{"id":125870,"date":"2011-08-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011"},"modified":"2018-10-11T22:54:11","modified_gmt":"2018-10-11T17:24:11","slug":"ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011","title":{"rendered":"M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private &#8230; vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private &#8230; vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 24\/08\/2011\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR\n\nW.P.(MD)No.3544 of 2011\nand\nM.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011\n\nM\/s.Beta Wind Farms Private Limited,\nrepresented by its\nAuthorised Signatory,\nJ.Sriram,\n3rd Floor, Egmore Benefit Fund Building,\nNo.25, Flowers Road,\nKilpauk,\nChennai - 600 010.\t\t\t\t... Petitioner\n  \t\nVs.\n\n1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,\n   represented by its\n   Principal Secretary,\n   Energy Department,\n   Secretariat,  Chennai - 600 009.\n\n2.The District Collector,\n   Tirunelveli District,\n   Tirunelveli.\t\t\t\t\t... Respondents\n\n\tPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for\nthe issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the\norder No.A3\/2409\/2010 dated 14.07.2011 passed by the second respondent and quash\nthe same and consequently, direct the respondents to grant permission to the\npetitioner to erect and commission the wind mill at a distance of 3.5 kms from\nthe Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant at Koodankulam, at Vijayapathi and at\nIrukkanthurai village in Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.\n\n(Prayer amended as per the order of this Court dated 10.08.2011 in M.P(MD)No.3\nof 2011 in W.P(MD)No.3544 of 2011)\n\n!For Petitioner\t\t...\tShri N.R.Chandran,\n\t\t\t\tSenior Counsel,\n\t\t\t\tfor Mr.A.Thirumurthy\n^For Respondents\t...\tMr.M.Govindan,\n\t\t\t        Special Govt. Pleader\n\n* * * * *\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThis writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying to issue a<br \/>\nwrit of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the order<br \/>\nNo.A3\/2409\/2010 dated 14.07.2011 passed by the second respondent and quash the<br \/>\nsame and consequently, direct the respondents to grant permission to the<br \/>\npetitioner to erect and commission the wind mill at a distance of 3.5 kms from<br \/>\nthe Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant at Koodankulam, at Vijayapathi and at<br \/>\nIrukkanthurai Village in Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. Heard Shri N.R.Chandran, learned Senior Advocate for Mr.A.Thirumurthy,<br \/>\nlearned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special<br \/>\nGovernment Pleader appearing for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The petitioner challenges the order of the second respondent District<br \/>\nCollector dated 14.07.2011 made in  No.A3\/2409\/2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company engaged in the<br \/>\nestablishment of Wind Farms.  They sought permission of the District Collector &#8211;<br \/>\ncompetent authority for erection of 23 Windmills in  two Village Panchayat areas<br \/>\nduring May 2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. The Village Panchayats concerned forwarded the applications to the<br \/>\nCommissioner of the Panchayat Union, Radhapuram Taluk so as to place the same<br \/>\nbefore the Koodankulam Project Local Committee constituted under G.O.Ms.No.829,<br \/>\nPublic Works Department, dated 29.04.1991 for its consideration and approval.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. Initially, the Commissioner of Radhapuram Panchayat Union by<br \/>\nproceedings dated 19.07.2010 informed the petitioner that their application for<br \/>\nerection of 23 Wind Mills was rejected as it amounts to an industrial activity.<br \/>\nAgainst this, the petitioner filed an appeal to the District Collector on<br \/>\n27.07.2010.  The said appeal has not been disposed of even as on today.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. Thereafter, based on certain clarification issued by the various<br \/>\nGovernment authorities, the petitioner once again approached the Commissioner of<br \/>\nRadhapuram Panchayat Union for approval and the matter was placed before the<br \/>\nKoodankulam Project Local Committee for consideration. The request was<br \/>\nconsidered  and a favourable report\/order was passed in the meeting of the<br \/>\nKoodankulam Project Local Committee on 25.02.2011, by way of a resolution which<br \/>\nreads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>Applica-tion Nos.\tDetails\t\tAbstract of the Resolution<br \/>\n1 to 24\t\t\tEstablish- \tThe applications received for the<br \/>\n\t\t\tment of wind \testablishment of wind mills have<br \/>\n\t\t\tmills\t\tbeen rejected in the local committee<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tmeeting held on 16.7.2010 on the ground<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tthat establishment of wind mill amounts<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tto the development of industry.  It has also<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tbeen clarified that the applicants shall make<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tappeal before the District Administration.  The<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tletters of the Principal Secretary, Energy (C-2)<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tDepartment, Export Promotion Bureau and the<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tcertificate dated 25.1.2011 of the Managing Director<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tof Tamil Nadu Energy Development Agency have been<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tconsidered in this meeting.  In the above three<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tdocuments, it has been stated that wind mill is not<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tan industrial development.  Therefore, the applications<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t1 to 24 are forwarded to the District Collector for<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tfavourable decision.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. This was forwarded by the Commissioner of Panchayat Union, Radhapuram<br \/>\nto the Assistant Director of Rural Development (Panchayats), Tirunelveli, on the<br \/>\nsame day vide proceedings in Na.Ka.A4\/2092\/2010 dated 25.02.2011.