Gujarat High Court
Vadodara vs Federation on 23 August, 2011
Author: S.J.Mukhopadhaya
Bench: S.J. Mukhopadhaya
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/12774/2000 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12774 of 2000
In
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 4393 of 1998
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2795 of 1997
=========================================================
VADODARA
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION - Petitioner(s)
Versus
FEDERATION
OF INDUSTRIES GUJARAT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE & 119 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PRANAV G DESAI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 5,7
- 51,53 - 83,85 - 90,92 - 110,112 - 113,115 - 116,118 - 119.
NANAVATI
ASSOCIATES for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2, 5, 7, 11,14 - 15,17 - 24, 27,29
- 36,38 - 42, 44, 50,52 - 63,65 - 67,69 - 72,74 - 83,86 - 90,94 -
97,100 - 103,106 - 108,112 - 113,115 - 116,118 - 119.
RULE SERVED
BY DS for Respondent(s) : 3 - 4,8 - 10,12 - 13, 16, 28, 33, 37, 43,45
- 46,48 - 49, 51, 64, 66, 68, 73, 85,92 - 93,98 - 99,104 - 105,109 -
110.
MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent(s) : 3,
NANAVATI &
NANAVATI for Respondent(s) : 6,
MR TARAK DAMANI for Respondent(s)
: 6,
SINGHI & BUCH ASSO. for Respondent(s) : 16,
MR AY
KOGJE for Respondent(s) : 25,
MR HC PANDYA for Respondent(s) :
26,
MR MB FAROOQUI for Respondent(s) : 45, 51,
M/S TRIVEDI &
GUPTA for Respondent(s) : 46,
MR BHARAT T RAO for Respondent(s) :
47,
MR KV SHELAT for Respondent(s) : 48,
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N)
for Respondent(s) : 52,
- for Respondent(s) : 0.0.0, 0.0.0, 0.0.0,
0.0.0,0.0.0
- for Respondent(s) : 0.0.0
- for Respondent(s) :
0.0.0
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date
: 23/08/2011
ORAL ORDER
(Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA) From the decision of the Federation contained in the letter dated 19.8.2011 at page 671, it will be evident that the claim amount has been shown against each of the industries. However, according to the Federation and its units, total amount should be recovered from 3000 units situated in and around the area. The industries named therein have agreed to pay only 25% of the claim amount.
2. From the stand taken by the Corporation, it appears that pursuant to the Court's order and observations, and at the request of the industries, an Effluent Treatment Plant was constructed by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation, which incurred a cost of Rs.11.29 crores in the year 2000. If the amount is now calculated along with 18% interest, it will be much more than Rs.30 crores.
3. Before deciding the issue, we intend to give last opportunity to the industries situated in the area including the respondent-Federation to state whether they intend to pay the principal amount of Rs.11.29 crores immediately. In such case, the Court may decide as to what should be the interest and as to from which such industries such interest amount can be recovered or whether in the facts and circumstances, the Corporation will agree to not charge any amount of interest.
4. If the industries do not agree to pay the total amount then in that case the Court may direct the Vadodora Municipal Corporation to close the Effluent Treatment plant and not to allow the industries to get its effluent treated in such plant. In such case, the Pollution Control Board may be asked to get the pollution level checked within 4 to 7 days of such closure of the unit and if any unit is found to be causing pollution then the Pollution Control Board may close such units, or whether they agree to pay the amount with interest to the Corporation for getting the effluent treated in such plant or construct a separate independent Effluent Treatment Plant and take other rectification measures.
5. Post the matter for further hearing on 25th August 2011 on the top of the list.
(S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA, CJ.) (J.B. PARDIWALA, J.) zgs/-
Top