K.Balamurugan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 September, 2008

[Cites 18, Cited by 32]

Madras High Court

K.Balamurugan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 September, 2008

This is a public interest litigation and the petitioners seek for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents not to commit any act or omission which will interfere with the landscape of Mundiyambakkam lake in Survey No.144-1 at Mundiyambakkam village, Villupuram District spread over an extent of 16.45 hectares and consequentially protect and preserve the said lake from any development or construction activities whatsoever and thereby maintain the water body by restoring status quo ante prior to G.O.Ms.No.161, Health and Family Welfare (MCA1) Department, dated 30.08.2006.

2. The State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.161, Health and Family Welfare (MCA1) Department, dated 30.08.2006, stating that a new Medical College is to be established at Villupuram District with an intake of 100 students from the academic year 2007-2008. It is stated that the said G.O. came to be issued in furtherance of an announcement made on 22.06.2006, in the State Legislative Assembly that the Government of Tamil Nadu had planned to start a Medical College in Villupuram District.

3. At the very outset the petitioners in paragraph 5 of their affidavit filed in support of the writ petition have made an averment in no uncertain terms that they welcome the decision to start a Medical College in Villupuram District. In the same breath they have stated that for establishing the Medical College the Honble Health Minister and the Hon'ble Education Minister of the State inspected four lakes in and around Villupuram District viz., Virattikuppam lake, Mundiampakkam lake, Vikkiravaandi lake and Muthaampalayam lake and that when certain objections were raised to the attempt of the State Government in locating the Medical College, in any one of the water bodies, the Honble Minister for Education issued a statement on 10.01.2007, that no agricultural land will be selected for the construction of the Medical College. It is however alleged that subsequently it was reported in the newspapers published on 07.02.2007, that in a meeting on the development activities of Villupuram Town, the Minister for Education announced that 25 acres of land which is needed for construction of the Medical College has been selected in the Mundiyambakkam lake.

4. It is stated that there were objections for construction of Medical College in a water body by the local Member of Parliament and that there were also demonstration by others. It is also stated that subsequently representations were also made to the Chief Minister's Special Cell but still foundation stone laying ceremony was held on 19.05.2007, for the construction of the Medical College building in the Mundiyambakkam lake by the Hon'ble Minister for Local Administration which was also attended by the Hon'ble Minister for Education as well as Hon'ble Minister for Health and Family Welfare. It is stated that for holding the function in the lake, the area was leveled and filled with debris.

5. As far as the Mundiyambakkam lake is concerned, it is stated that it is spread over an area of 42 acres adjacent to the Villupuram Town and that vast extent of lands were being irrigated through the said water body, that on an earlier occasion another lake viz., Villupuram Poonthottam lake was taken over by the Government for construction of Villupuram Bus Stand and other Government Offices in an extent of 48.39 acres and there by the water body which was catering to the water needs of the people in Villupuram had been erased. It is further contended that a similar step is now being taken for construction of a Medical College in the Mundiyambakkam lake as against public interest and the decision has been taken without making any environment impact assessment by the concerned Department. It is also stated that the construction of a Medical College would deplete the water storage level in and around the area and thereby the ground water table which is already below 200 ft. would deplete further.

6. It is further contended that the present step of establishing a Medical College in the Mundiyambakkam lake is contrary to the circular of the State Government dated 26.11.2004, not to interfere with the water bodies in Poramboke lands by any one including the State Government Departments. The further submission of the petitioners is that alternate availability of vast extent of Poramboke lands alongside the stretch of National Highway from Villupuram towards Chennai was also not considered by the respondents. It is also contended that if the construction of a Medical College is permitted in the Mundiyambakkam lake, it would seriously prejudice the farmers who are solely dependent on the storage level of water to replenish the ground water table during rainy seasons and thereafter.

