Madhya Pradesh High Court
Alok Pratap Singh vs The Union Of India & Ors on 26 October, 2010
1
W.P.No.2802/04
Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others
26.10.2010
Shri Naman Nagrath with Shri K.N.Fakhruddin, learned
Counsel for petitioner.
Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
Shri R.D.Jain, learned Advocate General with P.K.Kaurav, Dy.AG for respondent No.2/State of M.P. Shri V.S.Shroti, learned Sr.Advocate with Shri Ashish Shroti, Counsel for respondent No.3.
Shri Harish Salve, Shri Ravindra Shrivastava, Shri Kishore Shrivastava, learned Sr.Advocates with Ms.Shiraj Patodia, Ms.Anusuiya Sadhu, Shri Kunal Thakre and Shri Ankur Shrivastava, Counsel for respondent No.4.
Shri Ajay Gupta and Shri Rajeev Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No.6..
Shri Sandeep Singh, learned counsel for Central Pollution Control Board.
Shri Avninder Singh and Harpreet Ruprah, learned counsel for intervener.
Shri R.P.Agrawal, learned Sr.Advocate with Shri Rahul Chitnis and Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Counsel for intervener (Agriculural and Rural Development) Shri Manoj Sharma, learned Counsel for intervener (Centre for Environmental and Agrochemicals.
Shri Akshay Dharmadhikari and Shreyas Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel for intervener Gujrat State Pollution Control Board.
I.A.No.11389/10, an application for review of directions contained in the Order dated 21.7.2010 The Respondent No.1-Union of India by this application is seeking following reliefs:
"(i) to direct the name of the Committee to remain as 'Oversight Committee' as decided by the Cabinet instead of 'Task Force (Oversight) Committee' as re-designated by this Hon'ble Court.2 W.P.No.2802/04
Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others 26.10.2010
(ii) to direct that the Ministry of Environment and Forests may file the requisite compliance reports before this Hon'ble Court instead of the Task Force (Oversight) Committee, if so desired.
(iii) to direct that the compliance reports to be submitted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, if so desired, may be in relation to para 37 to 43 of the minutes of the meeting of the Group of Ministers, covering environmental remediation related matters only."
Arguments on this application are heard. Before deciding this application, it would be appropriate, if relevant part of order dated 21.7.2010 is referred, which reads as under:-
"An affidavit has been filed by Bandana Banerjee, Under Secretary in the Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals, Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers. Along with the affidavit several documents have been placed on record. Prayer has also been made to change the constitution of Task Force Committee appointed by this Court vide order Dt.30.3.2005 in view of the decision taken by the Govt. of India with respect to constitution of the Oversight Committee. A time bound programme has also been filed with respect to various steps to be taken pursuant to the decision taken by the Union Cabinet. It has also been submitted that expenditure of Rs.310 crores is to be incurred by the Government of India for removal of the toxic wastes etc. in the course of remedial measure. Prayer has been made to direct DOW Chemicals respondent No.4 and respondents No.5 and 6 also to deposit the aforesaid amount by way of interim measure. As only part removal of toxic waste has been made so far and thereafter further study is being conducted as to its ill effect in the area of the disposal. It is submitted by Shri V.K. Tankha, learned Addl. Solicitor General appearing on behalf of Union of India that a committee has been constituted with the following persons though previously Task Force Committee was constituted by this Court vide order dt.30.3.2005 to strengthen the aforesaid committee considering the utmost importance and requirement of the job and other important functionaries have been added by the Government of India, following is the proposed composition of the Oversight Committee :
1- Minister of State (I/C) Environment Chairman & Forest, GOI 3 W.P.No.2802/04 Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others 26.10.2010 2- Minister- In-charge, Deptt. Of Bhopal Co-Chairman Gas Tragedy Relief and Rehabilitation, GoMP 3- Minister for Environment, GoMP Co-Chairman 4- Secretary, Deptt. Of Bhopal Gas Tragedy Relief & Rehabilitation, GoMP 5- Commissioner, Bhopal 6- Principal Secretary (Finance), GoMP 7- Secretary, MoE&F 8- Secretary, Chemicals & Petrochemicals, GOI 9- Secretary, Deptt. Of Science & Technology 10- AS&FA, MoE&F 11- Chairman, CPCB 12- Chairman MPCB 13- Director, IICT, Hyderabad 14- Director, NEERI, Nagpur 15- Director, NGRI, Hyderabad 16- Joint Secretary (Hazardous Convenor Substances Mgmt Divn), MoE&F With the consent of the learned Counsel, it is ordered that let the Oversight Committee be named as Task Force Committee, by and large all the important functionaries who were included in the Task Force Committee are there in the committee proposed by the Union of India, so let it continue the function as ordered by this Court and the Apex Court and to comply with the orders passed time to time. There is no objection raised by any of the counsel appearing on behalf of the parties at bar with respect to aforesaid committee being treated as reconstituted Task Force Committee."
