Summary
A developer sought reconsideration of the interpretation of built-up area in the 2006 EIA notification, relying on observations in the three-judge NOIDA Park decision. The Court distinguished that case’s questions about open-to-sky activity areas and project classification. It held that those observations did not undermine the inclusion of all covered construction, including municipal non-FSI areas, in built-up area for environmental clearance. The application was dismissed.
Issues
- Whether NOIDA Park required reconsideration of the inclusion of all covered construction in built-up area.
Held
- The earlier holding treated covered construction as built-up area for environmental clearance irrespective of municipal FSI or non-FSI classification. Municipal exclusions did not determine environmental impact. (¶¶ 1, 2, 7)
- NOIDA Park concerned classification as a construction or area-development project and the treatment of open-to-sky activity areas. Its observations about ambiguity did not address or exclude covered non-FSI construction, so no conflict arose. (¶¶ 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
- The later notification and clarification had already been addressed in the principal judgment and were not issues in NOIDA Park. They furnished no ground for the application. (¶ 7)
Result
The interlocutory application was dismissed, leaving the interpretation adopted in the judgment dated 10 August 2018 undisturbed.