Supreme Court - Daily Orders
M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India on 4 October, 2017
Bench: Madan B. Lokur, S. Abdul Nazeer, Deepak Gupta
1
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.3 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. NOS. 250-251/2005 in Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).13029/1985
M.C. MEHTA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR STAY)
WITH I.A.NO. 266/2005 (FOR DIRECTIONS)
I.A. NO. 346/2013 (FOR DIRECTIONS)
I.A.NO. 73432/2017 (FOR INTERIM STAY AND DIRECTIONS)
Date : 04-10-2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Mr. Harish N. Salve, Sr. Adv.(A.C.)(NP)
Ms. Aparajita Singh, Adv. (A.C.)
Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Adv. (A.C.)
Mr. Siddhartha Chowdhury, Adv. (A.C.)(NP)
For Petitioner(s) Petitioner-in-person
For Respondent(s)
Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Gourab Banerji, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Saurav Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Satyawan Shekhawat, Adv.
Mr. Vivekananda Bominneni, Adv.
Mr. Sahil Tagotra, Adv.
Mr. Bimal Roy Jad, AOR
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
SANJAY KUMAR
Date: 2017.10.06 Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.
11:16:01 IST
Reason:
Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Neelima Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. K.V. Mohan, AOR
Mr. Shikhar Khare, Adv.
2
Mr. Abhishek Choudhary, AOR
Mr. Anil Grover, AAG
Mr. Satish Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Nishal Viz., Adv.
Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kr. Visen, AOR
Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Vibhu Shanker Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur, Adv.
Mr. Kuldeep Chauhan, Adv.
Ms. Anil Katiyar, Adv.
Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Adv.
Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv.
Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR
Mr. Vijay Panjwani, AOR
Mr. R.D. Upadhyay, AOR
Mr. Ajit Pudussery, AOR
Mr. Prashant Bezboruah, Adv.
Mr. Munawar Naseem, AOR
Mr. Rakesh Dewan, Adv.
Ms. Bina Gupta, AOR
Mr. Samir Ali Khan, Adv.
Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Cause title of the case should be reflected as:
M.C. Mehta In Re: Allocation of Natural Gas to M/s. Indraprastha Gas Limited. The above case relates to I.A. Nos.250-251 of 2005, 266 of 2005, 346 of 2013 and 73432 of 2017.
The basic objection of learned counsel appearing on behalf of M/s. Indraprastha Gas Limited relates to the 3 order dated 4th April, 2008 passed in the aforesaid case. It appears that an interim measure was ordered by this Court where out of 0.7 MMSCMD per day of natural gas being supplied to M/s. Indraprastha Gas Limited by the Union of India, 0.25 MMSCMD was required to be supplied to M/s. Haryana City Gas Distribution Limited. By an order dated 16th August, 2017, we had made it clear that M/s. Haryana City Gas Distribution Limited may receive 0.25 MMSCMD of natural gas from M/s. Indraprastha Gas Limited in terms of the order dated 4 th April, 2008 only for vehicles in relation to the four CNG Stations as mentioned in paragraph 3 of the application. This is objected to by learned counsel for M/s. Indraprastha Gas Limited who says that the interim measure arrived at by this Court on 4th April, 2008 now needs to be recalled.
This is, of course, opposed by learned counsel for M/s. Haryana City Gas Distribution Limited. For the disposal of these applications, list them on 16th November, 2017.
Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of M/s. Haryana City Gas Distribution Limited says that the natural gas is being utilized only for transport sector in Faridabad and Gurugram.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (KAILASH CHANDER)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER