SC gives Tamil Nadu time for views on study in Sterlite case

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today granted a week’s time to the Tamil Nadu government to submit its view on the NEERI study, which gave clean chit to Vedanta group firm Sterlite on the environmental impact of Tuticorin copper smelting plant. A bench of justices RV Raveendran and AK Patnaik adjourned the matter to 25 August on the request of the Tamil Nadu government. [caption id=“attachment_58542” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“The NEERI report absolved the Tuticorn plant of any environment violations, saying that the company was following all norms. Reuters”]  [/caption] The apex court also said its stay would continue on the Madras High Court order of September 28, 2010 to close the plant for non-compliance of environmental norms. “Interim order would continue till next date of hearing, 25 August ,” the bench said. On 18 July, the apex court had directed the state government and its pollution control board to submit their views on the NEERI study. “The Tamil Nadu Government as also the TNPCB are directed to submit their comments/suggestions with reference to the NEERI report… so that this Court can have a clear view about the existing position,” the apex court had said. On 29 April, while hearing a petition of the Vedanta Group company, it had asked the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) to conduct a study of compliance of environmental norms by Sterlite’s copper smelting unit at Tuticorin. The NEERI report absolved the Tuticorn plant of any environment violations, saying that the company was following all norms. During the last proceedings, MDMK leader Vaiko, who is also a party to this case, alleged that Sterlite was violating environmental norms and damaging the ecology of the area. Vaiko’s plea was opposed by Sterlite, which said that the MDMK Leader had created obstructions when NEERI’s team was conducting environmental assessment of the area. Earlier, the high court had ordered closure of the plant on the grounds that it was within 25 km of an ecologically fragile area and that the company had failed to develop a 250 metre-wide green belt around the plant. The company disputed the order, saying that it was not given a proper hearing by the court, which ignored its submissions. PTI