Supreme Court of India· 20 February 2023

Can an operating power plant be closed where clearance conditions are substantially complied with?

M/s IL&FS Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited v. T. Muruganandam & Others

2023 INSC 136
Coram: M.R. Shah; C.T. Ravikumar

🔖 Save this judgment 🔔 Follow National Green Tribunal Act 2010 📬 Get today's judgments

View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.

Answer

Not where closure would be against the larger public interest. The units had supplied power since September 2015 and April 2016 to approximately forty lakh households in an energy-deficit State, and from the latest compliance report there appeared to be substantial compliance with the conditions imposed while issuing the clearance and the additional conditions in the corrigendum, with no fundamental breaches — closing them would adversely affect the power sector of the State.

Headnote

National Green Tribunal Act 2010 — EIA Notification 2006 — Environmental Clearance — Corrigendum to Environmental Clearance — Maintainability of appeal — Cumulative impact assessment — Not to be cited as precedent — National Green Tribunal Act 2010 — Appeal against a corrigendum to an Environmental Clearance — Held: An aggrieved person may always challenge a corrigendum to an Environmental Clearance, but the appeal is restricted to the additional conditions in the corrigendum where the original clearance is unchallenged or has already been confirmed on conditions not challenged. (¶9) Environmental Clearance — Operating plant — Larger public interest — Held further: Where units have supplied power since 2015 to about forty lakh households in an energy-deficit State and there is substantial compliance with the clearance conditions, closing them would not be in the larger public interest. (¶7) Cumulative impact assessment — Question expressly left open — Held further: Whether a cumulative impact assessment study is required for such a project was kept open, to be decided in an appropriate case. Appeals disposed of; the Court directed that this order shall not be cited as a precedent in any other matter. (¶8, 10)

In the Court's own words

Paragraph 7Having heard Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the MoEF and original petitioners and the facts narrated hereinabove, it is to be noted that pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, the appellant has commenced two power plants in Phase- I, which are in operation since September, 2015. The appellant is operating two units of 600MW since September, 2015 and April, 2016, which presently supply power to approximately 40 lakhs households. The power plants are situated in an energy deficit State (Tamil Nadu). Thus, closing the power plants/units would adversely affect power sector of the State and which shall not be in the larger public interest, more particularly the power deficient State of Tamil Nadu.

Acts & Sections

National Green Tribunal Act 2010EIA Notification 2006

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of M/s IL&FS Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited v. T. Muruganandam & Others — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment

Is an appeal to the NGT against a corrigendum to an Environmental Clearance maintainable?Did the Court decide whether a cumulative impact assessment study is required?

Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections