Kerala HC seeks state govt's reply in PIL against Wayanad tunnel project
A bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji issued the directive on the PIL filed by Wayanad Prakrithi Samrakshana Samithi and adjourned the matter to Sept 9. HC also clarified that any step taken by the state govt or other stakeholders towards commencement of the project would be subject to the PIL's outcome.
The petitioners contended that Wayanad district is highly prone to landslides and that the proposed project passes through ecologically sensitive areas (ESAs).
The tunnel alignment cuts through the ESA villages of Thiruvambady in Kozhikode and Vellarimala in Wayanad, and hence, the environmental appraisal conducted by the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) was inadequate. They argued that the project required appraisal at the central level, and pointed out that neither the Union ministry of environment, forest and climate change (MoEFCC) nor the central govt had conducted any independent environmental assessment.
The petitioners also questioned the competence of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) report prepared by the Konkan Railway Corporation, arguing that it is not an accredited agency authorised to prepare such reports. Additionally, the Samithi referred to an office memorandum issued by the central govt, which mandates that work can begin only after obtaining Stage II forest clearance from the Govt of India.
Since such clearance has not yet been granted, the petitioners argued that the state govt should not proceed with any construction activities.
Opposing the PIL, the govt pleader submitted that another set of litigations involving the same project is already pending before a different division bench. It was further argued that under Section 16(h) of the National Green Tribunal Act, any person aggrieved by the grant of environmental clearance may file an appeal before the National Green Tribunal within 30 days, and therefore, the petitioners should seek remedy through that forum.
HC, however, directed the govt pleader to file a detailed reply affidavit and orally observed that it would consider the issues raised by the state once the pleadings are complete.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
Bombay High Court gets new bench at Kolhapur; sittings from August 18
The Bombay High Court will get a new bench at Kolhapur district in western Maharashtra , which will be the fourth HC bench in the state, and its sittings will commence from August 18. A notification in this regard was issued on Friday by High Court Chief Justice Alok Aradhe. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Operations Management CXO Cybersecurity Others Leadership Artificial Intelligence Product Management healthcare Data Science Healthcare Data Analytics MCA Degree Management Design Thinking Digital Marketing PGDM others Project Management Public Policy Finance MBA Technology Data Science Skills you'll gain: Quality Management & Lean Six Sigma Analytical Tools Supply Chain Management & Strategies Service Operations Management Duration: 10 Months IIM Lucknow IIML Executive Programme in Strategic Operations Management & Supply Chain Analytics Starts on Jan 27, 2024 Get Details "I, Alok Aradhe, Chief Justice of the High Court at Bombay, with the approval of the Governor of Maharashtra, appoint Kolhapur as a place at which Judges and Division Courts of the High Court may also sit, with effect from August 18, 2025," the notification said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Unsold 2022 Cars Now Almost Free - Prices May Surprise You Unsold Cars | Search Ads Learn More Undo As per officials, a roster of how many judges would be sitting at the Kolhapur bench, which is likely to cover half a dozen districts, would be prepared next week. At present, apart from the principal bench in Mumbai, the high court has two more benches -- at Nagpur in eastern Maharashtra and Aurangabad (Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar) in the central region of the state. Live Events A third bench of the high court sits in adjoining Goa. The notification comes amid demands from various quarters over the years for a bench at Kolhapur so as to ease the burden on litigants and lawyers who have to travel to Mumbai, around 380km away, for hearing of their pleas. The new bench is likely to have jurisdiction over six districts - Satara, Sangli, Solapur, Kolhapur, Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg (last two located in coastal Konkan region). Chief Justice of India B R Gavai had earlier this month also supported the demands for a HC bench at Kolhapur. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis posted the notification published in an official gazette on social media platform X and noted the decision to set up the bench at Kolhapur will bring much-needed relief to litigants and legal professionals in the region. Terming it a "historic development," the CM expressed his delight at the decision, stating the matter had been under active consideration since the beginning of his tenure. "It was a long-standing demand of the people, and I had been pursuing it consistently. I am extremely delighted it has now succeeded," said Fadnavis, who also handles the law and judiciary portfolio. The CM extended his gratitude to CJI Gavai and HC Chief Justice Aradhe for their support in enabling the setting up of the new bench. "This will make justice more accessible and efficient, while saving citizens' time, effort, and money," he added, congratulating the people and legal fraternity of the region.
