A Siddha medical practitioner filed a Public Interest Litigation(PIL) in the Madras High Court challenging Genetic Engineering Approval Committee’s (GEAC) ‘safe for environment decision’ granted to Bt brinjal.

The practitioner Thanikachalam, has challenged the legality of GEAC’s decision on three counts, contending that it violated Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The petition is likely to come for hearing on February 10.

The petitioner claimed that GEAC did not apply its mind on the expert panel report, many of the members were of questionable integrity and state as well as district level committees were not set up before arriving at the decision to clear Bt brinjal.

The GEAC took up the issue within six days of the expert committee submitting its recommendation and arrived at a decision within a day.

The petitioner further stated that GEAC ignored the opinion of Dr P M Bhargava, who was appointed by the Supreme Court to observe the functioning of the GEAC.

Dr Bhargava had suggested that at least a month was required to arrive at any decision. But GEAC took the decision within a day.

The petitioner also contended that the recommendations of the committee itself were malafide as the integrity of some members was questionable. Further, the decision was arrived at without constituting state and district level committees, he submitted, in his petition The petitioner challenged the legality of GEAC’s decision as hasty and taken without applying its mind to the recommendations of the expert panel.

According to media reports, Bhargava had earlier stated that 30 tests needed to be carried out before approving genetically modified plants. But it was not done in the case of Bt Brinjal.

UNI