing the central government’s affidavit, senior counsel Jayant Bhushan told the court that once permission was granted for Noida Park, then it would be difficult to challenge the “subjective view” of the government, and urged that the Uttar Pradesh government should not be allowed to get away with its wrong and illegal actions.
The arguments in the matter would continue the next Friday.
- Court seeks environment report on statues in Noida park - Apr 22, 2010
- Mayawati's Noida Park hits green roadblock in court - Jul 30, 2010
- Trees on 65 percent area of Noida memorial: Uttar Pradesh - Aug 06, 2010
- Mayawati's park project at cost of trees: Apex court told - Jul 23, 2010
- Court dismisses Vedanta plea for refinery expansion (Lead) - Jul 19, 2011
- High court talks tough on mining - Mar 03, 2012
- Don't clear new industrial projects in Noida: Green tribunal (Lead) - Apr 12, 2012
- Specify clearances needed for Mayawati's Noida project: Court - Oct 01, 2010
- Noida farmers say construction has spoilt environment - Aug 04, 2011
- Tourists banned in core areas of Madhya Pradesh tiger reserves - Dec 11, 2010
- Gas distribution networks to be set up in Uttar Pradesh - May 22, 2012
- Apex court permits construction of Ambedkar park in Noida (Lead) - Dec 03, 2010
- Court notice to Jindal SAW Ltd - Mar 29, 2011
- Himachal court cancels green nod for cement unit - Dec 13, 2010
- 2G trial judge can't hear cheating case: Telecom firm (Lead) - Apr 25, 2012
Tags: aftab, apex court, appraisal committee, bnhs, bombay natural history society, central environment, dream project, environmental clearance, environmental impact assessment, expert appraisal, floodgates, kapadia, natural history society, noida, objective criteria, s radhakrishnan, salve salve, square metres, total contrast, uttar pradesh government