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. Based on the above, the petitioner filed the present writ petition for<br \/>\na Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to grant permission to the<br \/>\npetitioner to erect and commission the wind mill at a distance of 3.5 Kms from<br \/>\nthe Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant at Koodankulam, at Vijayapathi and at<br \/>\nIrukkanthurai villages in Radhapuram Taluk, Tirunelveli District.  On<br \/>\n31.03.2011, an interim order was passed in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 in W.P(MD)No.3544<br \/>\nof 2011 to inspect the erection of 7 wind mills which is said to have been<br \/>\ncompleted by the petitioner and the District Collector was asked to pass an<br \/>\norder.  The interim order has been passed with  a rider that the Commissioning<br \/>\nor erection of the windmill will not give  any right to the petitioner to claim<br \/>\nthe substantial relief (i.e.) permission for erection of the windmills.  It was<br \/>\nspecified in that order that the Department can seek necessary order from the<br \/>\nGovernment since the matter was pending before the Government.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. Based on the interim order, it appears that on 05.04.2011, the<br \/>\nKoodankulam Project Local Committee submitted a report with regard to the<br \/>\nerection of 7 wind mills.  Thereafter, the District Collector passed an order on<br \/>\n14.07.2011 rejecting the request of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. The petitioner was given liberty to challenge the said order by filing<br \/>\nan application for amendment of the prayer in the pending writ petition.  The<br \/>\namendment as sought for was ordered and the writ petition is now taken up for<br \/>\nconsideration on merits. The respondents stated that the counter already filed<br \/>\nwill suffice.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. The impugned order passed by the District Collector dated 14.07.2011<br \/>\nis challenged on the following grounds:\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) The District Collector, having relied upon the Government Order has failed<br \/>\nto exercise the power in the manner prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.829, Public Works<br \/>\nDepartment, dated 29.04.1991.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) No opportunity was given to the petitioner to be heard before rejecting<br \/>\ntheir claim and therefore, there is a violation of principles of natural<br \/>\njustice.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii) The letter of the Principal Secretary to Government in Letter<br \/>\nNo.3282\/C2\/2011 dated 19.07.2011, in particular, paragraph 4, has not been<br \/>\ncomplied with in pith and substance.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. Counter-affidavit was filed in respect of the unamended writ petition<br \/>\non 29.03.2011 before the impugned order of the District Collector dated<br \/>\n14.07.2011 was passed. The counter, however, is almost on the same lines as that<br \/>\nof the impugned order. The very same reasons are contained in the counter<br \/>\naffidavit.  Therefore, it will be sufficient if the impugned order is taken into<br \/>\nconsideration on the points urged by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and<br \/>\non the basis of the counter filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t15. The order under challenge proceeds on the basis that the Inspector of<br \/>\nFactories, Tirunelveli, was asked to clarify whether the windmill is an<br \/>\nindustry.  The said authority  has sent an extract of National Industrial<br \/>\nClassification (All Economic Activities) issued by the Central Statistical<br \/>\nOrganization, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of<br \/>\nIndia, New Delhi, wherein it is shown that Electric Power Generation using other<br \/>\nNon-Conventional sources is classified as Industry as per code No.35106.  Hence,<br \/>\nthe windmill sought to be erected by the petitioner is an industry.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t16. Relying upon the guidelines of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board<br \/>\n(AERB) with regard to the Sterilized Zone and the Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ),<br \/>\nthe District Collector came to the conclusion that the industrial activity in<br \/>\nthe nature of erection of wind mill should not be allowed in the Sterilized<br \/>\nZone.  He came to the conclusion that erection of wind mill will hamper the<br \/>\nevacuation of people during the time of emergency and that the activities of the<br \/>\npetitioner are coming within the Sterilized Zone and in terms of the guidelines<br \/>\nof the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, the request of the petitioner for NOC for<br \/>\nerecting 23 wind mills is rejected in order to avoid evacuation of people during<br \/>\nthe unlikely event of an accident.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t17. The Commissioner of the Radhapuram Panchayat Union, prima facie, was<br \/>\nof the view that the erection of windmill is an industry.  For all these<br \/>\nreasons, the request was rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t18. After going through the order under challenge and the contentions<br \/>\nraised by the petitioner, this Court finds that the order under challenge<br \/>\ndeserves to be set aside and remitted back to the said authority by way of<br \/>\nremand for the following reasons:\n<\/p>\n<p>(1) The District Collector has placed reliance on  G.O.Ms.No.829, Public Works<br \/>\nDepartment, dated 29.04.1991, but he has, however, come to the conclusion that<br \/>\nNOC should be rejected.  Clauses (ii) and (iii) of the G.O., clearly state that<br \/>\nif the District Collector comes to the conclusion that the recommendations of<br \/>\nthe Committee need to be revised or amended,  he shall forward it to the State<br \/>\nGovernment with his comments and the State Government alone will decide the<br \/>\nissue.  Since the District Collector in this case has decided to reject the<br \/>\napplications for grant of NOC inspite of specific recommendation by the<br \/>\nKoodankulam Project Local Committee, he has to follow the procedure under<br \/>\nClauses (ii) and (iii) of G.O.Ms.No.829, Public Works Department, dated<br \/>\n29.04.1991.  