National Green Tribunal
Utkarsh Singh Chauhan vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 29 January, 2025
Item Nos.01 & 02 Court No. 2
BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Interlocutory Applications No.45 & 46/2025
IN
Original Application No.602/2022
Utkarsh Singh Chauhan Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. Respondents
Date of hearing: 29.01.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant : None for the applicant.
Applicants : Dr. Rajeshwar Singh, Mr. Anirudh Wadhwa Mr. Hemant
in I.As. : Sharma and Mr. Kartik Gupta, Advocates for Applicants in
I.As. No.45 and 46 of 2025.
Respondents: Mr. Bhanwar Pal Singh Jadon, Mr. Harshvardhan Singh
Rajawat, Ms. Gargi Chaturvedi and Ms. Anjali Sharma,
Advocates for respondents no. 1,2,3,5 and 7 to 9.
None for respondents no. 4 and 6.
ORDER
1. The intervenor applicants- Sh. Rampal, Sh. Chandra Shekhar and Sh. Ram Swaroop have filed I.A. No.45/2025 to Implead the Applicants as Respondents in the Original Application No. 602 of 2022 and permit them to file appropriate pleadings and to restrain respondents no. 1 to 9 from taking any action to the detriment of the applicants, inter alia, for 1 removal of the alleged encroachment in "Chande Baba Talab" situated in village Garhi Chunoti, Lucknow, in terms of the Order dated 19.11.2024 passed by this Tribunal in the above said original application and the above said applicants have also filed I.A. No.46/2025 to direct urgent listing and hearing of the Original Application No. 602 of 2022 and I.A. No.45/2025.
2. Both the above-mentioned I.As. have been listed today by the Registry.
3. The factual background relevant to the hearing of the above- mentioned applications may be briefly adverted to.
4. Mr. Utkarsh Singh Chauhan Advocate had sent a letter petition to this Tribunal raising the grievances regarding encroachment on "Chande Baba Talab" and seeking directions for its restoration/rejuvenation.
5. The above said letter petition has been treated and registered as Original Application No.602 of 2022.
6. Vide order dated 22.09.2022, this Tribunal constituted a Joint Committee, and report of the Joint Committee was submitted via email dated 13.01.2023. In its report, the Joint Committee inter alia mentioned that out of 36.909 Hectare area of the "Chande Baba Talab", 3.1859 Hectare area is encroached upon by raising of construction of permanent and temporary houses.
7. In view of the averments made in the application and observations made in the report of the Joint Committee, respondents no. 1 to 7 were impleaded vide order dated 18.01.2023. Subsequently respondents no. 8 and 9 were impleaded vide order dated 11.09.2023.
2
8. In the course of hearing replies/reports have been filed by UPPCB, District Magistrate, Lucknow, PCCF (HOFF), U.P., State Wetland Authority and ACS, Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Department, Government of U.P.
9. This Tribunal has passed interim orders for removal of encroachments and restoration/rejuvenation of the pond.
10. The intervenor applicants- Sh. Rampal, Sh. Chandra Shekhar and Sh. Ram Swaroop have filed I.A. No.45/2025 for their impleadment as respondents on the grounds that out of 36.909- Hectare area of the "Chande Baba Talab", only 3.1859 Hectares are encroached upon by the raising of the construction of permanent and temporary houses. The houses were built and the occupants are residing on the land for the last several decades. Pursuant to orders passed by this Tribunal, the District Magistrate, Lucknow has initiated the process of removal of the encroachments. The Action Plan proposed in the joint inspection report dated 09.11.2022 and 30.12.2022 by the joint committee constituted by this Tribunal and its consequent execution by this Tribunal, arbitrarily displaces the Applicants from their homes, without providing them an opportunity to be heard. The applicants have sought hearing and adequate representation to ensure that their Fundamental Rights under the Constitution of India are not affected without following the due process of law.
11. The above said applicants have also filed I.A. No. 46/2025 for urgent listing of O.A. No. 602/2022 and for deciding I.A. No.45/2025 for their impleadment and interim relief.
3
12. None has appeared for the Original Applicant-Sh. Utkarsh Singh Chauhan, in these proceedings earlier and none has appeared for the Original Applicant-Sh. Utkarsh Singh Chauhan even today.
13. We have heard learned Counsels for the intervenor applicants and respondents and Learned Counsel for respondents no. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 to 9 and have gone through the relevant record.