7. It is also alleged that the impugned order is in violation of S.O.1533 dated 14.09.2002, issued under Rule 3 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 of the the Environment and Forest Department of the Union Government. It is further contended that the action of the respondents is in violation of Articles 14 , 19 and 21 as well as 48(A) and 51(A) of the Constitution of India. It is further alleged that the action of the State is in conflict with the principles of public trust, in as much as, the State being the trustee of the natural resources and public property is expected to maintain the same. It is then contended that the construction of the Medical College in the lake would also cause serious pollution which would be in violation of the statutory provisions as well as the declaration found in the declarations made in the United Nations Conference of the Human Environment held in Stockholm in 1972 (Stockholm Convention) to which India was a party. It is based on the above said allegations, the petitioners have come forward with the above referred to prayer in the writ petition.

8. The writ petition was entertained on 07.08.2007, the respondents were put on notice and a detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 4th respondent District Collector, Villupuram which has been adopted by the respondents 1, 2 and 5. A separate counter affidavit has been filed by the 6th respondent viz., the Director of Medical Education.

9. The fourth respondent District Collector, in his counter has sated that the petitioners are all living far away from Villupuram and that they are not holding any lands in and around the lake and therefore they have no locus standi to file the writ petition. It is stated that the State Government took a policy decision in the year 2006-2007 to establish Medical Colleges in all the Districts where there is no Government Medical College and that the 6th respondent sent a proposal for starting a Medical College at Villupuram. It is in pursuance of the said proposal, the Government passed Orders in G.O.Ms.No.161, Health Department, Dated 30.08.2006, for establishment of a Medical College at Villupuram and that necessary funds have also been sanctioned for construction of the building and for purchase of the equipments etc., The Government is stated to have issued a letter dated 03.08.2006, requesting the authorities to locate 25 acres of suitable land preferably nearer to the National Highways with adequate transport facilities for the public to have easy access to the proposed Medical College. It is stated that the Secretary to Government (Health and Family Welfare Department) and other officials inspected various lands along with the District Administration and that they were not in a position to locate any unobjectionable Government Poramboke lands suitable for locating the Medical College. It is stated that the Mundiampakkam lake which is barren and an unutilized site which has not received any water for the past 15 years, was found suitable since the Ayacutdars were also cultivating their lands through bore wells and open wells. It is stated that the land was more suitable as it was adjacent to the National Highway and in close proximity to Villupuram from and the surrounding villages. It is further stated that since the lake has not received any water for more than 15 years, nearly 34.52 hectors of ayacut land has ceased to be ayacut land and some portion of the tank land has been encroached and misused by some people.

10. It is stated that on being approached, the Mundiambakkam Panchayat passed a resolution on 05.12.2006, and by which it has offered to part with the land for the provision of the Medical College. A notice in Form A1 was stated to have been issued by the Firka Revenue Inspector inviting objections from the public as well as the Ayacuttadars in the Mundiambakkam village on 27.12.2006. After giving a reasonable period of more than 15 days, the Firka Revenue Inspector is stated to have made an inspection of the proposed site as well as the surrounding places and held a detailed enquiry. It is stated that to the said notice, no objections were received from either the public or from the Ayacuttadars as well as any other interested person. In the enquiry, leading Ryots, Village Panchayatars, President of Mundiambakkam Panchayat, Ayacuttadars, Village Administration Officer and the Village Assistant of Mundiambakkam Panchayat stated to have represented that the Mundiambakkam eri did not receive water for more than 15 years and that the ayacut lands are being cultivated through bore well and open well only. They also stated to have consented for the transfer of the land and none of them raised any objections for the proposed transfer of the lands for the Medical College. Thereafter, the extract from the A Register, F.M.B., and other village accounts were stated to have been appended by the Revenue Inspector along with the proposal recommending the transfer. While making the proposal, the Revenue Inspector also fixed the market value of the land based on the sale statistics gathered from the office of the Sub Registrar concerned.

