Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Rohit Choudhury vs Numaligarh Refinery Ltd on 23 November, 2022

Author: Achintya Malla Bujor Barua

Bench: Achintya Malla Bujor Barua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010165072019




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                        Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2451/2019

         ROHIT CHOUDHURY
         S/O SHRI DEBI PRASAD AGARWAL, VILL. GORMUR, P.O. LOKUJAN,
         BOKAKHAT 785612, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.



         VERSUS

         NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD.
         THROUGH ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (HR) IN CHARGE, GOLAGHAT,
         DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.

         2:THE UNION OF INDIA
         THROUGH THE SECY.
          MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE
          PARYAVARAN BHAWAN
          CGO COMPLEX
          LODHI ROAD
          NEW DELHI 110003

         3:THE STATE OF ASSAM
         THORUGH ITS CHIEF SECY.
         ASSAM SACHIALAYA COMPLEX
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI 781006

         4:DEPTT. OF FOREST
          GOVT. OF ASSAM
         THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND HEAD
         OF FOREST FORCE
         ARANYA BHAWAN
          PANJABARI
          GUWAHATI 781037
                                                                       Page No.# 2/4

            5:DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER (T)
             GOLAGHAT DIVISION
             JONAKI NAGAR
             DIST. GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM.

            6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
             GOLAGHAT
             DIST. GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM.

            7:THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL)
             BOKAKHAT
             DIST. GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM.

            8:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
             GOLAGHAT
             DIST. GOLAGHAT
            ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR H RAHMAN

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM




                                 BEFORE
            HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

                                      O R D E R

23.11.2022 Mr. J Roy, learned senior counsel for the authorities in the NRL states that although no activities would take place in the northern side of the land in question, but the expert committee had allowed certain developmental activities in the southern portion of the pipeline. In furtherance thereof, the NRL authorities are required to place certain equipments on some area on the southern side of the pipeline. It is stated that the equipments will be mainly heavy equipments to be used for the project purpose. It is also stated that the Page No.# 3/4 area over which the equipments would be placed would be covered by a solar fencing but that is likely to take about three months. But at the same time, the equipments are required to be placed with some urgency.

It is also stated and agreed by the learned counsel for the parties i.e. Mr. BJ Talukdar, learned senior counsel for the Revenue Department, Mr. B Choudhury, learned counsel for the Forest Department and Mr. H Rahman, learned senior counsel for the respondent No. 8 that such equipments can be allowed to be placed.

The NRL authorities accordingly may place the equipments as asked for. But in doing so, the NRL authorities will take due care and ensure that placing of such equipments do not cause any harm or any injury to the elephants that may be moving around in that place. We further clarify that in the guise of placing certain equipments, no obnoxious substance shall be placed which may cause harm to the elephants which may also include materials that are of chemical in nature.

The NRL authorities may also proceed with any such tender process for the purpose of introducing the solar fencing as recommended by the expert committee. The NRL authorities are also required to do all such needful as they have agreed upon and as recommended by the expert committee. In doing so, the NRL authorities shall use their good conscience to the extent that harm or any injuries are not caused to the elephants.

Mr. K Gogoi, learned counsel for the NTRO also makes a statement that the said organization is also doing the needful to cooperate with the recommendations of the expert committee.

As the authorities are making statements that they are cooperating with the Page No.# 4/4 recommendation of the expert committee, the needful be done as recommended by the committee and the matter be listed after two months for further consideration.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant