Latest news with #ADMariaClete
New Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Health
- New Indian Express
Consider setting up infertility treatment centre in GRH soon: Madras HC
MADURAI: Noting that a proposal to set up an infertility treatment centre at Government Rajaji Hospital (GRH) in Madurai is pending before the state government, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court observed that the government may consider establishing the centre expeditiously for the benefit of the public. A bench of justices SM Subramaniam and AD Maria Clete made the observation recently, while disposing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by A Veronica Mary in this regard. Petitioner's counsel submitted that while responding to a similar petition last year, the government informed the court that a proposal has been submitted to start the facility at a cost of Rs 1.38 crore. Based on the same, the court had disposed of the plea. However, no decision has been taken on it, counsel said. The judges observed that it is a policy decision to be taken by the government by considering various factors and the court cannot substitute its opinion. However, when there are growing demands from the public, especially the poor, for such a facility, any welfare government has to consider the same in an effective manner. Since a proposal is pending, the government may consider establishing the centre as expeditiously as possible, the judges observed.
New Indian Express
4 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Madras HC bars quarrying, mining in Sivagalai archaeological site
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has directed Thoothukudi district authorities to ensure that no mining or quarrying activities are carried out on land situated within the Sivagalai archaeological site until a final decision is made by the authority. A division bench of Justices S M Subramaniam and A D Maria Clete issued the order while disposing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by D Muthuramalingam, challenging the permission granted to a private individual to quarry on the land. The permission was originally issued by the Assistant Director of Geology and Mining on November 22, 2024. During the hearing, the government counsel informed the court that the area had since been notified as an archaeological site and the quarry licence was suspended in December 2024. Taking this into account, the court instructed the petitioner to approach the appellate authority if he wished to further challenge the assistant director's decision. The judges emphasised that, until a final order is passed by the authorities, the land must be protected from any form of mining activity. However, they declined the petitioner's request to set a deadline for the district collector (appellate authority) to make a decision, citing the official's workload. In his petition, Muthuramalingam contended that the three-hectare land granted for quarrying lies close to the Sivagalai archaeological site and is rich in historical remains. He also noted that the proposed quarry site is surrounded by agricultural fields, three irrigation ponds, and a wildlife conservation area. He warned that quarry explosions could not only damage valuable archaeological artifacts but also pose serious risks to the local community and wildlife.
New Indian Express
a day ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Not experts to declare waterbody as sanctuary: Madurai bench of Madras HC
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on Wednesday disposed of suo motu proceedings initiated to declare Samanatham tank in Thiruparankundram as a sanctuary, observing that it is not an expert body and cannot issue a positive direction substituting expert views and directives of the executives. "No doubt bird migration activities are going on in the tank. But such decisions have to be taken by the government on the recommendations of the competent authorities and by getting expert reports from the concerned authorities," a bench comprising justices S M Subramaniam and A D Maria Clete noted. Declaration of a tank as a sanctuary requires certain procedures to be followed under statutes and rules in force, they pointed out. The Wildlife Protection Act contemplates various conditions and circumstances warranting such a declaration in the public interest. The authorities may take note of the facts reiterated by the division bench concerned while initiating suo motu proceedings and if necessary, take action, the judges added. The court had initiated the proceedings in February by taking suo motu cognizance of various appeals made to protect the water body. It also took note of a news report published by TNIE on August 25, 2024, about a similar recommendation made by the Madurai Nature Cultural Foundation, which had visited the water body and found about 300 rare species of birds. At present, the tank is easily accessible to the public and is therefore vulnerable to poaching and loss of natural habitat, the court noted. Recalling that a PIL petition filed by R Manibharathi seeking the same relief was closed given the submissions made by the state that proposals have been forwarded to the government, the court had initiated the suo moto proceedings.
