Supreme Court Permits TTZ Authority to Process 400 MSME Applications Under Strict Joint Expert Supervision

Date:

The Supreme Court has allowed the processing of around 400 Taj Trapezium MSME Applications for non-polluting industries. The Court modified its October 2024 moratorium on industrial expansion in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ).

A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant issued the order. Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana also formed part of the Bench.

Court Balances Environment and Local Livelihoods

The Court held that a complete ban on non-polluting economic activities could harm local livelihoods. However, it stressed that environmental safeguards must remain central to the approval process.

The Bench therefore introduced a strict expert-supervision mechanism. The mechanism follows the precautionary principle.

The Court observed that authorities must follow the precautionary principle strictly. It also directed the TTZ Authority to process the pending applications under expert supervision.

TTZ Covers 10,400 Square Kilometres

The Taj Trapezium Zone covers around 10,400 square kilometres. It includes areas in Agra, Firozabad, Mathura, Hathras, Etah, and Bharatpur.

The zone protects the Taj Mahal and other heritage monuments from atmospheric pollution.

The Union Government clarified the nature of the pending applications. Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati and Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani represented the Union authorities.

They informed the Court that the applications do not concern heavy, coal-based, or high-emission industries.

Applications Concern Small Non-Polluting Units

The pending applications involve around 400 MSME proposals. These include units powered by electricity or natural gas.

The proposals cover businesses such as flour mills, shoe-making units, and small paper-processing enterprises.

The Union authorities argued that the prolonged moratorium had affected the region’s economic development. They also highlighted its impact on local livelihoods.

NEERI Recommends Broader Evaluation

The Supreme Court also considered an interim report from the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI).

NEERI submitted the report on April 21, 2025. The report cautioned against using a rigid definition of “non-polluting industries.”

According to NEERI, authorities should not rely only on traditional Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) classifications.

Instead, the evaluation should also consider heritage status, local craft traditions, and Geographical Indication (GI) factors.

Court Creates Expert Clearance Mechanism

The Supreme Court laid down several conditions for processing the applications.

Mandatory Expert Presence

Every TTZ Authority meeting must include two experts.

One expert must come from the Central Empowered Committee (CEC). The other must represent NEERI.

The Authority cannot hold a meeting without either expert.

Unanimous Approval

The TTZ Authority may approve a proposal without seeking prior permission from the Supreme Court.

However, the NEERI expert, the CEC expert, and the TTZ Authority must unanimously conclude that the unit is strictly non-polluting.

Dissent Requires Supreme Court Permission

If either expert raises an objection, the TTZ Authority cannot grant approval on its own.

The Authority must then obtain permission from the Supreme Court before clearing the proposal.

Public Objections and Transparency

The authorities must upload provisional decisions on the official CEC website.

The public can then submit objections and suggestions.

The TTZ Authority and the expert panel must consider the feedback before granting final approval.

Supreme Court Maintains Environmental Oversight

The Court also directed the authorities to serve advance copies of final approvals on the Amicus Curiae.

This direction will allow further judicial scrutiny whenever necessary.

The Taj Trapezium MSME Applications order therefore creates a balance between environmental protection and sustainable economic activity. The Supreme Court has allowed the process to continue, but only under strict expert oversight and public transparency safeguards.

Read more:

spot_img

Share post:

Popular

More like this
Related

Supreme Court Acquits Former Clerk in Bribery Case

The Supreme Court has stressed that Bribery Demand Proof...

Supreme Court Examines Shiv Sena Symbol Dispute

The Supreme Court has raised a key question in...

Supreme Court Upholds Excess Pay Recovery From NIT Calicut Teachers

The Supreme Court has upheld the Recovery of Excess...

Higher Marks Cannot Cure Lack of Essential Qualification: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that an Essential Recruitment...