The Andhra Pradesh HC ordered the Government to seize the company premises of the LG Polymers chemical plant at Vishakapatnam resulting in Vizag Gas leak incident, from where toxic amounts of styrene vapour had escaped on the intervening night of May 6 and 7, leading several persons being hospitalised, besides causing environmental damage.
The Bench of Justices Jitendra Kumar Maheshwari and Lalitha Kanneganti have issued the following directions in Vizag gas leak case:
- The premises of the company shall be completely seized;
- No one should be allowed to enter into the premises including the Directors of the company;
- If a Committee, if any, appointed wants to inspect the premises, they are at liberty to. However, they shall put a note on the Register maintained at the gate of the Company regarding the said inspection and while returning, a note regarding the act down on the premises should also be noted.
- None of the assets, movable or immovable, fixture, machinery and contents shall be allowed to be shifted without the leave of the Court
- The surrendered passports of the Company Directors should not be released without the leave of the Court.
- The Company Directors are not allowed to go outside India without leave
- The Goverment should inform the Court whether any permission was obtained to restart the company’s operations during the lockdown period. If not, an action taken report on this aspect should be filed,
- Given the grievance that multiple Committees over the issue have been appointed (by the NG, the Central Government and the State Government) the Government authorities may apprise the Court as to which Committee shall fulfil the purpose to answer all questions raised on the issue.
The Court also direct the Government to apprise the Court on the following issues related to Vizag gas leak case:
- What is the net worth of LG Polymers Pvt. Ltd. as per the provisions of the Companies Act, but not as per the book value?
- Why was styrene monomer permitted to be transported to South Korea and who is the person responsible for the same, when no Court permission was granted for the same and when no investigation/ inspection team was appointed and no Magisterial enquiry was made, despite these being a requirement after the registration of the crime?
The matter has now been listed to be taken up next on May 28.
Read the order below: