APPLICATION STATUS:
- File Status
- File Status
- File Details
606/SEIAA/EC1/4633/2014
| Name & Address of Applicant | Sri. Shibu Pynadath John, Managing Director, M/s Pynadath Granites (p) Ltd., 10/365D, Pynadath Estate, Pulinkara, Kuttichira P.O., Thrissur District, Kerala-680724. Ph: 0480-2744744, Mob: 09846719014, E-mail: pycons@gmail.com |
| Details of the Project | Environmental clearance for the quarry project in Sy. Nos. 2066/1, 2067/2, 2063, 2057, 2056/2, 3 and 2067/1 at Kuttichira Village , Kodassery Panchayath, Chalakkudy Taluk, Thrissur District by Sri. ShibuPynadath John, Managing Director, M/s Pynadath Granite Pvt.Ltd., 10/365D, Pynadath Estate, Pulinkara, Kuttichira, P.O., Thrissur – 680724 |
| File Status | E.C Issued |
| Date of Receipt | 30-09-2014 |
| EC Issued Date | 17-02-2016 |
| Category | Quarry |
| District | thrissur |
| SEAC | 45th Meeting of SEAC, 118, 120, 122 |
| SEIAA | 48th, 109, 111 |
| Reason for Pendency | |
| Remarks |
The 118th SEAC considered the proposal for revalidation as per the Judgment dated.02.11.2020 in WP(C) No.17533/2020 and 23 other cases. The Proponent and Consultant were present. the consultant made the presentation, The Committee directed the Proponent to submit certain additional documents. Meanwhile, the Regional Officer of MoEF& CC, Bangalore dated 18.03.2021 informed about the Non-compliance of nine conditions in the EC granted earlier . The 120th SEAC decided to inform the SEIAA of these facts and in the light of the letter from the Regional Officer, MoEF & CC, Bangalore, SEIAA may cancel the EC on account of non- compliance of EC conditions. The 122nd SEAC referred to SEIAA The 111th SEIAA decided that 1. SEAC should conduct a field inspection to confirm whether the project proponent has attended all the non-compliances mentioned in the Letter No.EP/12.1/2015-16/17/SEIAA/KER/403 dated 18.03.2021, of MoEF&CC, Integrated Regional Office, Bangalore and recommend whether EC has to be cancelled or not. During the field inspection SEAC should also verify the issues raised by Sri P.V.Rappai after giving a notice to him about the date of inspection. 2. The representation of Sri P.V.Rappai shall be disposed of stating that though an opportunity of hearing was given to him to dispose of his representation as directed by Hon?ble High court, his advocate couldn?t present the case due to Covid related issues and he has no access to file and he has sought for an extension. As requested by his advocate Sri P.V.Rappai will be given one more opportunity of being heard after the proposed field inspection of SEAC to verify the compliance status of observations made in the Letter No.EP/12.1/2015-16/17/SEIAA/KER/403 dated 18.03.2021, MoEF&CC, Integrated Regional Office, Bangalore, as well as the issues raised by him in his representation to SEIAA. 3. Standing Counsel shall be requested to file extension petition for a period of 4 months in relevant WP(C)s to comply with the directions of Hon?ble High Court. |