11. After receipt of the said report and Sub Division Records, the Villupuram Tahsildar is stated to have made a further inspection of the site and after scrutinizing the proposals along with the fixation of market value and finding the same to be in order, the Tahsildar submitted his proposal to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Villupuram recommending for the land transfer on 25.01.2007. Simultaneously, the Union Engineer, Vikkiravandi Panchayat Union is also stated to have offered his technical opinion for the construction of the Medical College in the lands proposed for transfer. He also stated to have opined that the area did not receive any water for more than 15 years and that the land is suitable for the construction of the Medical College. According to him, while the Orathur Tank was the only source of water for the Mundiambakkam lake, as there was no surplus water in the Orathur Tank there was no water flow for Mundiambakkam lake. Therefore, the Union Engineer is also stated to have expressed his no objection for the use of the land for other public purposes. Thereafter, the Revenue Divisional Officer as well as the District Collector sent their recommendations for the transfer of the land on 26.01.2007. On 28.01.2007, the District Collector, Villupuram after verification of the records approved the proposal and forwarded the same to the Government through the Special Commissioner and Commissioner for Land Administration on 29.01.2007. Simultaneously the Chief Engineer, (Water Resources Organisation) after collecting necessary report from the Executive Engineer sent his recommendations for transfer on 06.04.2007. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that in the Agriculturists Conference and grievances hearing day Meeting held by the District Collector at the District level on various dates the farmers association representing agriculturists, welcomed the establishment of Medical College at Villupuram and there was also no objection from the public.

12. It is in the above stated background G.O.Ms.No.258, Revenue Department, dated 18.08.2007, was stated to have been passed by the Government permitting the Health and Family Welfare Department to enter upon the proposed site. Subsequently in G.O.Ms.No.602, dated 19.10.2007, the Government ordered for reclassification of the lands as Health and Family Welfare Department, Government Medical College, Villupuram and closely followed by that also made changes in the village and taluk accounts with effect from 29.10.2007.

13. In paragraph 18 of the counter affidavit various other factors which weighed with the District Administration for selecting the land for establishment of the Medical College have been set out. It is stated that the proximity of the location to the town and villages in and around Villupuram will enable the public to have easy access to the hospital. The other reason stated are availability of transport facilities, water, electricity, non-availability of other unobjectionable Government Poramboke or patta land, cultivation of ayacut lands by bore wells and open wells, the fact of non-supply of water to the lake for more than 15 years, the nearness of the National Highway to the site where frequent road accidents occur and the plight of the accident victims from getting immediate treatment and above all the site satisfy the prescribed norms of the Medical Council of India. It is further stated that the proposed Medical College and attached Hospital is planned to have 300 beds well equipped surgical hospital with Post Graduate Doctors in all specialties, apart from large out patient department with free treatment for the poor. It is further stated that the establishment of the college and the hospital in the proposed site would be far more beneficial to the public at large than allowing the land to remain barren without any scope of water source to the lake and thereby providing scope for encroachments and remain as a waste land. Apart from attempting to justify in locating the Mundiambakkam lake, the counter also states that the proposed construction will be provided with the required rain water harvesting system to augment the ground water recharge, that the existing earthen channel would also be strengthened and fully protected in order to ensure free flow of water from Orathur lake to the Panayapuram eri, and that it will also enable the authorities to protect the land from encroachers.

14. As far as the concern expressed about the ground water recharge, it is stated that adequate rain water harvesting structures would be provided as that would enable the other nearby tanks viz., Panayapuram tank, Vadakurichipalayam tank, Ayyuragaram tank, Orathur tank, Sathanur tank, Otteri and Vikravandi Periya tank which were also located within a radius of 5 to 6 km which would also get recharged and thereby the sugarcane cultivation in the Villupuram District will also be sufficiently safeguarded.

15. In the counter affidavit an undertaking has been given to the effect that in the course of construction of the Medical College, it will be ensured that the construction materials and other wastes will not be permitted to be heaped in the vaikkal viz., the channel through which the water would pass to Panayapuram lake and that no sewage water from the hospital will be permitted to pollute the water source to Panayapuram lake as well as ground water source.

16. It is stated that the 7th respondent viz., the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board also convened a meeting on 12.06.2008, at the instance of the 6th respondent, the Director of Medical Education and discussed in detail as regards the safeguards to be made from any pollution being caused due to the construction of the Medical College and Hospital. It is further stated that even in G.O.Ms.No.213, Environment and Forests (EC-1) Department dated 30.03.1989, where the highly polluting industries have been listed out, the construction of a Medical College cum Hospital is not included. It is also stated that so for the Villupuram District has not suffered any water shortage since the location of the town and villages in and around Villupuram are surrounded by natural water sources such as Orathur lake on the western side and Panayapuram lake on the eastern side.