Time of India
a day ago
- General
- Time of India
Only state can decide on declaring Samanatham tank as sanctuary: HC
Madurai: Madras high court on Wednesday observed that it is for the state govt to take a decision to declare Samanatham tank in Thiruparankundram in Madurai district as a bird sanctuary. A division bench of justice S M Subramaniam and justice A D Maria Clete observed that no doubt bird migration activities are going on in Samanatham tank. However, such decisions have to be taken by the govt on the recommendation of the competent authorities and after obtaining reports from the experts. The declaration of a tank as a sanctuary requires certain procedures to be followed under the Statute and Rules in force. The court, not being an expert body, cannot substitute the expert views. Therefore, the court may not be in a position to issue a positive direction to declare the tank as a sanctuary. The court is of the considered view that the authorities may take note of the facts reiterated by the division bench while initiating the suo motu proceedings and, if necessary, process the same in the manner known to law, the judges observed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trending in in 2025: Local network access control [Click Here] Esseps Learn More Undo The court passed the order while disposing of a suo motu proceeding seeking a direction to the state to declare Samanatham tank as a bird sanctuary in terms of Section 18 of the Wildlife Protection Act. The tank is presently under the control and maintenance of the public works department (PWD). The waterbody provides habitat for more than 150 species of birds. The tank also provides habitat for two vulnerable species, namely the Indian spotted eagle and great spotted eagle. Owing to the biodiversity and, in particular, the unique natural bird habitat, there were various appeals to protect the tank by declaring it as a bird sanctuary. The action is necessitated in light of the fact that the waterbody is vulnerable to poaching, loss of natural habitat, and is easily accessible to the public, which gravely threatens the natural habitat of these birds. If the said waterbody is declared as a sanctuary, it would be subjected to restrictions as to entry in terms of Section 27 of the Act and various other protective measures as envisaged under Chapter IV of the Act of 1972, as a protected area. Earlier, a public interest litigation was filed by R Manibarahti seeking a direction to the govt to declare the tank as a bird sanctuary. The court closed the petition after the state submitted that a proposal was sent in this regard to the govt.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
HC restrains NHAI from collecting fee in two toll plazas
Madurai: Madras high court on Tuesday restrained the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) from collecting toll fees in two toll plazas situated on the Madurai-Tuticorin national highway stretch, after taking into account the fact that the road was not maintained properly and saplings were not planted on both sides of the road. A division bench of justice S M Subramaniam and justice A D Maria Clete passed the order while disposing of a public interest litigation filed by V Balakrishnan, a retired Tangedco assistant executive engineer from Tuticorin district. The petitioner stated that the contract for the Madurai-Tuticorin highway was awarded in 2006 and the highway stretch was put to use in 2011. He stated that as per the contract, the contractor was to plant trees on both sides and on the centre median; however, the work was carried out partially. The contractor collected tolls from two toll plazas from the date of usage of the roads. But the contractor failed to maintain the road, and many portions of the road were not motorable due to lack of proper maintenance. He stated that NHAI remained a silent spectator of all the lapses and irregularities committed by the contractor without initiating any kind of action to fulfil the terms and conditions of the contract. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like ¿Cómo obtener un segundo ingreso invirtiendo $100 en AES CFD? PentyMedia Más información Undo Sensing the seriousness, the agreement was terminated in 2023. It is also seen from the RTI reply that about 563.83 crore are recoverable from the contractor for his failure to plant roadside avenues and maintain the roads. The petitioner stated that after taking over the road, NHAI continued to collect the tolls previously collected by the contractor. The action of the NHAI is totally baseless and illogical because it has not spent any money towards the construction of the road. The estimated project cost was 920 crore. However, the contractor collected 932.44 crore, without spending 563.83 crore towards maintenance and plantations. He stated that NHAI miserably and deliberately failed to take timely action against the contractor and allowed the contractor to continue with his violation and irregularity for more than 10 years, thereby causing a loss of 563.83 crore, besides causing inconvenience and suffering to the road users. The right to proper road connectivity is the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Road maintenance is the statutory duty of the authorities, and they ought to have followed it strictly. Hence, the petitioner moved court seeking a direction to the NHAI authorities to initiate action against the contractor and to plant saplings on both sides of the road and the centre median on the highway.
