Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

Kheti Vikas Seva Trust & vs State Of Gujarat & 4....Opponent(S) on 8 December, 2014

Author: R.P.Dholaria

Bench: Vijay Manohar Sahai, R.P.Dholaria

         C/WPPIL/199/2014                                   JUDGMENT




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 199 of 2014



FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:



HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR
SAHAI


and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

================================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see
      the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
      judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as
      to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any
      order made thereunder ?

5     Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?

================================================================
                 KHETI VIKAS SEVA TRUST & 1....Applicant(s)
                                 Versus
                   STATE OF GUJARAT & 4....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SIRAJ R GORI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
MR PARTH BHATT, AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MR BIREN A VAISHNAV, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 2
MR DEVANG VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 3
MR RS SANJANWALA, SR.ADVOCATE WITH MR SANDIP SINGHI FOR
SINGHI & CO, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 4-5


                                  Page 1 of 6
        C/WPPIL/199/2014                                JUDGMENT



================================================================

        CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.
               VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
               and
               HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

                          Date : 08/12/2014


                          ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA)

1. This petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation has been filed by the petitioners claiming the following reliefs.

"12.A That the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to take effective steps against the respondent companies who has failed to comply with the conditional environmental clearance.

B. That this this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to revoke the conditional environmental clearance as evidently the Respondent No.5 company has failed to comply with the conditional environmental clearance.

C. That during the pendency of the present petition this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate Page 2 of 6 C/WPPIL/199/2014 JUDGMENT direction directing the respondent no.5 company not to discharge waste water in the outfall channel without complying with the conditions stipulated in the environmental clearance issued by the MoEF.

D. That during the pendency of the present petition this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate direction to the respondent authorities as well as the respondent companies for effective implementation of the conditions stipulated in the environmental clearnace accorded by the MoEF in the year 2010 which contemplates that the respondent shall create an endowment of Fishermen Welfare Fund so that their quality of life improves and creation of facilities for fish landing platforms/fishing harbour/cold storage and also to provide relief in case of emergency situations such as missing fishermen on duty due to rough seas, tropical cyclones and storms etc. E. xxx xxx xxx"

2. We have heard Mr.Siraj Gori, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Parth Bhatt, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1, Mr.Biren Vaishnav, learned counsel for respondent No.2, Mr.Devang Vyas, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for respondent No.3, Mr.R.S.Sanjanwala, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.Sandip Singhi for respondent Nos.4 and 5.

C/WPPIL/199/2014 JUDGMENT

3. During the course of hearing, Mr.Gori, learned counsel for the petitioners has taken us through various environmental clearance certificates which came to be issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India vide various orders passed since 2007 in favour of two different respondent companies. We have also been taken to various conditions which came to be imposed as part of environmental clearance certificates alleged to have been breached by the respondent companies. On taking through the aforesaid alleged breach of special and general conditions of the environmental clearance certificates, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks revocation of conditional environmental clearance and proper implementation and monitoring of the same.

4. On going through the aforesaid environmental clearance certificates, it clearly reveals that the aforesaid specific and general conditions have been imposed for compliance thereof on the part of the respondent companies and in case of any breach thereof, it was open to the aggrieved person to file the complaint before the Ministry of Environmental and Forest for its due compliance thereof and if the person aggrieved is not satisfied with the action or reasons given by the Ministry of Environmental Page 4 of 6 C/WPPIL/199/2014 JUDGMENT and Forest, then further remedy is provided under the earlier provisions of section 11 of the National Environment Appellate Act 1997 and after its repeal, under section 16(h) of the National Green Tribunal Act 2010.

5. Indisputably, on going through the material available on record, the petitioners have neither approached the Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi nor the Green Tribunal for ventilating their grievance as regards the alleged breach of special as well as general conditions by the respondent companies.

6. As narrated above, efficacious remedy is provided under the provisions of the aforesaid Act and Special Tribunal is also constituted under the provisions of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 where the petitioners can point out their grievance by leading the evidence and after examining the rival claims along with the documentary evidence if adduced by either party, the concerned authority or the Tribunal can pass appropriate order. In this view of the matter, the present appeal in the nature of Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable. Therefore, the petition is dismissed. Notice is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs.

C/WPPIL/199/2014 JUDGMENT

7. We, however, make it clear that as the petitioners have efficacious remedy under the provisions of the aforesaid Act as well as before the Ministry of Environment and Forest, we have not entered into the merits of the case. The petitioners shall be at liberty to avail remedy in accordance with law.

(V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) pathan Page 6 of 6