From the perusal of the aforesaid, it is apparent that it was an order with the consent of the parties. Merely nomen-clature which was earlier assigned by the Central Government as 'Oversight Committee' has now been re-named as 'Task Force Committee' will 4 W.P.No.2802/04 Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others 26.10.2010 not affect the working of the said Committee. As the order was passed with the consent of the parties, we do not find any reason to recall or review aforesaid order. First prayer in this application is rejected.
The second prayer in the application is in respect of issuance of the direction to the Ministry of Environment and Forest to file requisite compliance report before this Court instead of Task Force (Oversight) Committee. We are unable to understand the contention of the Union of India. By this application, the Union of India is seeking direction against its own ministries which are not at all required. Aforesaid both ministries are under the Union of India and in the opinion of this Court, no such directions are required to be issued by this Court to the said ministries of Union of India as it itself can give effect to its decision through the ministry. Aforesaid part of the application is also rejected.
So far as third prayer in the application is concerned, it is in respect of correction of following part of the order dated 21.7.2010:-
"Let the report as envisaged in para 42 of the aforesaid minutes be submitted to this Court. The Task Force Committee (Oversight Committee) is also directed to submit a report to ensure that a report is submitted to this Court with respect to ill effects on the human and the environmental of the area and various aspects mentioned from para 29 to 43 of the minutes."
Learned counsel for respondent No.1 Union of India submitted that a part of order relating to implementation of paras 29 to 36 of the minutes be deleted from the directions.
For ready reference, paras 29 to 36 of the minutes are quoted which read as under:-
29. It was informed that pursuant to various orders issued by the Supreme Court, the Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre (BMHRC) was established in July 2000.
The hospital has 8 Mini Units, Besides, there are 6 Hospitals, 5 W.P.No.2802/04 Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others 26.10.2010 9 Day Care Centres, 3 Unani, 3 Homeopathy and 3 Ayurveda Dispensaries run by the State Government for the gas- affected people.
30 There is an Advisory Committee appointed by the Supreme Court which is chaired by DG, ICMR. The Advisory Committee has not met for nearly two years. There is also a Monitoring Committee appointed by the Supreme Court. The chair of the Monitoring Committee has been vacant since 2008.
31. The GoM noted that BMHRC is run by Bhopal Memorial Hospital Trust (BMHT). There is a Board of Trustees chaired by Mr.Justice A.M.Ahmadi. There is also a Governing Body chaired by Mr.Justice Ahmadi. Both bodies meet infrequently, no more than twice a year.
32. BMHT has a corpus which has grown to Rs.436 crore as on 31.3.2009. Nevertheless, financial projections made for five years beginning 2010-11 show that there will be a deficit every years and the deficit will rise every year. Salaries in BMTH are lower than salaries paid by Government of Madhya Pradesh in its hospitals. Many posts are vacant. Some departments are non functional. On 26.10.2009, BMHT filed an application before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal no.3187-3188 of 1988, inter alia praying that the Central Government may be directed to take over the hospital after winding up the Trust.
33. ICMR established a research centre in Bhopal in 1984. It conducted epidemiological research and clinical studies. Some volumes of research papers were published in 1987 and 1994. ICMR stopped its research work on 31.12.1994. The research centre was handed over to the Government of Madhya Pradesh and is now run as a Centre for Rehabilitation Studies (CRS). It has been carrying on some long term epidemiological studies.
