The Supreme Court recently upheld an Orissa High Court order from 2010 that halted Vedanta’s acquisition of 6,000 acres for a new university.
A division bench of Justice MR Shah and Krishna Murari also imposed Rs 5 lakh on the appellant, Vedanta’s Anil Agarwal Foundation, to be deposited with the Odisha State Legal Services Authority within 6 weeks.
The court noted in its decision that two rivers ran through the area in question and hence made some stinging criticisms against the State for its lack of foresight in permitting the land acquisition.
“The most important aspect, which is required to be considered is the non-application of mind by the State Government on environmental aspects and passing of two rivers from the acquired lands in question. It is not in dispute that from the lands in question two rivers namely ‘Nuanai’ and ‘Nala’ are flowing, which as such were acquired by the State Government. How the maintenance of the rivers etc. can be handed over to the beneficiary company,“the order reads.
Such a move would violate the doctrine of public trust, and affect the residents at large as well as wildlife in the nearby sanctuary, the bench observed.
“The large-scale construction for the establishment of the proposed university as observed by the High Court will also adversely affect the Wildlife Sanctuary, entire eco system and the ecological environment in the locality. It is a duty of the State to protect the Wildlife Sanctuary and it may affect the entire eco system and the ecological environment in the locality,“ the Court underlined.
In addition, the bench determined that, based on the evidence presented, undue benefits and generosity were proposed to be granted to the appellants, without considering similar proposals made by other trusts.
“It is unclear why the government provided such an excessive advantage to one trust/company. Hence, the entire acquisition process and the rewards suggested by the State Government were tainted by favoritism and violated Article 14 of the Indian Constitution,” the bench stated.
The decision was reached following an appeal by the Anil Agarwal Foundation, the beneficiary for whom the land was acquired.The High Court had directed that the possession of the acquired lands be restored to the respective landowners, along with a refund of the amounts paid for the same.
The top court noted that the malafide intent of the foundation was revealed by the initial measure of land it had sought.
“Initially, 15,000 acres was proposed to be acquired, which is now reduced to 3837 acres. Meaning thereby, the proposal was for exaggerated demand. This was mala fide intention on the part of the appellant company / foundation,“ the bench stated.
The top court had reserved its verdict in the matter on September 21, 2022.
