Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Environment (Cause) & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 April, 2022
Author: Prakash Shrivastava
Bench: Prakash Shrivastava
07
ss/jks 18.04.2022
WPA(P) 147 of 2022
Centre for Action on Urban Sustainable
Environment (CAUSE) & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Samim Ahammed
Ms. Saloni Bhattacharjee
Ms. Gulsanwara Pervin
... ... for the petitioners
Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharyya
Mr. Anindya Sundar Das
... ... for the Union of India
Mr. S. N. Mookherjee, AG
Mr. Jahar Lal De
Mr. Supratim Dhar
... ... for the State
Mr. Abhratosh Majumder, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury
Mr. Chayan Gupta
Mr. Sandip Dasgupta
Mr. Saaqib Siddiqui
Mr. Aviroop Mitra
... ... for the HIDCO
Mr. Satyajit Talukdar
Mr. Abhishek Sarkar
... ... for the KMDA
Mr. Alak Kr. Ghosh
Mr. Arijit Dey
... ... for the KMC
Ms. Soumi Guha Thakurta
... ... for the CPCB
In this public interest petition the petitioners have
questioned Alipore Area Development Project which
includes following :
(a) Creation of Independence Museum within
erstwhile Alipore Central Correctional
Home.
(b) Phase-wise redevelopment of entire
project area.
2
(c) Rejuvenation of Adi Ganga (Tolly's Nullah)
with protection of banks under Alipore
Area Development Project.
The entire project area covers around 108 acres of
land.
The main submission of learned counsel for the
petitioners is that in this process of Alipore Area
Development Project, the Heritage Site existing on the
land in question and heritage buildings are being
demolished and damaged. The project has adverse
environmental impact and is being carried out in
violation of the order of the National Green Tribunal,
Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA No. 200 of 2014 dated
14th May, 2019 and the project also affects the open
space ratio and the provisions of the West Bengal Town
and Country (Planning and Development) Act, 1979 have
not been complied with.
The prayer has been opposed by the learned
Advocate General appearing for the State and also by the
learned counsel appearing for the HIDCO and KMDA.
Learned counsel appearing for the HIDCO has
stated before this Court that till the reply is filed and the
matter is taken up on the next day, the heritage
structures will be duly protected and nothing irreversible
to the heritage structures will be done and that the
heritage printing machines, if any, existing on the site
will also be duly preserved. He has also submitted that
the printing machines have already been transferred to
3
the Saraswati Press but at the transferred site they will
be duly preserved and protected.
Having regard to the above statement of learned
counsel for the respondent HIDCO, no interim direction
at this stage is required.
Learned counsel for the respondents are granted three weeks time to file affidavit-in-opposition. Thereafter, affidavit-in-reply be filed within one week.
List on 18th May, 2022.
(Prakash Shrivastava, C.J.) (Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)