Punjab Supreme Court Halts Cement Plant Land Use in Sangrur
In a landmark decision reaffirming statutory urban and regional planning norms, India’s Supreme Court has struck down land-use approval for a proposed cement grinding unit in Sangrur district, Punjab, near schools and residential settlements, underscoring the primacy of long-term planning and environmental safeguards over post-hoc industrial permissions. The ruling, delivered this week, reverses earlier judicial endorsement of the project and carries significant implications for industrial siting norms in growing urban-rural fringes.
At the heart of the dispute was a powerful building materials producer’s plan to establish a standalone cement facility on 47.82 acres designated under the Sangrur Master Plan as a rural agricultural zone where “red category” industries — including cement plants — were not permitted. Local residents, farmers and the nearby Vasant Valley Public School had challenged a Change of Land Use (CLU) granted in 2021, arguing that it violated zoning laws and exposed communities to particulate pollution and associated health risks.The Supreme Court bench, led by Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, held that the CLU could not be retrospectively validated through ex-post facto administrative measures when the Master Plan itself had not been formally altered through statutory processes. The ruling clarified that executive convenience or later endorsements cannot substitute for legally mandated amendments to operative plans, which are designed to balance economic activity with public health and environmental protection.
The decision also underscored the constitutional importance of a clean environment under Article 21, emphasising that economic development — including cement industry expansion — must coexist with preventive safeguards that protect life, particularly where sensitive receptors such as schools and homes are involved. In quashing the approval, the court highlighted that exposure to cement dust and its cumulative impacts on air quality and groundwater cannot be dismissed as speculative when sizeable populations live nearby.For the cement manufacturing sector, the judgment reinforces the need for transparent, plan-aligned siting and due environmental assessment well before capital investments are made. Cement plants and allied processing units, even when technologically modern, have inherent risks from fugitive dust and other emissions that require careful buffer zoning, monitoring, and community engagement long before construction begins. Experts say regulatory certainty is as critical for investors as protective planning norms are for residents and ecosystems.
The court’s emphasis on statutory compliance also signals caution to state and central bodies about regulatory relaxations that dilute siting norms without convincing scientific justification — a concern when industrial classification categories are recalibrated without robust, site-specific evidence of reduced environmental risk.
Urban planners and environmental advocates alike view the Sangrur ruling as a pivot toward more deliberative industrial development: one that aligns growth with climate-resilience, people-first zoning, and equitable access to a healthy living environment. As the cement project’s permissions stand quashed, authorities may need to revisit planning mechanisms to ensure future industrial proposals are anchored in statutory plans and environmental rigour, not just commercial expediency.
