Plea in HC against Murugan statue
Madras High Court
has directed the state forest department to respond to a petition to halt construction of a 184-foot-tall Murugan statue at Marudhamalai, Coimbatore. A special division bench of Justices N Satish Kumar and D Bharatha Chakravarthy passed the order on a plea moved by animal welfare activist S Muralidharan.
According to the petitioner, Marudhamalai, located within the Coimbatore forest region, lies along an important elephant corridor and is an ecologically sensitive area. "Elephants use this area as a passage to move between the Nilgiri forests and other forest zones. Constructing a 184-foot statue in this region would require the clearing of forest land, which could disrupt elephant movement and lead to an increase in human-animal conflict," he said.
He claimed that no Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was conducted for the project and that necessary approvals were not obtained from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) or the forest department. Therefore, the petitioner wanted the court to direct the state govt to stay all the construction activities related to the statue. He further wanted the court to direct the authorities to close illegal resorts operating in Anaikatti, another known elephant corridor.
You Can Also Check:
Chennai AQI
|
Weather in Chennai
|
Bank Holidays in Chennai
|
Public Holidays in Chennai
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18 minutes ago
- Business Standard
SC orders SIT probe into 'nexus' between Noida officials & land owners
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered an SIT probe into alleged irregularities in payment of compensation to land owners by Noida Authority, which in several cases was 'exorbitant' highlighting the nexus between senior officials and land owners. A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ordered a new special investigation team (SIT) of three Indian Police Service (IPS) officers, replacing the earlier SIT, which highlighted the irregularities in the land acquisition compensation payouts. The apex court also directed that there will be no project development in Noida without prior Environmental Impact Assessment and approval by the court's green bench, which hears environmental cases. In January this year, the court had constituted an SIT of three senior IPS officers from the UP cadre to investigate the 'overall functioning' of Noida Authority. The SIT report found that in at least 20 cases, land compensation paid to certain beneficiaries exceeded legal entitlements. It also named errant Noida Authority officials and raised concerns about potential collusion, centralised power, and a lack of transparency in the administrative operations of the authority. The court is currently hearing the anticipatory bail plea of a law officer of Noida over charges of 'release of huge amount of compensation in favour of some land owners who, it was alleged, were not entitled to seek such a higher compensation for their acquired land.' The new SIT, formed by the court on Wednesday, is directed to register preliminary enquiries and, if they find credible evidence of wrongdoing, escalate to FIRs under appropriate legal provisions. The court said that this process must be overseen by a police officer of at least Commissioner rank, who will also file periodic status reports to the court. The court has also told the Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary to place the findings before the Council of Ministers and appoint a Chief Vigilance Officer (from IPS cadre or deputed from the Comptroller and Auditor General) within four weeks. Additionally, a citizen advisory board is to be constituted within the same timeframe. The matter has been adjourned for eight weeks, during which the SIT's report must remain under strict judicial supervision.
India.com
3 hours ago
- India.com
SC Orders New SIT To Probe Noida Officials–Builders Nexus In Land Compensation Case
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the constitution of a new Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Uttar Pradesh Police to conduct a preliminary enquiry into alleged collusion between officials of the NOIDA Authority and builders over claims of inflated land acquisition compensation to farmers. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi ordered a new SIT comprising three IPS officers which will replace the earlier SIT. The apex court also ordered restraining project development in Noida without prior Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and approval of the report by the court's green bench. It directed that the Director General of Police (DGP) of Uttar Pradesh shall constitute an SIT comprising three police officers of the IPS cadre to investigate the issues as identified by the previous SIT. The new SIT shall immediately register preliminary enquiries and proceed to inquire into the points highlighted by the previous SIT and forensic experts, as well as the Economic Offence Wing (EoW) of the state police, be associated with it, ordered the bench. If the SIT, after preliminary enquiry, finds that a prima facie cognisable offence was committed, it shall register the case and proceed further in accordance with law, said the apex court, also asking for a filing status report of the SIT. "A copy of the SIT report be placed before UP Chief Secretary, who in turn shall place it before the Council of Ministers to take appropriate decision", bench stated in its order. It further said that the Chief Secretary should also post the Chief Vigilance Officer in Noida, who should either be from the IPS cadre or on deputation from the CAG. The top court then posted the matter for hearing after eight weeks. The bench was hearing a case where it had ordered an SIT probe while dealing with the anticipatory bail plea of a NOIDA law officer, following allegations of higher compensation being awarded to some landowners, though they were not entitled. The SIT report has indicated that exorbitant compensation was paid to landowners in 20 cases and named erring officials of NOIDA. It also suggested that it was necessary to examine bank account details of the officers, their family members, landowners, and assets acquired by officers during the relevant period.
The Hindu
5 hours ago
- The Hindu
Poverty prevents people from filing appeals, says Madras High Court; orders release of life convict citing parity
Observing that there are several reasons, including poverty, that prevent people from filing appeals before higher judicial forums, the Madras High Court has ordered the release of a convict in a dacoity-cum-murder case by according him the benefit of parity with his co-convicts, who had been released from prison by an order of the Supreme Court in 2018. A Division Bench of Justices M.S. Ramesh and V. Lakshminarayanan concurred with the argument of advocate R. Sankarasubbu that if the convict Balu, alias D. Balasubramanian, had approached the top court along with the three co-convicts, there was every possibility of his sentence also having been reduced from life imprisonment to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment. The judges allowed a writ petition filed by the convict's wife Indira Gandhi, seeking the release of her husband on the ground of parity. They recorded the submission of Additional Public Prosecutor E. Raj Thilak, who also did not dispute the proposition of law laid down by the Supreme Court, in at least three cases, regarding the principle of extending parity to an unappealed convict. 'When the petitioner complains that her husband's constitutional right under Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) had been violated, we cannot shrug off our duties and ask the petitioner to... prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court,' the judges wrote and pointed out that the criminal case was from the year 2002, and that more than two decades had passed since he was convicted. 'All that we are doing is performing our constitutional duty of rendering parity between A1, A2, A4 and the petitioner's husband. Our powers under Article 226 of the Constitution are wide and they have been granted only to enable us to do justice. This court also has the inherent power and the jurisdiction, while dealing with situations as presented in the present case, to render justice and prevent manifest injustice,' the judges said. According to the prosecution, the convicts had robbed 4.7 kg of gold and 5.5 kg of silver from a jewellery shop after killing a person who was sleeping inside the shop. Though the petitioner's husband had not committed any overt act with respect to the murder, he too was convicted under Section 391 of the Indian Penal Code, which makes all members of a gang liable for punishment even if one of them had committed murder. Though the trial court had imposed only 10 years of imprisonment on the convicts, the High Court had enhanced their punishment to life imprisonment in 2010 while allowing a 2006 State appeal for enhancement of sentence. However, allowing a further appeal by three of the convicts, except the petitioner's husband, the Supreme Court had reduced their sentence to 10 years in 2018 and ordered their release. Hence, the petitioner had now approached the High Court, by way of a writ petition, seeking parity and obtained the relief.
