Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

SLC Reads

Nature declared as ‘Living Being’ : Madras HC

Socio Legal Corp

Last Updated on May 2, 2022 by Administrator

Written by Shaurya Mahajan

The Madras High Court in the case of A. Periyakaruppan v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Another invoked the “parens patriae jurisdiction” and declared “Mother Nature” as a “Living Being”, having a legal entity and having the status of a legal person, with all corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of an l living person, to preserve and conserve them.

The Madurai bench of Justice S. Srimathy delivered the decision. The bench also noted that nature shall have fundamental rights/ legal rights and constitutional rights for its survival, safety and sustenance, and resurgence to maintain its status and also to promote its health and wellbeing. The court also directed the State Government and the Central Government to take appropriate steps to protect mother earth in all possible ways.

The court made the above observations in a petition filed by a former Taluk Tahsildar to quash the Government Order imposing compulsory retirement and a penalty of reduction of 1/3rd pension and other retirement benefits for colluding with other officers and granting Patta in forest lands to private to private individuals. The petitioner served in the Revenue Department for the past 35 years and served as Distillery Officer in the cadre of Deputy Collector in the Rajashree Sugars and Chemicals Private Limited, Varadraj, Nagar, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District. After attaining the age of superannuation, he was not permitted to retire and was placed under suspension citing the pendency of disciplinary proceedings against him.

Through the GO dated 06.04.2009, the Government punished him by imposing compulsory retirement, and by GO dated 17.08.2012, the Government ordered that the petitioner shall be eligible for only 2/3rd of the pension and DCRG. The 1/3rd of the eligible pension and the retirement gratuity was reduced as a penalty.

The court opined that though the punishment of co-delinquent was quashed or dropped and the entries were also modified and pattas cancelled since the land in question was classified as “Forest Land” necessary intervention was needed. The court, therefore, modified the order of compulsory retirement as a stoppage of increment for six months without cumulative effect.

Written By

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Advertisement

Related Posts

Inside Court News

Last Updated on April 18, 2024 by News Desk The Supreme Court has been hearing the petition whereby it was sought that every vote...

Inside Court News

Last Updated on April 18, 2024 by News Desk Introduction: The battle over the patent for Chlorantraniliprole (CTPR) has escalated as Natco Pharma Limited...

Inside Court News

Last Updated on April 17, 2024 by News Desk Recently, the supreme court questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) about the penalties, if...

Inside Court News

Last Updated on April 17, 2024 by News Desk A PIL was filed in the Supreme Court of India, where it was sought that...