17. In paragraph 40 of the counter affidavit it is highlighted that conscious of the State responsibility in maintaining the ecological balance and environment protection vis-`-vis sustained development activities for the improvement of socio economic development of the people, a balanced approach was made and the decision to locate the Medical College in the proposed site was consciously taken in the larger interest of the public and therefore such a step proposed by the State should not be interfered with for all or any of the reasons urged by the respondents.

18. After this writ petition was entertained, on behalf of the petitioners photographs were produced to show that Mundiyambakkam lake continue to have water storage from the Orathur lake. On behalf of the respondents also several photographs were produced to show that no such water storage was available in that lake. In order to ascertain the correct factual position, we passed an order dated 04.08.2008, appointing a Committee consisting of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the Special Government Pleader along with the respective juniors as well as the standing counsel for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board with the assistance of the District Environmental Engineer to meet in the office of the District Collector, Villupuram on 09.08.2008 at 11 a.m. and visit the spot on the same day. The District Collector was also directed to arrange for a photographer, to take photographs of the spot at the time of inspection and prepare a report based on the inspection and submit the photographs also along with a report. Such report was directed to be submitted by 12.08.2008. While passing the said order, we also recorded the assurance given by the learned Advocate General that the construction of the Medical College will not in any way affect the existing water channel connecting the Orathur eri with other lakes.

19. In pursuance of our order dated, 04.08.2008, an inspection was stated to have been made in the presence of the respective counsel and other officials on 09.08.2008. A report by the District Collector dated 12.08.2008, along with the photographs taken during the visit was also filed. In the report it is stated that the Committee commenced its inspection by 11.30 a.m. which went on till 2.00 p.m. and that the photographs were taken to ascertain the present physical features of the lake in question.

20. We also perused the set of photographs stated to have been taken on 09.08.2008. As many as 46 photographs have been filed and the boundary points of the entire site situated in Survey No.144/1 have been indicated in the photographs. A perusal of the photographs disclose that in no part of the land even a drop of water can be seen. Some of the photographs show certain standing sugarcane crops and certain other crops. But there is no indication of any water storage in any part of the land. In the photographs found at pages 18 and 19, the presence of the sluice is visible but even in and around the sluice there were enormous growth of bushes which only shows that the same was not operational for quite sometime.

21. A perusal of the objections filed on behalf of the petitioners to the Field Inspection Report dated 12.08.2008, does not disclose any formidable objection to the Report of the District Collector or to the photographs annexed with the Report. In the objections, the main stand of the petitioners is that the administration failed to maintain the lake, as well as, the channel which was the source of water supply to the lake from Orathur lake and therefore direction should be issued to restore the channel and protect the water body. It is also stated in the objections that though the presence of thorny buses are found in the proposed site, the non-storage of water was prevalent only for the past four years and not 15 years as stated by the respondents.

22. In the above stated background, we heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Advocate General for the respondents.

23. Ms. Geetha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in her submissions contended that the State failed to apply the precautionary principles for protecting the water body in its attempt to convert the same for a different purpose. According to her the State failed to explore the availability of alternative sites other than water bodies in its survey for locating the site to put up the Medical College and Hospital. The learned counsel contended that even the inspection held by the Hon'ble Minister at the initial stage was only on water bodies in and around Villupuram and there was no indication of any other lands of the Government or other lands with particular reference to identifiable Survey Numbers stated to have been inspected either by the officials or the ministers before finalising the present site of Mundiyambakkam lake. The learned counsel further contended that there was total non-application of mind on that score.

24. By referring to the Report of the Chief Engineer, PWD and certain other documents, the learned counsel contended that the statistics furnished therein discloses the depletion in the ground water storage by categorising the same under the heading "over exploited lake". The learned counsel contended that reclassification of Mundiambakkam lake as any other land would only add to such depletion in the ground water storage level, which will not be in the interest of public at large. The learned counsel however fairly stated that the petitioners are not against the establishment of Medical College in the Villupuram District but they are keen to ensure that on that score a water body should not be encroached by the State itself. The learned counsel relied upon AIR 2001 SC 3215, 2006 (3) SCC 549 and 1996 (5) SCC 647 in support of her submissions.

