Bombay High Court
The Commissioner And Ors vs The Union Of India And Ors on 7 December, 2023
Author: G. S. Kulkarni
Bench: G. S. Kulkarni
1-wp-10311-2013.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10311 OF 2013
Virendra Baburao Patil & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India, through Secretary,
Department of Atomic Energy,
New Delhi & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3989 OF 2023
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2813 OF 2011
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2223 OF 2011
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Ishwar Vasant More & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2033 OF 2009
IN
Kiran Kawre Page 1 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 :::
1-wp-10311-2013.odt
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1140 OF 2006
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
The Commissioner & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1383 OF 2005
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
The Commissioner & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2972 OF 2004
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Mini Gangaram Tambda & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2971 OF 2004
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1721 OF 2016
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Kiran Kawre Page 2 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 :::
1-wp-10311-2013.odt
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3183 OF 2019
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 5663 OF 2004
Shri. Ram Naik ...Petitioners
Versus
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Janata Samiti,
Through Office Bearers and Representatives & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 5081 OF 2012
Tarapur Anushakti Prakalp Pidit Shetkari
Seva Sanstha, Popharan & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6158 OF 2007
Kishore Namdeo More & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 8447 OF 2012
Sudha Sitaram Patil ...Petitioner
Versus
Union of India, through Secretary
Department of Atomic Enerty & Ors. ...Respondents
__________
Mr. Mihir Deshai, Senior Advocate a/w Mr Chetan Mali, i/b. Ms.
Sanskruti Yagnik for Petitioners in WP/10311 of 2013.
Mr Rajiv Patil, Senior Advocate a/w Mr Sachin Punde a/w Mr. Tanmay
Vispute a/w Ms. Pooja Pall for Petitioner in WP No. 5663/2004.
Mr. S. G. Deshmukh i./b. Ms. Priya Patil for Applicant in IA/3989/2023
Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar a/w Ms. Lopa Munim with Mr. Rajesh Kothari
with Mr. Sagar Deb with Ankita Gadkari i./b. M/s. Rajesh Kothari & Co.
For Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in WP/10311/2023 & WP5663/2004 a/w
Kiran Kawre Page 3 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 :::
1-wp-10311-2013.odt
I.A./3989/2023 & WP/6158/2007 & 8447/2012 and for Respondent
Nos. 3 & 4 in WP/5081/2012.
Mr. Dashrath A. Dube i/b, M C Proshty for Respondent-Union of India in
WP/5663/2004 and WP/5081/2012.
Dr. Birendra Saraf, AG a/w P.J. Gavhane, AGP a/w Mr. Jay Shanklecha, for
State.
Mr. Ram Naik - Intervenor in prson.
Mr. Samir A. Vaidya a/w Mr. Prathamesh D. Sarang a/w Mr. Kaivalya
M.Ram, for Petitioner in WP/6158/2007.
Mr. Ajit R. Pitale, for added Respondent in C.A./1721/2016.
Tejas Chavan, D.R.O. Palghar present in Court.
__________
CORAM : G. S. KULKARNI &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : DECEMBER 7, 2023. P.C.:
1. Today the petitions are listed before us on the backdrop of earlier orders passed on these proceedings.
2. We have heard Dr. Saraf, learned Advocate General, who has placed on record a compilation of documents setting out the list of issues. About 18 issues are stated to be unresolved. Out of these issues, from what has been urged on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Ram Naik who appears in person, the issues of vital concern are in regard to the rehabilitation of Project Affected Persons (Issue No.3). In this regard as submitted by Dr. Saraf, there are 243 plots which are yet to be allotted to the project Kiran Kawre Page 4 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023 ::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 ::: 1-wp-10311-2013.odt affected persons. It appears that there are persons more in number who claim to be entitled to allotment of these plots.
3. The other issue which Mr. Naik has emphasized, is the issue of rehabilitation of 438 Fisherman families. In this regard the stand of the State Government is to the effect that such demand was earlier raised through Mr. Ram Naik for grant of 1 Hector of farm land and which was not accepted by the State Government as communicated vide its letter dated 23 January 2013.
4. Thus, there are assertions on the part of the petitioners who claim to be the Project Affected Persons interalia for allotment of land, as also there is a demand for allotment of land for the Fisherman families. The State Government is confronted with such claims being made, to be decided within the permissible parameters. Some decisions are already taken in respect of the persons who, according to the State Government, were not eligible.
