Vizag Gas Leak : AP HC Directs Seizure Of LG Polymers Premises; Restrains Directors From Leaving Country [Read Order]

first_imgTop StoriesVizag Gas Leak : AP HC Directs Seizure Of LG Polymers Premises; Restrains Directors From Leaving Country [Read Order] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK24 May 2020 3:06 AMShare This – xThe Andhra Pradesh High Court on Friday ordered the State Government to seize the company premises of the LG Polymers chemical plant at Vishakapatnam, from where the leakage of the Styrene chemical occurred during the wee hours of May 7, leaving many persons dead and injured.The Court also restrained the Directors of the Company from leaving the country without the leave of the court.The Bench…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Andhra Pradesh High Court on Friday ordered the State Government to seize the company premises of the LG Polymers chemical plant at Vishakapatnam, from where the leakage of the Styrene chemical occurred during the wee hours of May 7, leaving many persons dead and injured.The Court also restrained the Directors of the Company from leaving the country without the leave of the court.The Bench of Chief Justice J K Maheshwari and Justice Lalitha Kanneganti  issued the following directions: The premises of the company shall be completely seized; No one should be allowed to enter into the premises including the Directors of the company;If a Committee, if any, appointed wants to inspect the premises, they are at liberty to. However, they shall put a note on the Register maintained at the gate of the Company regarding the said inspection and while returning, a note regarding the act down on the premises should also be noted.None of the assets, movable or immovable, fixture, machinery and contents shall be allowed to be shifted without the leave of the CourtThe surrendered passports of the Company Directors should not be released without the leave of the Court.The Company Directors are not allowed to go outside India without leaveThe Goverment should inform the Court whether any permission was obtained to restart the company’s operations during the lockdown period. If not, an action taken report on this aspect should be filed,Given the grievance that multiple Committees over the issue have been appointed (by the NG, the Central Government and the State Government) the Government authorities may apprise the Court as to which Committee shall fulfil the purpose to answer all questions raised on the issue.The Court  also noted that the action taken reports filed by the State and Central Government were silent on the following issues: LG Polymers has been operating without a valid Environmental Clearance from the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC); The inhibitor concentration in the storage tank was not checked;Refrigeration system was no working properly;The radius of the vulnerable zone was exetended up to 6.3km from the source;There are several hospitals, educational institutions, places of worship, railway stations and airport within the vulnerable zone;The bystander population should have been informed of the risk that they were in and trained in evacuation procedures in the event of an accident as per Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989. But this has not been done;The siren/ alarm system did not function. After recording that the Government authorities had prayed for time to respond on these aspects, the Court also direct the Government to apprise the Court on the following additional issues, i.e.: What is the net worth of LG Polymers Pvt. Ltd. as per the provisions of the Companies Act, but not as per the book value? Why was styrene monomer permitted to be transported to South Korea and who is the person responsible for the same, when no Court permission was granted for the same and when no investigation/ inspection team was appointed and no Magisterial enquiry was made, despite these being a requirement after the registration of the crime?The Court passed the directions in a suo moto case taken by it following the deadly gas leak.While taking suo moto notice of the tragedy on May 7, the Court had noted that Styrene is notified as a dangerous substance under the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act and as per the Chemical Accident (Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Response) Rules of 1996, certain crisis response steps need to be taken, such as formulation of Crisis alert system, central crisis group, state crisis group all the way down to local crisis group.”It is a matter of enquiry and assessment that the provisions of the said Rules have been observed or not”, the Court had observed.Click here to download Order Read OrderSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more

NLSIU Not A State University; Govt Funding ‘Very Minuscule’ : University Tells Karnataka HC

first_imgNews UpdatesNLSIU Not A State University; Govt Funding ‘Very Minuscule’ : University Tells Karnataka HC Mustafa Plumber27 Aug 2020 8:18 AMShare This – xThe National Law School of India University on Thursday informed the Karnataka High Court that it is not a ‘State university’ as is being contended by the State of Karnataka. Senior Advocate Uday Holla appearing for the Institution submitted : “The submission of the state government that NLSIU is a State University is not correct.” He relied on section 3 of the…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe National Law School of India University on Thursday informed the Karnataka High Court that it is not a ‘State university’ as is being contended by the State of Karnataka.  Senior Advocate Uday Holla appearing for the Institution submitted : “The submission of the state government that NLSIU is a State University is not correct.” He relied on section 3 of the Karnataka Universities Act, which specifies which are the Universities which are deemed universities. It also specifies that Managlore, Bangalore, Gulbarga and Mysore Universities, are State Universities. Secondly, the Karnataka State Law University Act, section 6 (II) (iv) excludes the NLS from the ambit of the Act. The submission was made during the hearing of a batch of petitions challenging the 25 percent domicile reservation introduced by the state government on April 27, for Karnataka Students. A division bench of Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ravi V Hosmani was informed by the University that the Executive Council has not passed any resolution on providing the reservation and left it to the court to decide. Holla said “The University said as of date apply the Amendment Act, subject to the decision of the court.” Holla also gave details about the budgetary allocation of the University. “Total budgetary estimate for this year is Rs 30 crore. We get funds from various sources. Major source is the efe we collect from students for regular courses as well as distance education courses. We also get institutional fees for projects we get. State funding is ‘very minuscule’. This year it is Rs 50 lakh. In the last 16 years on an average from the state we have received 50 lakh annually.” In response to the query of the court on how the 25 percent reservation is allocated and how the 5 percent concession of marks is given to Karnataka Students. Holla clarified that “No candidate will get marks beyond the ‘total marks’ of the exam after being given the concession marks under the reservation.” He concluded by saying “We (NLSIU) are conducting Kannada classes for the first time this year. It is not that the University is against Kannadigas or Karnataka, we even offered to the state to do the reservation in a phased manner.” Adv Lakshmi Menon appearing for the Consortium of National Law Universities told the Court that an interim order at this stage will affect the applicants. Advocate General Prabhuling K Navadgi will make his submission on August 31. In March, the Karnataka State Assembly passed the National Law School Of India (Amendment) Act, 2020, which received the Karnataka Governor’s assent on April 27. As per this amendment, NLSIU should reserve horizontally twenty-five percent of seats for ‘students of Karnataka’. The amendment inserts the following proviso in Section 4 of the National Law School of India Act :- “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act and the regulations made thereunder, the school shall reserve horizontally twenty-five percent of seats for students of Karnataka.” As per the explanation of this section, “student of Karnataka” means a student who has studied in any one of the recognized educational institutions in the State for a period of not less than ten years preceding to the qualifying examination.”Report about previous hearings may be read here :’Domicile Reservation Goes Against Objective Of National Law School’: Bar Council Of India Tells Karnataka HC ‘It Will Only Help Students Of Elite Schools’: Karnataka HC Asks State To Clarify Who Will Benefit From NLSIU Domicile Reservation Next Storylast_img read more