The controversy revolves around Tata Chemicals’ Mithapur facility 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 fight.

High Court verdict

On 25 May, the Gujarat High Court rejected Tata Chemicals’ plea, holding that the corporation possessed no legal entitlement to the long‑standing wastewater channels and that the state‑owned marine sanctuary land had been unlawfully 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 petition challenging the High Court judgment. The apex court ordered that no coercive measures be taken against Tata Chemicals while the petition is under review, effectively providing the firm with temporary protection.

The bench also directed the Gujarat government to submit its written response by 2 November. After the reply is filed, the matter will return to the Supreme Court for further deliberation.

Mandated environmental review

The Gujarat High Court had instructed the Gujarat Pollution Control Board to convene an expert panel to assess the ecological impact on the affected coastal stretch. The panel was tasked with proposing remedial actions, estimating compensation, and completing its study within a three‑month timeframe.

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

What lies ahead?

With the Supreme Court’s stay in force, Tata Chemicals is insulated from any immediate enforcement steps. The next critical stage hinges on Gujarat’s written reply; following that, the apex court will decide whether the broader challenge to the High Court’s findings will proceed.