14. In view of the reasons mentioned in I.A. No. 46/2025 and attending facts and circumstance showing urgency for hearing, I.A. No. 46/2025 is allowed.
15. Accordingly, O.A. No. 602/2022 has been preponed and taken up for hearing along-with I.A. No. 45/2025.
16. Learned Counsel for the intervenor applicants have submitted that the applicants and other residents are residing in the land stated to have been encroached upon for the last several decades. The State of Uttar Pradesh has adopted policy according to which any person belonging to the scheduled castes or other backward classes to be dispossessed is to be provided alternative accommodation for rehabilitation. Similarly situated other families are being extended the benefit of such policy, which is being denied to the intervenor applicants and the fundamental rights of the applicants are being violated. The intervenor applicants cannot be dispossessed without grant of an opportunity of being heard in compliance to the principles of natural justice. Orders to be passed in the present proceedings will adversely affect the applicants. In view of settled principle of law reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another 2024 SCC Online SC 3585 orders adversely affecting the intervenor applicants 4 cannot be passed without impleading them as parties to the present proceedings.
17. Learned Counsels for the intervenor applicants have accordingly prayed that the applicants may be impleaded as respondents and respondents no.1 to 9 may be restrained from evicting them without grant of an opportunity of being heard and ensuring their rehabilitation.
18. On the other hand, learned Counsel for respondents no. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 to 9 has submitted that the intervenor applicants did not supply copies of I.As. No.45 and 46 of 2025 to the respondents represented by him and above said respondents are not aware of the contents of the above-mentioned I.As. and the respondents cannot be denied valuable right of filing appropriate response to the same.
19. Learned Counsel for respondents no. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 to 9 has further argued that similar I.A. No. 579/2024 for impleadment was rejected on the ground of being defective. In the present case, an application has also been filed by three applicants who purport to represent other seventy-nine persons whose names are mentioned in the list. The encroachers on wetland are liable to be removed in view of Judgments/orders passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal, and the applicants and other encroachers have no right to continue in possession thereof. Pursuant to orders passed by this Tribunal in the present case, process for removal of encroachments on "Chande Baba Talab" in accordance with law has been initiated. Respondents No.1 to 3, 5 and 7 to 9 have no objection to prayer for impleadment of the applicants, but in the absence of any right to continue the encroachments over the wetland, their prayer for restraining respondents no. 1 to 9 from taking any action for removal of the encroachments is not maintainable and may not be allowed by this Tribunal as Respondents 5 No.1 to 3, 5 and 7 to 9 are complying with and executing the Judgment/orders passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal regarding removal of encroachments from wetlands.
20. Learned Counsel for respondents no. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 to 9 has relied on the observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in orders dated 16.07.2024, 22.11.2024 and 17.01.2025 passed in Civil Appeal No (S). 1904/2020 titled as Mirza Abid Beg Vs State of U.P. & Ors.
21. Learned Counsels for the intervenor applicants have submitted that copies of the I.As. were supplied to the respondents but could not point out to any document to sustain the submission.
22. This Tribunal has observed that the good old practice of supplying advance copies to the opposite parties and attaching proof of such supply of copies with the pleadings/applications/replies filed has been largely given up. Such advance supply of copies to the opposite parties/their counsels serves the valuable purpose of not only informing the opposite parties, enabling them to controvert and contest, but also suppresses consequent evil of taking of opposite parties by surprise disabling them to controvert distortions and misrepresentations of facts. Such practice also contributes, in substantial measure, to fairness in the conduct of proceedings and prevents objections and adjournments on the ground of copies not having been supplied to the opposite parties. The Registry is directed to raise objection and place the pleadings/applications/replies under defect till proof of supply of copies to opposite parties/their Counsels is attached therewith.
23. In the present case, in view of urgency of hearing, no adjournment is warranted on the ground that copies were not supplied. 6
24. Questions regarding impleading of parties in cases in which suo motu cognizance is taken by this Tribunal as to applicant being necessary party and requirement of impleadment of the applicant can be argued and decided on the basis of nature of violations and remedial measures involved and attendant/surrounding facts and circumstances, and the filing of detailed replies to the impleadment application will not be necessary. Consequently, grant of adjournment to enable filing of reply to the I.A. No.45/2025 is not warranted.