25. As against the above submissions Mr.G.Masilamani, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents submitted that Orathur lake is the main water body from which the surplus water is released and which is the source for Mundiambakkam lake and Panayapuram lake which are located within the vicinity of 5 kilometers and 6 = kilometers respectively from the Orathur lake. According to him, having regard to the fact that the State as part of its present proposal to locate the Medical College has decided to strengthen the channel and thereby maintain the source of supply of surplus water from Orathur lake to Panayapuram lake to be continued without any description, public interest will not in any way be jeopardized. According to the learned Advocate General since as a matter of fact for the past more than 15 years there was no flow of water from Orathur lake and thereby Mundiambakkam lake was under disuse, no prejudice will be caused to any one much less the public at large by setting up the Medical College and hospital in the said site, while on the other hand, in the larger interest of the public, the establishment of the College and Hospital in the District will only fulfill the long felt need of the public for better health care. The learned Advocate General also emphasized the fact that the Ayacutdars have set up their own bore wells and open wells for cultivation purposes due to the non-availability of water in the Mundiambakkam lake. He also pointed out that none of the Ayacutdars have come before the Court raising any grievance and therefore the administrative decision taken by the State Government in the interest of public at large should not be interfered with.

26. The learned Advocate General also contended that in the larger public interest, the establishment of Medical College and hospital would sub-serve the interest of the public in a much more beneficial manner than allowing the land to lie barren in the future years which will not be of any use to any one much less the public at large, but may only provide scope for further encroachments and therefore the proposed action of the State does not call for any interference.

27. As the issue raised in this writ petition concerns the protection of environment and conservation of water resources, we deem it appropriate to refer to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners in the foremost. In the decision reported in 1996 (5) SCC 647 (Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum Vs. Union of India and others), the Hon'ble Supreme Court dealt with the principles of Sustainable Development as a concept recognised in the international sphere. The Hon'ble Supreme Court made it clear that the traditional concept of development and ecology are opposed to each other is no longer acceptable and that Sustainable Development is an acceptable principle in the present day context. The emergence of the concept of Sustainable Development as pronounced in the Stockholm Declaration of 1972 and the later decision of giving a definite shape to the said concept in the year 1987 by the World Commission on Environment and Development in its report called Our Common Future, under the behest of the then Prime Minister of Norway, Ms.G.H.Brundtland, has been referred to in the decision in detail. The Hon'ble Supreme Court made it clear in paragraph 10 of its decision that Sustainable Development as a balancing concept between ecology and development has now been accepted as a part of the customary international law though its salient features were yet to be finalised by the international law jurists.

28. In paragraph 11 and 12 of the judgment the Hon'ble Supreme Court has concretized the vital principles which reads as under:

11. Some of the salient principles of Sustainable Development, as culled out from Brundtland Report and other international documents, are Inter-Generational Equity, Use and Conservation of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection, the Precautionary Principle, Polluter Pays Principle, Obligation to Assist and Cooperate, Eradication of Poverty and Financial Assistance to the developing countries. We are, however, of the view that The Precautionary Principle and The Polluter Pays Principle are essential features of Sustainable Development. The Precautionary Principle in the context of the municipal law means:

(i) Environmental measures by the State Government and the statutory authorities must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation.

(ii) Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation.

(iii) The onus of proof is on the actor or the developer/industrialist to show that his action is environmentally benign.

12. The Polluter Pays Principle has been held to be a sound principle by this Court in Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India. The Court observed: (SCC p.246, para 65) ... we are of the opinion that any principle evolved in this behalf should be simple, practical and suited to the conditions obtaining in this country.

The Court ruled that: (SCC p. 246, para 65) ... once the activity carried on is hazardous or inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such activity is liable to make good the loss caused to any other person by his activity irrespective of the fact whether he took reasonable care while carrying on his activity. The rule is premised upon the very nature of the activity carried on.

