Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

V. Ramasubbu vs Union Of India on 5 January, 2024

Author: Abhay S. Oka

Bench: Abhay S. Oka

                                       IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                     CIVIL APPEAL NO.          OF 2024
                                        (@ DIARY NO(S). 23282/2023)


     V. RAMASUBBU                                                         APPELLANT(S)

                                                     VERSUS

     UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                                RESPONDENT(S)


                                                  O R D E R

Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

Delay condoned.

In the Original Application filed by the appellant before the National Green Tribunal, Chennai (for short, “the Tribunal”), there were two prayers made, which read thus:

“A. To direct the 6th respondent to immediately stop the illegal and unlawful pending establishment works of the New Tenkasi Collectorate building. B. To direct the 6th respondent to take steps towards compensating and remedying the social and environmental damages caused due to illegal establishment and illegal operation.” A perusal of the impugned order shows that only the first prayer has been dealt with and there is no consideration of the second prayer. The first prayer is dealt with by recording an undertaking given by the learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of the State Government that the construction work will not be proceeded with till the Environmental Clearance and Consent for Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Establishment are obtained.

Date: 2024.01.08 18:28:39 IST

However, the Tribunal has completely Reason: overlooked the second prayer.

1  While we maintain the impugned order as far as prayer ‘A’ in the Original Application is concerned, we remit the Original Application filed by the appellant to the Tribunal for dealing with prayer ‘B’ which we have quoted above.

The Tribunal will decide the Original Application limited to prayer ‘B’ as expeditiously as possible.

All questions on merits are left open to be decided by the Tribunal.

The Appeal is partly allowed on the above terms.

..........................J. (ABHAY S.OKA) ..........................J. (UJJAL BHUYAN) NEW DELHI;

JANUARY 05, 2024.

                                     2
ITEM NO.58               COURT NO.7                  SECTION XVII

               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

CIVIL APPEAL Diary No(s). 23282/2023 V. RAMASUBBU APPELLANT(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) (IA No.131563/2023-STAY APPLICATION and IA No.131561/2023- CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL and IA No.131562/2023- CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS) Date : 05-01-2024 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN For Appellant(s) Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR Ms. Sanjana Grace Thomas, Adv. Ms. Ayushma Awasthi, Adv. Ms. Pariksha, Adv.

Ms. Tara Kurien, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Ms. Shivika Mehra, Adv.

Ms. Sthavi Asthana, Adv. Mr. Pratham Sagar, Adv.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. B.L.N. Shivani, Adv.

Ms. Purnima Krishna, AOR Mr. M.F. Philip, Adv.

Mr. Karamveer Singh Yadav, Adv. Ms. Tanisha Bachhuka, Adv.

Mr. D. Kumanan, AOR Mr. Sheikh F. Kalia, Adv. Mr. Veshal Tyagi, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned.

The Appeal is partly allowed in terms of the signed order.

 Pending application stands disposed of accordingly.

(ASHISH KONDLE)                                 (AVGV RAMU)
COURT MASTER (SH)                             COURT MASTER (NSH)

[THE SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON THE FILE] 4