25. Since the intervenor applicants are stated to have encroached upon the land of pond and are statedly liable to be removed therefrom, orders to be passed by this Tribunal in the present proceedings will adversely affect the intervenor applicants. In view of settled principle of law reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Grasim Industries Limited Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Another 2024 SCC Online SC 3585 orders adversely affecting the intervenor applicants cannot be passed without impleading them as parties to the present proceedings. In view of the nature of violations and remedial measures involved, viewed in the context of attendant/surrounding facts and circumstances of the case, the intervenor applicants being necessary parties are impleaded as respondents no. 10, 11 and 12 and I.A.No.45/2025 is allowed to that extent.
26. Since I.A. No.579/2022 was rejected on the ground of defect with liberty to file fresh application, rejection order does not have any consequential effect to bar any subsequent impleadment.
27. However, it may be added here that encroachers on wetland/ponds are liable to be removed in view of Judgments/orders passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal. The applicants and other persons have no right to continue in possession of the land in question if it is 7 established that their possession is illegal and amounts to encroachment on the wetland/pond in question. The rights of the persons alleged to have encroached upon wetlands/ponds have to be considered only for the limited purposes of determining the questions as to whether there is any such encroachment on wetland/ponds on demarcation thereof and in case of such encroachment on wetland/pond, neither right to continue in possession accrues nor can be granted to them. Such encroachers have to be evicted forthwith in accordance with law subject to any relief of rehabilitation admissible to them under policy/orders of the State Government. Any such rehabilitative relief has also to be granted by the State Government within reasonable time, and removal of encroachment cannot be deferred indefinitely or to long periods of time.
28. In his affidavit dated 16.11.2024 the District Magistrate, Lucknow, has mentioned that re-survey of the houses of the families residing on 3.1859 hectares out of the total area of 36.9090 hectares in Gata No.268 situated at Village Gadhi Chunauti was conducted. In the said survey, the total 115 houses/buildings were found constructed, in which a total of 145 families are currently residing, and against the owners of the said 115 houses, the eviction orders dated 30.04.2024, 03.09.2024 and 04.09.2024 have been passed by the Tehsildar (Judicial), Sarojini Nagar and Tehsildar Sarojini Nagar under section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 but as per the government order dated 19.10.2023, the poor, landless and scheduled caste people who fall within the ambit of the eligibility for housing allotment should be evicted only after rehabilitation. Out of the aforesaid 145 families, 129 families have been found eligible for allotment of land for house. 08 families have already been allotted land for house. The land measuring area 0.2530 hectare of Gata No. 249 recorded as Naveen Parti, area 0.2530 hectare of Gata No. 513 recorded as Usar and area 0.2620 hectare recorded in the name of Gram Samaj 8 have been marked for allotment of land for house to the eligible 121 families. The process allotment of land for remaining 121 eligible families is in progress. The Secretary, Government of U.P. has granted approval vide letter dated 11.11.2024 for allotment of land for house to all 129 families. Other 16 families have been found ineligible due to having government job or other land available for house in the village.
29. In view of government order dated 19.10.2023, the poor, landless and scheduled caste people, who fall within the ambit of the eligibility for housing allotment, can be evicted only after rehabilitation and eviction orders cannot be executed by demolishing the constructions raised by them on land encroached upon immediately.
30. The questions as to whether the intervenor applicants are entitled to benefit of said government order and whether the applicants can be evicted without rehabilitation have to be considered before their eviction. Questions incidental to substantial environmental issues involved in the case can also be adjudicated upon by this Tribunal.
31. The applicants are given opportunity to file their replies giving relevant details and attaching documents relating to boundaries, demarcation and their title etc. in respect of their houses to establish their rights as claimed and also objection to demarcation conducted by the Government of Uttar Pradesh, if any, within two weeks.
32. The respondents are directed to file their responses to the same within next one week.
33. The District Magistrate, Lucknow is also directed to file detailed report within three weeks regarding 16 families, which are not entitled to 9 any relief of allotment of land for house, along-with copies of the relevant documents in support thereof.
34. The applicants may also file rejoinder/response to the same, if so desired.
35. List on 25.02.2025 the date already fixed for further hearing/orders.
36. Arguments on I.A. No.45 of 2025 qua interim injunctive relief will also be heard on that date.
37. Till that date eviction of the applicants from the land alleged to have been encroached upon shall remain in abeyance.
38. A copy of this order be sent to the original applicant and the respondents by email for requisite compliance.
Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM January 29th, 2025 I.A. No.45 & 46/2025 M 10