SC refuses plea challenging TN govt's decision for a pen statue in memory of DMK patriarch M Karunanidhi

A bench comprising justices S K Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that if this is a political petition, the apex court is not the forum to fight the political battles and told the petitioner’s counsel to fight this battle elsewhere.

New Delhi:The Supreme Court Tuesday declined to entertain a plea challenging the DMK government's decision for an off-shore pen memorial project in memory of its patriarch and former chief minister M Karunanidhi.

A bench comprising justices S K Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia said that if this is a political petition, the apex court is not the forum to fight the political battles and told the petitioner’s counsel to fight this battle elsewhere. Senior advocate P Wilson, representing the DMK government, contended that the plea before the court is a politically motivated petition, which is being fought in the garb of fishermen’s livelihood.

Senior advocate Siddharth Dave appeared before the court representing some of the fishermen, who moved the apex court against the proposed Rs 81-crore, 42m-tall pen monument 360m off the Bay of Bengal coast. The plea contended that the monument would cause environmental damage and loss of livelihoods. Declining to entertain the petition, the bench said, “If this is about environmental concerns, why cannot the NGT (National Green Tribunal) hear it? Why should everything come directly to the Supreme Court?”

Dave contended that the PIL has been filed by the fishermen to enforce their fundamental right to livelihood, and it can be directly maintained before the top court. Wilson submitted that the state government has received a coastal regulation zones (CRZ) clearance along with the other approvals for the monument, and also the NGT is seized of the matter.

Dave stressed that the monument proposed over half an acre of reclaimed sea would spell disaster for the ecosystem. Wilson submitted that the state government had carried out the consultation process, however, the people who objected to the monument did not participate in the public hearing.

After hearing submissions, the bench said queried the petitioner’s counsel, why cannot the high court hear this matter, if it is about fundamental rights and pointed out that the matter is a local issue and made it clear that if it is an environmental issue but a local one, the petitioner can move before the NGT. The petitioner agreed to withdraw the petition. The apex court dismissed the plea as withdrawn.