Meghalaya HC to consider wider inquiry into nexus between State & cement factory in East Jaintia Hills

Syllad | The Rising MeghalayaOctober 30, 2023

The Meghalaya High Court on Monday said it will consider for a wider inquiry into the possible nexus between the State and a cement manufacturing unit in East Jaintia Hills.

The order was passed after the petitioner of PIL Shailendra Kumar Sharma, claiming to be a public spirited person and who has raised several key issues in the past relating to environment, brings alarming facts to light pertaining to the operation of a cement manufacturing unit in the East Jaintia Hills District.

“The petitioner’s prayers for a wider inquiry, including as to the possible nexus between the State and the seventh respondent, will be considered on the adjourned date. List on November 7, 2023,” the bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice B Bhattacharjee said in the order.

According to the petitioner, the seventh respondent company has obtained permission from the State to operate a cement plant along with a captive power plant of 10 mw, but it has gone on to manufacture more cement than what was envisaged in the State’s letter of approval of November 13, 2008.

The petitioner claimed that mining activities in relation to limestone have been undertaken by the seventh respondent without obtaining any license or permission in such regard.

The order said that in such context, the petitioner places queries raised by the Union Ministry of Mines on March 2, 2022 and claimed that the seventh respondent’s replies to the queries do not reveal any license for mining limestone having been obtained by it.

“The State seeks time and says that the principal issues raised have to be answered by the seventh respondent. However, despite the State having been served, the State is unable to throw any light immediately as to whether the seventh respondent has obtained any
license for mining. Clearly, there appears to be something remiss. Whether or not the State is complicit, has to be inquired into,” it said.

The bench also directed that all the respondents, including the seventh respondent, should be served immediately and informed that the matter will appear a week hence for the preliminary questions raised by the petitioner to be answered.