In a significant setback for Sterlite Industries, the Supreme Court of India has dismissed its petition seeking the revival of the closed Sterlite Copper smelter unit in Thoothukudi. The apex court’s decision deals a blow to the Vedanta group, which has been embroiled in a legal battle to restart the unit, shut down on grounds of alleged environmental concerns and public opposition.
The Supreme Court, in its ruling on February 29, categorically stated that the plant’s contributions to the nation must be subordinated to the public trust theory and sustainable development standards. This ruling effectively puts an end to any hopes of the Sterlite Copper unit reopening in the foreseeable future.
The Thoothukudi plant, operated by Sterlite Copper, the Indian subsidiary of Vedanta Resources, has remained shuttered since 2018 following protests from various quarters, including environmentalists, left parties, and local residents. The closure came after widespread demonstrations, including violent clashes that resulted in the deaths of 13 people. The Tamil Nadu (AIADMK) government, in response to the protests and concerns raised by activists, ordered the closure of the unit and sealed its premises.
The closure of the Sterlite Copper unit sparked controversy and led to a judicial inquiry by the Justice Aruna Jagadeesan commission into the alleged police firing on anti-Sterlite protesters. The commission submitted its report to the government after several extensions, and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has been probing the incident. There are now calls to include murder charges against 17 policemen for their involvement in the incident.
Furthermore, there have been allegations of foreign interference, with accusations that a foreign nation, which holds a monopoly in the copper smelter sector, instigated protests against the Sterlite by funding left-wing groups and activists. The closure of the plant has led to a significant increase in copper prices, lending credence to these allegations.
The recent ruling by the Supreme Court comes in the wake of a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud’s remarks on February 21. The bench emphasised that factories must comply with the law and cannot cherry-pick provisions to follow. It also called on the Tamil Nadu government to establish the violations committed by the Sterlite Copper unit before ordering its closure.
The matter has been fixed for further hearing next Thursday, indicating that the legal battle surrounding the Sterlite Copper plant is far from over. The decision of the Supreme Court to uphold the closure of the plant underscores the importance of upholding environmental regulations and addressing public concerns in industrial operations.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud remarked, “We can allow you to refurbish; six years have gone by. We can direct you to put some money upfront, say in an escrow, as a bona fide measure that you will comply with all the environmental safeguards framed by the expert panel, of which the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) will be a part. After all, it is the state’s land. They have the remit.”
The court also emphasized that a company cannot pick and choose which provisions to comply with and must adhere to all applicable laws. The suggestion to refurbish the plant comes with the condition of upfront financial commitment to ensure compliance with environmental regulations.
CJI Chandrachud urged the Tamil Nadu government to consider forming an expert committee to explore the possibility of reopening the Sterlite Copper plant with stringent conditions to safeguard the environment. The court highlighted the need to protect the welfare of the local community in Thoothukudi, emphasising the importance of considering wider concerns and forming an expert panel to assess the plant’s reopening.
The recent observations by the judges have brightened the chances of reopening the closed Sterlite Copper unit, providing a glimmer of hope for the Vedanta group. However, the court’s stance appears to be contingent on strict compliance with environmental safeguards and commitments.
This development comes after the apex court bench, comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, on 29th February, dismissed Vedanta’s plea to reopen the Sterlite Copper plant. The court upheld the 2020 Madras High Court’s judgment affirming the shutdown notice issued by the Tamil Nadu government and the state pollution control board.
The Supreme Court concurred with the TN government’s contention that the health and well-being of the area’s residents were of utmost concern. It cited repeated charges of violations related to air and water pollution against Sterlite and agreed that the state had a duty to protect the health and lives of its citizens.
The bench noted, “Closure of industry undoubtedly is not a matter of first choice. However, the repeated nature of breaches, coupled with the severity of the violations, would in this analysis leave neither the statutory authorities nor the high court to take any other view unless they were to be oblivious to their plain duty.”
Critics have questioned the perceived double standard in dealing with pollution-related issues, citing other industries in Tamil Nadu that continue to operate despite environmental concerns. They argue that the same logic applied to Sterlite should be extended to other polluting industries and that offering options for compliance rather than outright closure would be a more desirable approach.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the fate of the Sterlite Copper plant remains uncertain. The Supreme Court’s recent indications for refurbishment provide a new dimension to the case, opening the possibility for Vedanta to revive its closed unit while meeting stringent environmental standards.
Stakeholders, including environmentalists, industrialists, and activists, closely monitor the developments, awaiting further clarity on the future of the Sterlite Copper plant. The ongoing legal battle continues to raise important questions about balancing industrial development, environmental protection, and public health.
Comments