HC disposes of plea seeking archaeological excavation in Ulaipatti
The court was hearing the petition filed in 2020 by advocate G. Thirumurugan. The petitioner said an ancient iron smelting furnace, various burial urns and other ancient artefacts were unearthed in Ulaipatti. A proper and systematic excavation could yield a good result in unravelling the history of the land. Such excavations at various sites by archaeological departments had raised the curtains on the past, he said.
A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and A.D. Maria Clete observed that the High Court cannot issue a direction to conduct such activities unless the authorities had formed an opinion that it was necessary in the interest of the public and in accordance with the provisions of the Central Act and the Rules in force.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
17 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Environment ministry notifies rules for management of contaminated sites
NEW DELHI: The Union environment ministry has notified the Environment Protection (Management of Contaminated Sites) Rules, 2025 for remediation of contaminated sites by those responsible for contamination These rules are important in light of incidents such as the Baghjan oil field blowout in Assam in 2020 The rules also provide for voluntary remediation of sites that are not already identified as contaminated. The local body or district administration, on its own or on receipt of a complaint from the public, shall identify an area affected with contaminants and list all such areas as suspected contaminated sites in its jurisdiction on a centralised online portal, according to the rules. The notification names 189 contaminants and their response level for agricultural, residential, commercial and industrial areas. A senior official said the rules will not apply to radioactive waste as defined under clause (xxii) of rule 2 of the Atomic Energy (Safe Disposal of Radioactive Wastes) Rules, 1987 or mining operations as defined under clause (d) of section 3 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 among others. But, if the contamination of a site is due to a contaminant mixed with radioactive waste or mining operations or oil spill or solid waste from a dump site, and if the contamination of the site due to the contaminant exceeds the limit of response level specified in these rules, then remediation of the site would be covered under these rules. The rules cover various halogenated aromatic compounds, pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, organofluorine compounds, and some metals, among others. These rules are important in light of incidents such as the Baghjan oil field blowout in Assam in 2020, near the Maguri-Motapung Wetland and the Dibru-Saikhowa National Park, which impacted the ecosystems in the area. The local body or District Administration shall furnish the state board with a list of suspected contaminated sites on a half-yearly basis. Upon receipt of a list of suspected contaminated sites, the state board, either on its own or through a reference organisation, undertakes a preliminary site assessment of the suspected contaminated site by sampling and analysis within ninety days from the date of receipt of such a list. The state board shall then furnish a list of probable contaminated sites and investigated sites to the Central Board on the centralised online portal within thirty days from the date of completion of the preliminary site assessment. The state board shall issue a public notice restricting or prohibiting any activity during the preliminary or detailed assessment of the suspected or probable contaminated site, taking into account the risks involved to human health and the environment. It shall publish the list of contaminated sites on the centralised online portal, inviting comments and suggestions from the stakeholders likely to be affected, within sixty days of such publication. It is the state board's responsibility to identify, following an inquiry, the person responsible for causing the site contamination within a period of ninety days. In case the contaminated site has been transferred by the person (transferor) causing the contamination to another person (transferee), the state board shall determine the transferee as the responsible person. Where the responsible person is identified, the state board shall direct the responsible person to prepare a remediation plan and undertake remediation through a reference organisation as selected by the state board and bear all the expenses towards it. The state board shall review and approve the remediation plan submitted by the responsible person within three months from the date of submission of remediation plan, and forward it to the Central Board. However, where the responsible person is not identified, the state board shall, on its own or through the reference organisation, prepare a remediation plan within six months from the date of publication of the contaminated site, for undertaking remediation of the contaminated site either out of its own resources or through support from State Government or both and resources of Central Government. The central board may appoint any reference organisation to verify the completion of remediation activities. In all cases, funds for conducting preliminary assessment and detailed assessment for suspected contaminated site and probable contaminated site, respectively, may, to the extent feasible, be initially met in whole or part by the Central Government from the Environmental Relief Fund under sub-section (9) of section 7 of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 and also by the State Government. Further, the central government shall constitute the Central Remediation Committee to review the remediation activities under these rules. The committee will consist of chairman, Central Board; a representative from the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs; the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT), Ministry of Commerce and Industry; the Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers; the Ministry of Science and Technology; the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; two technical experts from the field of environment, geotechnical and industrial waste management to be nominated by the Central Government among others. The state board may impose environmental compensation on any responsible person who does not comply with the provisions of these rules in undertaking the remediation or does not undertake the remediation under these rules in respect of a contaminated site and poses risks to human life and the environment, contributing thereby to loss, damage or injury tothe environment or human health. 'The Rules address a long-pending legal vacuum around the remediation of legacy pollution sires, but they place disproportionate operational and oversight burden on the State and Central Pollution Control Boards, which are already constrained by limited capacity. The composition of the Remediation Committees is also skewed toward industrial, urban development, and chemical sector ministries, with little to no representation from the Ministries such as Agriculture, Jal Shakti, or Environment which are important trustee of the soil and water. Furthermore, the absence of independent ecologists, public health experts, and social science raises concerns about balanced decision-making. There should also be a third-party audit or an independent verification mechanism in the remediation or monitoring phases for proper monitoring,' said Debadityo Sinha, Lead- Climate & Ecosystems, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.
