Bombay High Court
Sanjay Shankar Kokate vs Union Of India Through Secretary And 20 ... on 1 February, 2019
Bench: Naresh H. Patil, N. M. Jamdar
1/6
9-pill-41-18.doc
pdp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION LODGING NO. 41OF 2018
Sanjay Shankar Kokate .. Petitioner
Vs.
Union of India and 20 ors. .. Respondents
Ms. Shaista Pathan I/by Y & A Legal for petitioner.
Mr. Anil C. Singh, Additional Solicitor General a/w Mr. Neel
Helekar and Mr. Ashutosh Misra for respondent nos.1, 3, 4,5,7, 11
to 17 and 21.
Ms. Geeta Shastri, Addl. G.P. for respondent nos.2,6,8,9 & 10.
CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL, CJ. &
N. M. JAMDAR, J.
FEBRUARY 01, 2019.
P.C.
1. The petitioner prays for following reliefs :
(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a show cause notice to Respondent Nos.3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 as to why no investigation was initiated or action was taken against Respondent Nos.18, 19 and 20 for illegal dumping of debris and land-filling.
(b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus and/or any other writ or direction ::: Uploaded on - 12/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 15/03/2019 10:25:16 ::: 2/6 9-pill-41-18.doc to Respondent Nos.2 to 10 to investigate the said matter involving Respondent Nos.11 to 21 and also to take action against the Respondent Nos.11 to 21 in respect of the several illegalities committed by them in respect of the illegal and unauthorized filling of land and reclamation of the sea, thereby causing irreversible damage to the environment.
(c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass appropriate Writ, Order or Direction inter alia stopping the illegal and unauthorized filling of land and reclamation of sea.
(d) That this Hon'ble Court direct the Officials of Respondent Nos.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 to restore the said place where illegal dumping of debris was carried out to its original state.
(e) That this Hon'ble Court direct Respondent No.9 to carry out further and proper investigation in FIR No. 8/16 lodged on 13th May, 2016.
(f) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the Petition all development and construction activities within 50 metres on all sides of all mangroves within and around the Naval area in Colaba be stayed and status quo be maintained.
(g) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to give appropriate directions in the matter to Respondent Nos.1 to 6 herein inter alia setting ::: Uploaded on - 12/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 15/03/2019 10:25:16 ::: 3/6 9-pill-41-18.doc up a specialized investigating agency to enquire into and expose the huge scam being perpetrated in the sensitive Naval Area.
(h) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to set up a specialized investigating agency to investigate into the acts of Respondent No.21 since the time of his appointment.
2. The petitioner claims to be a social worker and on his coming to know that unauthorizedly a contractor had dumped some debris on foreshore land behind area of INS Kunjali which is adjacent to C.T.S. No.3. The Collector, Mumbai City by notice dated 10/05/2016 directed the Commanding Officer to inform name of the contractor. Mr. Anil Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General submits that the name of the contractor has been informed to the Collector, Mumbai City.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after receiving information through RTI and after collecting necessary material, petitioner approached this court. The learned counsel further submitted that the land filling illegally carried out must be taken note of and necessary action shall be taken against the persons involved.
::: Uploaded on - 12/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 15/03/2019 10:25:16 ::: 4/69-pill-41-18.doc
4. Commodore JPS Sabit, working as Commanding Officer of INS Kunjali, filed affidavit-in-reply on behalf of respondent no.7 on 22/11/2018. In paras 8 and 9, the deponent states as under :-
"8. I say that in the month of January 2016, the GE(NW) Kunali issued a work order in favour of one of the contractors M/s. Madhu Enterprises (the Respondent No.19 herein) for repair / resurfacing of roads and repairs to hard standing, footpath compound walls, fencing rolling shutters gates under AGE B/R-II under GE (NW), Kunjali. I further say that entire process was transparent and after following the regular procedure, the said contract was given to the Respondent No.19. I crave leave of his Honourable High Court to refer to and rely upon the said work order and all other relevant documents as and when filed. I further say that the unit per se has no role in the award and execution of contracts executed by MES department, the Respondent No.14 herein. I further say that since the place of work as mentioned in the contract falls within the establishment, based on the same, the contractor requested for gate pass in respect of its employees so that unhindered passage of men and material could be undertaken. I crave leave of this Honourable High Court to refer to and rely upon the said correspondence as and when filed. It is pertinent to mention here that the gate pass is a mandatory requirement for the personnel to enter the area, however the same does not put any liability on the unit to ensure the execution of the work by the ::: Uploaded on - 12/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 15/03/2019 10:25:16 ::: 5/6 9-pill-41-18.doc contractor and his employees. I say that the work of the above contractor is being a highly professional task, can only be undertaken by the concerned GE, whose office is located about 3 kilometres away from this establishment.
9. I say that taking advantage of this fact and situation, the said contractor came inside INS Kunjali in the month of May 16 and emptied some debris in the centre of the barren land without any permission and notice to the Defence officials. I further say that at no stage was the debris unloaded anywhere near the mangroves and no damages of whatsoever nature was caused to the mangroves. I say that the said dumping was duly noted by the then District Collector and was a cause of concern for the establishment also. I crave leave of this Honourable High Court to refer to and reply upon the said complaints and correspondence as and when filed. I further say that complete assessment of the situation was undertaken and all out efforts were made to ensure that it was not repeated & to preserve the environment in its natural form. Also, all co- operations were extended to the civil police in the investigation of the case. I say that no dumping was done to damage the mangroves as alleged or otherwise and all the allegations of the Respondents are false and baseless."
5. We have heard the learned Additional Solicitor General and the learned AGP. Perused the record placed before us. It is informed by the learned AGP that FIR is lodged against the drivers of the trucks. It is for the Collector, Mumbai City to ::: Uploaded on - 12/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 15/03/2019 10:25:16 ::: 6/6 9-pill-41-18.doc take appropriate steps in accordance with law, consequent to the issuance of notice, on its own merits.
6. In view of the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent no.7 and the submissions advanced, the Public Interest Petition stands disposed of.
N. M. JAMDAR, J. CHIEF JUSTICE
::: Uploaded on - 12/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 15/03/2019 10:25:16 :::