Assess glass industry impact on Taj Mahal: Supreme Court to NEERI
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 22, 2025) directed the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) to conduct an assessment of the nearby glass industries impacting the Taj Mahal in Uttar Pradesh.
A bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan directed NEERI to file an affidavit indicating the timeline for the assessment's completion.
The top court said all government agencies including the pollution control board should assist NEERI in the exercise.
"We want to know the extent of pollution caused by these industries. If we find that these industries are causing pollution, we won't hesitate to order shifting of these units. Some examination has to be made about the extent of pollution," the bench said.
The bench then directed the U.P. pollution control board to constitute a team for visiting the industries mentioned in the affidavit filed by the state and examine the aspect of pollution from these industries.
"After completing study of five industries, the pollution control board shall submit the interim report so that appropriate directions can be issued," the top court added.
The top court had previously deplored the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) authority on environment protection in and around the Taj Mahal asking it whether the preservation of the iconic monument was a "tamasha" (drama) or a "joke.
TTZ is an area of about 10,400 square kilometer spread over the districts of Agra, Firozabad, Mathura, Hathras and Etah in Uttar Pradesh and Bharatpur district of Rajasthan.
The apex court has been monitoring development in the area to protect the Taj Mahal, built by Mughal emperor Shah Jahan in the memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal at Agra.
The ivory white marble mausoleum is a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump travel ban shows ‘deep hostility' towards Iranians, Muslims, says Iran
Iran on Saturday lambasted US President Donald Trump's travel ban on countries, including Iran, and said that it showed "deep hostility" towards Iranians and Muslims. Iran's foreign ministry posted a statement on X quoting a senior official and said, "The decision to ban the entry of Iranian nationals - merely due to their religion and nationality - not only indicates the deep hostility of American decision-makers towards the Iranian people and Muslims but also violates... international law." Separately, Iran on Saturday slammed the new sanctions imposed by the United States targeting over 30 individuals and entities that Washington said are part of a "shadow banking" network linked to Tehran. It said that the network has laundered billions of dollars through the global financial system. "The new U.S. sanctions ..., are illegal and violate international law, and are further evidence of the deep and continuing hostility of the U.S. ruling regime towards the Iranian people," foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said in a statement, Reuters reported. Earlier on Wednesday, Trump issued a full-entry travel ban on nationals from 12 countries, including Afghanistan, Burma (Myanmar), Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Meanwhile, partial restrictions will also be enforced on Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela, limiting immigrant and non-immigrant visas due to high overstay rates or insufficient collaboration between law enforcement. The travel ban was justified by the White House, which cited Taliban control in Afghanistan, Iran and Cuba's state-sponsored terrorism, and Haiti's influx of illegal migrants during the Biden regime. Additionally, countries like Chad (49.54% B1/B2 visa overstay rate) and Eritrea (55.43% F/M/J overstay rate) were flagged for disregarding US immigration laws. 'We will restore the travel ban, some people call it the Trump travel ban, and keep the radical Islamic terrorists out of our country that was upheld by the Supreme Court," Trump had said. The travel ban was also upheld by the Supreme Court which ruled that 'it is squarely within the scope of Presidential authority' and noted that it is 'expressly premised on legitimate purposes'.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Salwa Judum case: Legislative workaround and limits of contempt power
The doctrine of separation of powers must always be acknowledged in a constitutional democracy, the Supreme Court said in its May 15 order ruling that any law made by Parliament or state legislatures cannot be held to be in contempt of court. The decision by a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma came while dismissing a 2012 contempt petition filed by sociologist Nandini Sundar and others against the Chhattisgarh government for enacting the Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, alleging the law violated an earlier SC order. The bench held that the law did not amount to contempt of the SC's 2011 landmark judgment that disbanded the state government-backed Salwa Judum, terming it unconstitutional. Salwa Judum was a government-backed militia formed in Chhattisgarh in 2005, which used armed tribal civilians to combat Maoist violence. The contempt plea claimed that the Chhattisgarh government failed to comply with the 2011 order to stop open backing of vigilante groups like the Salwa Judum, and instead went ahead and armed tribal youths in the fight against Maoists. It said there had been a clear contempt of the SC order when the state government passed the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, which legalised arming tribals in the form of Special Police Officers (SPOs) in the war against Maoists. The petitioners further submitted that instead of disarming SPOs, which was a key constituent of the SC's 2011 order, the Chhattisgarh government legalised the practice of arming them. They also argued that the victims of the Salwa Judum movement had not been adequately compensated. In the latest ruling of May 15, the Supreme Court said the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011 does not constitute a contempt of court per se, and that the balance between sovereign functionaries must always be delicately maintained. 'Every State Legislature has plenary powers to pass an enactment and so long as the said enactment has not been declared to be ultra vires the Constitution or, in any way, null and void by a Constitutional Court, the said enactment would have the force of law," the bench said. If any party wants that the legislation be struck down for being unconstitutional, the legal remedies would have to be presented before an appropriate constitutional court, the bench noted.
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Assam to use 75-yr-old law to push back illegal migrants
Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court , while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967. Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967.