34. In 2008, the GoM decided that ICMR will resume its research activities. From January 2009, ICMR has invited proposals to study genetic disorders, low birth weight, growth disorders, congenital malformations, etc. Despite poor response and after great difficulty, ICMR has identified two proposals for research and studies costing Rs.80 lakh and Rs.60 lakh respectively.
35. It is generally agreed that research and rehabilitation work is necessary in the following areas;
(i) Respiratory diseases
(ii) Eye-related diseases
(iii) Cancer
(iv) Total Renal Failure 6 W.P.No.2802/04 Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others 26.10.2010
(v) Genetic disorders
(vi) Congenital disorders
(vii) Women-related medical issues
(viii) Second-generation children related medical issues
36. After reviewing the state of affairs relating to health and health-related matters and finding that the picture is very disappointing, GOM recommends the following:-
(i) The GOI may approach the Supreme Court to allow take over of the BMHRC by the Government of India through the Department of Bio-Technology and the Department of Atomic Energy. The hospital can then be strengthened, upgraded and run as a super-speciality and research hospital. The State Government has no objection to this.
(ii) All other hospitals may continue to be managed and run by the Government of Madhya Pradesh.
(iii) ICMR should establish a full-fledged Research Centre in Bhopal. It will be its 31st centre. It must be on par with the existing 30 centres. The Research Centre should be set up and commissioned within 90 days of Government's decision. The staff of the existing Centre for Rehabilitation Studies, to the extent they are qualified, should be taken over by ICMR.
(iv) An Empowered Committee under the chairmanship of Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare and including other officers of the Ministries/Departments concerned may be set up to approve all proposals, including purchases and appointments, relating to the proposed ICMR Research Centre to facilitate setting up of the Centre within 90 days. To the extent necessary GFRs and RRs may be suspended or relaxed as a one-time exceptional measure to enable the commissioning of ICMR Research Centre. The Committee will be notified by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
(v) ICMR should immeidately identify suitable scientists and doctors, through fresh appointments, deputation etc., and appoint them to the new Research Centre to conduct epidemiological studies and clinical research in areas identified by ICMR including areas noted in paragraph 35 above. ICMR may also involve the World Health Organisation and other Indian/international experts, as may be advised, to collaborate in the research activities."7 W.P.No.2802/04
Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others 26.10.2010 Aforesaid issues are health related issues. This Court while dealing with the PIL is also concerned with the health and health related issues in the affected areas. Aforesaid contention of the respondent No.1 Union of India for deletion of paras 29 to 36 is also misconceived and cannot be accepted. In the result, I.A.No.11389/10 is found without merits and is hereby rejected.
It is submitted by the petitioner that the Union of India has also filed an application on 17.8.2010 for placing two reports on record. The State of M.P. has filed a preliminary reply today. Respondents No.4 and 5 has also filed reply in the last week. So some time may be allowed to prepare the case.
At this stage, Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel submitted that a detailed reply on behalf of Union of India has not been filed, so some time be allowed to the Union of India to file parawise reply to the petition.
Shri R.D.Jain, learned Advocate General assisted by Shri P.K.Kaurav, Dy.A.G. submitted that the State Government has filed reply and no further reply is required on behalf of the State Government.
Though the case is listed for final hearing, but because of the aforesaid, matter cannot be heard finally. We also think that some interim date may be fixed so that the parties may exchange the pleadings and thereafter, the Union of India can prepare 7 sets of paper books as directed by this Court on 17.8.2010, so that matter may be heard finally.
In view of aforesaid, we direct thus:-
(1) All the parties who are willing to file pleadings may do so within a period of three weeks from today. It is made clear that no further opportunity in this regard shall be allowed to any of the parties, as the matter is old one.8 W.P.No.2802/04
Alok Pratap Singh Union of India & others 26.10.2010 (2) After filing of the pleadings, Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for Union of India shall take steps for preparation of the paper books and the private paper books duly numbered and indexed shall be filed within further period of one week thereafter. (3) We also direct that the Task Force Committee, as constituted by order dated 21.7.2010 in this petition, shall submit its report on or before 7.12.2010.
Be listed for fixing a date for final hearing on 7.12.2010.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Sushma Shrivastava)
C. Judge Judge