5. We also have before us the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL) (the project proponent) who is represented by Mr. Khandeparkar. On behalf of the NPCIL, it is submitted that any decision on rehabilitation being taken would interalia affect the financial commitments, which were made by the NPCIL, which, according to the NPCIL, had stood crystallized. Mr. Khandeparkar, however, would Kiran Kawre Page 5 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023 ::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 ::: 1-wp-10311-2013.odt submit that the NPCIL is not averse to the legitimate claims being gone into and that the NPCIL would abide by its assurances and obligations which were accepted by it in respect of the Project in question namely the Tarapur Atomic Power Project.
6. It appears to be not in dispute that the issues on rehabilitation of such project affected persons are pending consideration of this Court for quite sometime. After these petitions were assigned to this Bench, we had urgently taken up the proceedings, and on the earlier occasions we had also extensively heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Naik.
7. We find from the record that the State Government vide Government Resolution dated 20 January 2020 has constituted a Committee to delve on the issues of rehabilitation of the PAP's, with the following object:
"Regarding setting up Grievances Redressal Committee under the chairmanship of the Collector, on district level for resolving the complaints made in respect of the alternative lands of the eligible Project Affected Persons, plots in Gaothan area rehabilitated for residential purpose, as per the Rehabilitation Act, 1976, 1986, 1199"
8. Such Committee is chaired by the District Collector, Additional Collector (Rehabilitation) as member, the Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation) as the Secretary of the Committee and an Executive Engineer for the project. The Chairperson of such committee was Kiran Kawre Page 6 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023 ::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 ::: 1-wp-10311-2013.odt empowered to nominate additional members either an officer or an employee of the State Government. We are told that the Committee has held meetings. This has also been confirmed before us on behalf of the petitioners.
9. However, considering the complexion of the issues as urged before us, we are of the opinion that the said committee as constituted by the State Government vide Government Resolution dated 20 January 2020, needs to be modified and a comprehensive Committee needs to be constituted, which would include representatives of the NPCIL, as also of the Government of India in Department of Atomic Energy and a Higher Officer from the State Government, so that each of the issues which are urged before us, and which are being agitated for quite sometime, can be effectively gone into by such Committee, so as to make an endeavor to redress the same.
10. We, accordingly, order that the following Committee be constituted under the Chairmanship of the Divisional Commissioner (Konkan Division):-
i. Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division (Chairperson), ii. Deputy Secretary, Government of India, Department of Atomic Energy, Kiran Kawre Page 7 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 :::
1-wp-10311-2013.odt
iii. Representative of a Nuclear Power Corporation of
India,
iv. Collector, District Palghar,
v. Additional Collector (Rehabilitation), District Palghar,
vi. Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation), (Secretary of the
Committee),
vii. Executive Engineer concerned with the Project,
viii. One representative from each of the two villages Akkarpatti
and Pokharan, who shall be the Invitees of the Committee.
11. Mr. Dashrath Dube Advocate for Union of India through the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice at Mumbai, to inform the Secretary, Department of Atomic Energy, of the constitution of such committee, for nomination of the Deputy Secretary, to be made on or before Monday i.e. 11 December 2023. Also the nominee on behalf of the NPCIL be communicated to the Chairperson of the Committee by such date.
12. The Project Affected Persons from the two villages (Pokharan and Akkarpatti) who are before us through the present petitioners, shall nominate their respective representatives who shall represent them before the Committee.
13. The NPCIL, through its appropriate officer as also the State Government and the other Stake holders are entitled to appear before the Committee through its representatives, and place their respective version before the Committee.
Kiran Kawre Page 8 of 9
-------------------------
December 7, 2023 ::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 ::: 1-wp-10311-2013.odt
14. We direct that the Committee so constituted shall hold its first meeting with notice to all the stakeholders within a period of two weeks from today, and thereafter set out the time schedule for hearing the Project Affected Persons on all the issues in batches.
15. We keep open all contentions of all the stakeholders to be considered by the Committee and an appropriate decision to be taken on the cases placed before it. Let the Committee prepare its report and place the same on record of the present proceedings on or before the returnable date.
16. Stand over to 25 January 2024. To be listed under the caption "For Directions".
[JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [G. S. KULKARNI, J.] Kiran Kawre Page 9 of 9 ------------------------- December 7, 2023 ::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2023 07:50:48 :::