Supreme Court Quashes Change of Land Use for Cement Plant in Punjab, Supreme Court Upholds Statutory Master Plan, Cites Violations in Environmental and Zoning Regulations
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the Change of Land Use (CLU) dated December 13, 2021, granted to Shree Cement North Private Limited for establishing a cement grinding unit in Sangrur, Punjab. The apex court's decision comes as a significant affirmation of the binding nature of statutory Master Plans and the necessity for strict adherence to environmental and zoning regulations.
The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, delivered a detailed judgment on February 13, 2026, setting aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order that had upheld the CLU. The Supreme Court ruled that the statutory Master Plan for Sangrur, which designated the site as a rural agricultural zone, did not permit industrial activities such as those proposed by Shree Cement.
The court emphasized that any alteration in land use must strictly comply with the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995. The act mandates a structured process involving public notice and participation, which was bypassed in this instance. The court observed that administrative approvals could not override the statutory requirements.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court highlighted lapses in environmental compliance. It noted that the required prior environmental clearance under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, was not secured before initiating site preparations. The court underscored that siting norms, particularly the minimum distance requirements from educational institutions and residential clusters, were not demonstrably adhered to, posing potential health risks.
The judgment also addresses a broader constitutional question regarding the Central Pollution Control Board's (CPCB) reclassification of industrial categories, which had relaxed environmental safeguards. The court quashed the CPCB's revised categorisation of "stand-alone grinding units without CPP" from the "Red" to the "Orange" category, citing it as inconsistent with the constitutional mandate to protect life and health under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
This ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of environmental governance and the judiciary's role in safeguarding public health and environmental integrity against administrative and regulatory lapses.
Bottom Line:
The statutory Master Plan is binding for land use and development. A Change of Land Use (CLU) contrary to the operative Master Plan is impermissible and cannot be validated by subsequent administrative approvals that do not comply with statutory requirements.
Statutory provision(s): Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995, Sections 70, 75, 76, 79-81; Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006; Constitution of India, Articles 14 and 21.
Harbinder Singh Sekhon v. State of Punjab, (SC) : Law Finder Doc id # 2853850