Failure to do so would render the order bad.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2)  In the order under challenge, the District Collector has referred to<br \/>\nseveral documents which have been received including the letter of the Inspector<br \/>\nof Factories, Tirunelveli and the proceedings of the District Collector in<br \/>\nProceedings No.A3\/2409\/2010 dated 24.11.2010.  Both the documents as above have<br \/>\nnot been furnished to the petitioner and therefore, there is a violation of<br \/>\nprinciples of natural justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>(3) The District Collector while considering the claim of the petitioner, failed<br \/>\nto take into consideration the letter of the Principal Secretary to Government,<br \/>\nEnergy (C2) Department, in Letter No.7703\/C2\/2010 dated 06.09.2010 which clearly<br \/>\nstates that the windmill is not a factory or an industry engaged in<br \/>\nmanufacturing process.  A copy of it has been addressed to the District<br \/>\nCollector, Tirunelveli and hence, it shows non-application of mind to relevant<br \/>\nfactor.\n<\/p>\n<p>(4) The District Collector has not taken into consideration the Certificate<br \/>\nissued by the Tamil Nadu Energy Development Agency which is headed by the<br \/>\nAdditional Chief Secretary, the Chairman cum Managing Director &#8211; an Officer in<br \/>\nthe rank of Indian Administrative Service, who has clearly stated that windmill<br \/>\ndoes not constitute an activity under the category of Industry for prohibition.<br \/>\nThis is a relevant fact not considered.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t19. Therefore, the non-consideration of these factors has resulted in<br \/>\npassing of  the impugned proceedings erroneously. If it was considered, it would<br \/>\nhave made a difference in the final outcome of the decision of the District<br \/>\nCollector.  It is relevant to consider whether a windmill is  an industry or<br \/>\nnot.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t20. In any event, subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, in the<br \/>\nletter of the Principal Secretary to Government in Letter No.3282\/C2\/2011 dated<br \/>\n19.07.2011, addressed to the District Collector, Tirunelveli, at paragraph 4,<br \/>\nthe District Collector has been requested to consider the report of the<br \/>\nKoodankulam Project Local Committee and follow the procedures laid down in<br \/>\nG.O.Ms.No.829, Public Works Department, dated 29.04.1991.  The  District<br \/>\nCollector has failed to give any reason as to whether he is accepting the views<br \/>\nof the Koodankulam Project Local Committee positively or negatively except a<br \/>\nmere reference.  There is no reason whatsoever in the order to state as to<br \/>\nwhether the report of the Koodankulam Project Local Committee is accepted or<br \/>\nrejected.  Therefore, there is a clear omission on the part of the District<br \/>\nCollector to consider relevant fact which is the mandate of the Government<br \/>\nOrder.  It is trite law that subsequent events can be taken into consideration<br \/>\nif it is relevant to the point in issue.   The Honourable Apex Court has held so<br \/>\nin many cases.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t21. The reference to the guidelines of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board<br \/>\n(AERB) is for  the  Government to consider  in the event of the District<br \/>\nCollector rejecting or refusing to grant NOC and therefore, the rejection order<br \/>\non this ground will be without jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t22. In the result, for all the above reasons,  the impugned order passed<br \/>\nby the second respondent in  No.A3\/2409\/2010 dated 14.07.2011, is set aside and<br \/>\nthe matter is remitted to the District Collector &#8211; second respondent for<br \/>\nreconsideration on merits in accordance with law after giving the petitioner an<br \/>\nopportunity of personal hearing.  Such exercise shall be completed  within a<br \/>\nperiod of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t23. The writ petition is ordered by way of remand.  Consequently, the<br \/>\nconnected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>rsb\/ts<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.The Principal Secretary,<br \/>\n   The Government of Tamil Nadu,<br \/>\n   Energy Department,<br \/>\n   Secretariat,<br \/>\n   Chennai &#8211; 600 009.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The District Collector,<br \/>\n   Tirunelveli District,<br \/>\n   Tirunelveli.\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private &#8230; vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24\/08\/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.(MD)No.3544 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 M\/s.Beta Wind Farms Private Limited, represented by its Authorised Signatory, J.Sriram, 3rd Floor, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-125870","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-11T17:24:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private &#8230; vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-11T17:24:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1946,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-11T17:24:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private &#8230; vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-11T17:24:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private &#8230; vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-11T17:24:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011"},"wordCount":1946,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011","name":"M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-11T17:24:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-beta-wind-farms-private-vs-the-government-of-tamil-nadu-on-24-august-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S.Beta Wind Farms Private &#8230; vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125870","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=125870"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125870\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125870"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125870"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125870"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}