The controversy revolves around Tata Chemicals’ Mithapur plant and a series of open‑channel drains that have historically emptied effluent into the Gulf of Kutch. In 2006 the district collector denied the company’s claim to the land, a decision that later became the cornerstone of a protracted court battle.

High Court’s earlier ruling

On 25 May, the Gujarat High Court rejected Tata Chemicals’ petition, holding that the firm possessed no legal entitlement to the long‑standing wastewater channels and concluding that the state‑owned marine sanctuary land had been improperly occupied.

Supreme Court’s provisional order

A three‑judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, together with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, issued a notice on the company’s challenge to the High Court judgment. The apex court ordered that no coercive action be taken against Tata Chemicals while the petition is under review, effectively providing the company with temporary protection.

The bench also directed the Gujarat government to file its written reply by 2 November, after which the matter will return to the Supreme Court for further deliberation.

Mandated environmental review

The Gujarat High Court had previously instructed the Gujarat Pollution Control Board to convene a panel of specialists to assess the ecological impact on the coastal zone. The panel was tasked with proposing remedial steps, estimating any compensation, and completing its study within three months.

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing Tata Chemicals before the Supreme Court, underscored that the dispute raises both environmental concerns and allegations of land encroachment.

What lies ahead?

With the Supreme Court’s stay in effect, Tata Chemicals is insulated from any immediate enforcement measures. The next stage depends on Gujarat’s written response; thereafter, the apex court will decide whether to allow the company’s broader challenge to the High Court’s findings to proceed.