Consequently the polluting industries are absolutely liable to compensate for the harm caused by them to villagers in the affected area, to the soil and to the underground water and hence, they are bound to take all necessary measures to remove sludge and other pollutants lying in the affected areas. The Polluter Pays Principle as interpreted by this Court means that the absolute liability for harm to the environment extends not only to compensate the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the environmental degradation. Remediation of the damaged environment is part of the process of Sustainable Development and as such the polluter is liable to pay the cost to the individual sufferers as well as the cost of reversing the damaged ecology.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court went on to state that by virtue of constitutional protection provided under Article 21 contained in Chapter III as well as Articles 47 , 48-A and 51-A(g) falling under Chapter IV viz., Directive Principles of State Policy, the principles drawn from the Sustainable Development concept have become the Law of the land. Ultimately, the Hon'ble Supreme Court after referring in detail to the various provisions contained in the Environment Acts, issued 11 directions for the protection of the environment and ultimately entrusted the task of monitoring the environmental issues arising in the State of Tamil Nadu by requesting the Chief Justice of this Court to constitute a Special Bench viz., Green Bench to deal with the cases dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and all other environmental matters. The Hon'ble Supreme Court also made it clear that it will be open to this Bench to pass any appropriate orders or order keeping in view the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

29. In the decision reported in AIR 2001 SC 3215 (Hinch Lal Tiwari Vs. Kamala Devi) the Hon'ble Supreme Court dealt with the case of allotment of a pond as house site to 15 persons, such allotment was however subsequently canceled by the Revenue Authorities and such cancellation was challenged in the High Court, where, while sustaining the cancellation, the said G.O. was partly confirmed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court. Setting aside the order of the Division Bench, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the land in question was a classified pond and therefore such allotment in favour of Scheduled Castes, agricultural labourers as was done was not valid in law. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon paragraph 13 of the said judgment which reads as under:

13. It is important to notice that the material resources of the community like forests, tanks, ponds, hillock, mountain etc. are natures bounty. They maintain delicate ecological balance. They need to be protected for a proper and healthy environment which enables people to enjoy a quality life which is the essence of the guaranteed right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Government, including the Revenue Authorities i.e. Respondents 11 to 13, having noticed that a pond is falling in disuse, should have bestowed their attention to develop the same which would, on one hand, have prevented ecological disaster and on the other provided better environment for the benefit of the public at large. Such vigil is the best protection against knavish attempts to seek allotment in non-abadi sites.(emphasis added)

30. In the decision reported in 2006 3 SCC 549 (Intellectuals Forum, Tirupathi Vs. State of A.P. and Others) the Hon'ble Supreme Court once again reiterated the Constitutional mandate as enshrined under Articles 48-A and 51-A, wherein the State is mandatorily bound to protect and improve the national environment including forests, lakes, wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures. The Hon'ble Supreme Court laid emphasis that these Articles are not only fundamental in the governance of the country but also it should be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws and that these Articles are kept in mind in extending the scope and purport of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14 , 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, along with the various laws enacted by the Parliament and State Legislature. The Hon'ble Supreme Court gave thrust to the accepted social principle that all human beings have a fundamental right to a healthy environment, commensurate with their well-being, coupled with a corresponding duty of ensuring that resources are conserved and preserved in such a way that the present as well as the future generations are ensured of its maintenance and protection.

31. In the said decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court liberally dealt with the doctrine of 'Public Trust' in the context of protection of natural resources such as lakes, forests etc., and held that such doctrine has now become part of Indian Jurisprudence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the State is the trustee of all natural resources which are by nature meant for public use and enjoyment and therefore as a trustee, the State is under a legal obligation to protect such resources.