New Indian Express
11 hours ago
- New Indian Express
After questioning by HC, Centre withdraws order for 6 cuts in Udaipur Files
NEW DELHI: The Additional Solicitor General (ASG) informed the Delhi High Court on Friday that the Central Government has decided to withdraw its directive recommending six cuts in the film Udaipur Files. This move came after the HC questioned whether the Centre had the authority to order such changes while exercising its revisional powers. Following this development, the Delhi High Court disposed of two petitions that sought to halt the release of the film. It directed all involved parties to appear before the appropriate revisional authority on Monday and instructed that a decision be made by Wednesday. Udaipur Files is based on the 2022 murder of Kanhaiya Lal, a tailor from Udaipur, who was killed by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous, allegedly over a social media post supporting an ex-BJP leader. However, the film has drawn sharp criticism. Islamic scholar Arshad Madani and Mohammed Javed—one of the accused in the murder case—petitioned the Supreme Court to stop the film's release, arguing it was inflammatory and communal. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Madani, claimed the film spreads hatred and unfairly targets the Muslim community, warning against allowing hate speech under the guise of free speech. Earlier, the Supreme Court permitted the government to review the movie. A review panel subsequently recommended changes before release. The film's producers then approached the court to challenge the HC's stay on the release. Madani contends the movie generalises a criminal act, portraying an entire community as complicit or supportive of terrorism. Meanwhile, the murder case is ongoing in a Special NIA Court, with hearings set to resume after the summer recess.
Hindustan Times
12 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
HC quashes civil court's gag order against media in Dharmasthala burial case
The Karnataka high court on Friday quashed a sweeping gag order issued by a Bengaluru civil court that barred media outlets, YouTube channels, and people from publishing reports or commentary related to the ongoing investigation into alleged mass burials of victims of suspected sexual assault and murder over a period of two decades in Dharmasthala. The court directed the trial court to reconsider the matter afresh. HC quashes civil court's gag order against media in Dharmasthala burial case According to Bar and Bench, justice M Nagaprasanna allowed a petition filed by YouTube channel Kudla Rampage challenging the ex parte interim injunction issued on July 8, 2025. The civil court order had restrained the publication of any 'defamatory content' against the family running the Dharmasthala Manjunathaswamy Temple. 'The impugned ex parte injunction order passed by the trial court is quashed. The case is being sent back to the competent court for fresh consideration of the interlocutory application. The trial court should take note of the points made in this order,' the high court said. It further added, 'The competent court should decide the case expeditiously. This court has not expressed any opinion on the civil suit, criminal proceedings, charges, counter-charges. All arguments between the parties are kept open except for one point considered in the order.' The original injunction was obtained by Harshendra Kumar D, brother of Veerendra Heggade, who sought the removal and de-indexing of over 8,000 digital links -- including news reports, social media posts, and videos -- alleging they contained defamatory content against him, his family, the Dharmasthala temple, and related institutions. Welcoming the high court ruling, A Velan, counsel for Kudla Rampage, said in a press statement, 'Karnataka High Court did not just pass a judgment; it restored a fundamental pillar of our democracy. The attempt to draw a curtain of silence over a matter of profound public agony and national importance has failed.' 'In a landmark verdict that will resonate far beyond the confines of this case, the High Court has quashed the sweeping and unprecedented gag order that sought to muzzle the media and stifle public scrutiny of the Dharmasthala mass burials case,' Velan said. He also criticised the trial court's order: 'The trial court's ex-parte injunction was a textbook example of an unconstitutional 'prior restraint' on speech. It was overbroad, passed without jurisdiction, and cast a chilling effect not only on the 338 named respondents but on any media house or individual who dared to report on the case. It sought to criminalize journalism.' Meanwhile, in Dharmasthala, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) wound up its search operations for the day after failing to locate any human remains at two more spots -- Spot 7 and Spot 8 -- identified by the complainant. 'Both sites were excavated thoroughly based on the complainant's directions. However, nothing was recovered from either location today. The investigation at the site has been closed for the day,' an SIT officer said, on condition of anonymity. Earlier, partial skeletal remains were recovered from Spot 6, including about 15 bones, some of which were broken. A skull was not found, officials confirmed. These remains have been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for further analysis, said officials. 'The FSL team is examining the bones already recovered, but the process is likely to take time. Only after detailed analysis can any clarity emerge about the age, sex, and cause of death,' another officer added, also requesting anonymity. The anonymous complainant, a former sanitation worker, has alleged that multiple bodies -- including those of women and minors -- were buried across temple-affiliated lands in Dharmasthala between 1995 and 2014. Thirteen such locations were identified as part of the SIT probe, based on his testimony. 'We're following standard procedures and coordinating closely with forensic teams. Not every site may yield physical evidence, but we are documenting everything for completeness,' a senior official said. Home minister G Parameshwara on Friday reviewed the investigation and said the state is monitoring social media posts about the case. 'We will keep a watch on posts that may wrongly impact society,' he told reporters after a meeting with senior officials, including chief secretary Shalini Rajneesh.