The Hindu
17 hours ago
- The Hindu
Procedure to redress chemically contaminated sites gets legal teeth
The Environment Ministry has notified new rules under the Environment Protection Act that lays out a process to address sites that are chemically contaminated. Called the Environment Protection (Management of Contaminated Sites) Rules, 2025, these give a legal structure to the process of contamination, that until now was missing despite several sites being already identified across the country for decades. Contaminated sites, according to the Central Pollution Control Board, are those where hazardous and other wastes were dumped historically. This has most likely resulted in contamination of soil, groundwater and surface water that pose a risk to human health and the environment. Some of the sites were contaminated when there was no regulation on management of hazardous wastes. In some instances, polluters, responsible for contamination, have either shut their operations or the cost of remediation is beyond their capacity, thus the sites remain a threat to the environment. These sites may include landfills, dumps, waste storage and treatment sites, spill sites, and chemical waste handling and storage sites. There are 103 such sites across the country. Only in seven sites remedial operation has commenced, which involves cleaning the contaminated soil, groundwater, surface water and sediments by adopting appropriate technologies. A senior official in the Environment Ministry told The Hindu that the latest rules — made public on July 25 — were part of a process of 'legally codifying' the process in place once contaminated sites were identified. Under these rules, the district administration would prepare half-yearly reports on 'suspected contaminated sites'. A State Board, or a reference organisation, would examine these sites and provide a 'preliminary assessment' within 90 days of being thus informed. Following these, it would have another three months to make a detailed survey and finalise if these sites were indeed 'contaminated'. This would involve establishing the levels of suspected hazardous chemicals – there are currently 189 marked ones under the provisions of the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules 2016 – and if these exceeded safe levels, the location of these sites would be publicised and restrictions placed on accessing it. A 'reference organisation' — basically a body of experts — would be tasked with specifying a remediation plan. The State Board would also have 90 days to identify the person(s) responsible for the contamination. Those deemed responsible would have to pay for the cost of remediation of the site, else the Centre and the State — under a prescribed arrangement — would arrange for the costs of clean-up. 'Any criminal liability, if it is proved that such contamination caused loss of life or damage would be under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023),' the official told The Hindu. However, contamination resulting from radioactive waste, mining operations, pollution of the sea by oil, solid waste from dump sites would not be dealt with under the provisions of these laws as they are governed by separate legislation.
Time of India
19 hours ago
- Time of India
DTC says no waterbody exists where Najafgarh bus terminal land is, seeks vacation of stay on fresh construction
New Delhi: After National Green Tribunal directed Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) not to carry out any fresh construction in southwest Delhi's Najafgarh, the latter claimed that no waterbody exists on the land on which the terminal is built. It requested NGT to vacate the stay. NGT is hearing a plea filed by two residents who have alleged that the land on which the Najafgarh Bus Terminal is operating is a wetland and has been encroached upon by Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC). They have also alleged that DTC is now constructing a new terminal on the wetland, which is a violation of the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2010. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi In a report dated July 3, the sub-divisional magistrate (Najafgarh) said that at present, the terminal stands on that land, and the recorded "johar", or village pond, is encroached upon by DTC. "The subject land is recorded as 'johar' in the revenue records under the ownership of the gram sabha. The land was urbanised in 1963 and later allotted by DDA to DTC. The construction on the said land appears to be carried out without obtaining the necessary environmental clearances, such as change of land use and forest NOC, in violation of Wetlands Rules, 2017," the SDM said in his report. The NGT, in an order dated July 4, asked \DTC not to carry out any fresh construction. However, DTC, in a separate report dated July 22, claimed that the terminal was constructed over 20 years ago and the terminal's revamp was announced in 2019. "The nearest wetland to the Najafgarh Bus Terminal is behind the terminal and is under the ownership of the SDMC (now MCD). It is prayed that the stay order dated July 2, 2025, be vacated," DTC said.
