- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
TN Government Yielded To Pressure From Vested Interests Who Organized Anti-Sterlite Stir, Vedanta Tells Madras HC
[ By Bobby Anthony ]Vedanta Limited has told the Madras High Court that the 2018 protests against its Sterlite copper smelting plant in Thoothukudi were orchestrated by a non-governmental organizations and activist groups which allegedly operate with a profit motive as well as other ulterior motives.The company also accused the Tamil Nadu state government of having yielded to pressure mounted...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Vedanta Limited has told the Madras High Court that the 2018 protests against its Sterlite copper smelting plant in Thoothukudi were orchestrated by a non-governmental organizations and activist groups which allegedly operate with a profit motive as well as other ulterior motives.
The company also accused the Tamil Nadu state government of having yielded to pressure mounted by such organizations, by ordering the permanent closure of the Sterlite copper smelting plant on May 23.
The action was meant to appease vested interests as well as promote a political agenda, the company alleged.
The company stated that Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Edappadi K Palaniswami had told the media that anti-social elements were behind the mass protests which led to a police firing that killed 13 people on May 22.
The cause behind the incident is being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), following court orders, the company stated.
Earlier, the company had stated in its rejoinder to a counter affidavit filed by the Tamil Nadu state government against reopening the Sterlite plant, the state government has taken an “adversarial position” without considering the pleas of more than 1.5 people who support reopening the unit.
The company stated that there were not previous protests or complaints against the plant, citing inspection reports of the years 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18.
It contended that on February 18, the Supreme Court had clearly stated that the order to close the plant was administrative in nature.
Vedanta also denied that it was a chronic violator of anti-pollution laws, claiming that it is a responsible corporate citizen which had spent more than Rs 500 crore to raise the standards of the environmental performance of its smelters.