32. The Hon'ble Supreme Court after making a detailed reference to the principles set out in 1972 Stockholm Declaration, also made a reference to the just balance to be struck between the policy of Sustainable Development vis-a-vis the environmental protection. In paragraph 87 of the judgment the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to its earlier decision reported in (1991) 2 SCC 539 (Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Group Vs. Bombay Suburban Electricity Supply Co. Ltd.) which reads as under:

84. The world has reached a level of growth in the 21st century as never before envisaged. While the crisis of economic growth is still on, the key question which often arises and the courts are asked to adjudicate upon is whether economic growth can supersede the concern for environmental protection and whether sustainable development which can be achieved only by way of protecting the environment and conserving the natural resources for the benefit of humanity and future generations could be ignored in the garb of economic growth or compelling human necessity. The growth and development process are terms without any content, without an inkling as to the substance of their end results. This inevitably leads us to the conception of growth and development which sustains from one generation to the next in order to secure our common future. In pursuit of development, focus has to be on sustainability of development and policies towards that end have to be earnestly formulated and sincerely observed. As Prof. Weiss puts it, conservation, however, always takes a back seat in times of economic stress. It is now an accepted social principle that all human beings have a fundamental right to a healthy environment, commensurate with their well-being, coupled with a corresponding duty of ensuring that resources are conserved and preserved in such a way that present as well as the future generations are aware of them equally.

33. The Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing with the case wherein two historic tanks called 'Peruru Tank' and 'Avilala Tank' were entrusted with the Tirupathi Urban Development Authority and the A.P. Housing Board in a Government Order for housing purpose which came to be impugned in that writ petition by a registered Society called Intellectuals Forum. The High Court having declined to interfere with the above Government Order, the Society approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court alleging that despite there being overwhelming evidence of the tank being in existence and were being put to use not only for irrigation purposes but also as lakes which were furthering percolation to improve the groundwater level and the High Court gave precedence to the economic growth by completely ignoring the importance and primacy attached to the protection of environment and protection of valuable and most cherished freshwater resources. It was also stated that the Government alienated the tank bund lands in favour of the Governmental Agencies for valuable consideration. The Society is stated to have alleged in their pleadings that there was always shortage of water and the District Machinery was constantly put on alert for devising schemes for the purpose of improving the existing water resources. It was stated that about 260 acres of tank bund area were transferred to the Housing Board and the Regional Development Authority for an integrated housing development. While dealing with the said situation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court taking note of the facts involved in that case gave various directions in paragraph 96 while disposing of the appeals.

34. A perusal of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court discloses that while on the one hand the Housing Construction already made were allowed to remain the State Government was directed to take extensive measures to protect the water bodies by renovating the supply channels for free flow of water to the tanks and by putting up percolation tank for artificial recharge for the revival of the tank. The construction of houses which were already made were directed to be provided with rooftop rainwater harvesting mechanism. Simultaneously the Hon'ble Supreme Court, prohibited the drilling of any bore well or tube well for any purpose in and around that area. In effect the Hon'ble Supreme Court struck a balance as between the environmental protection and the Doctrine of 'Sustainable Development'.

35. In a subsequent decision reported in 2006 (6) SCC 543 (Susetha Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others) the Hon'ble Supreme Court explained its decision rendered in Intellectuals Forum case reported in 2006 (3) SCC 549. In the case dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Susetha case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the correctness of the Division Bench decision of this Court where the Division Bench permitted the local Pancayat to construct a shopping complex for resettlement of those persons who were displaced due to expansion of a highway project on a Temple tank which was lying in disuse. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the course of its consideration took note of the report by the Centre for Water Resources which inspected the Temple tank and furnished various details in relation to the said tank. The details contained in the report discloses the area of the tank, absence of inlet facilities, non use of the tank for any purpose, the deplorable condition of the water in the tank which was unfit for human consumption, the fact that the tank was being used as a dumping yard, livelihood of the encroachers of the tank area, the fact that the tank was almost dry during the year and the other water bodies in and around the tank which would provide for groundwater recharge, the Hon'ble Supreme Court specifically referred to the observations made in Intellectuals Forum case made in paragraph 76 and reported as under in para 20:

"20. The Court has not, in the aforesaid decisions, laid down a law that alienation of the property held as a public trust is necessarily prohibited. What was emphasised was a higher degree of judicial scrutiny. The doctrine of sustainable development although is not an empty slogan, it is required to be implemented taking a pragmatic view and not on ipse dixit of the court."

The Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to another decision of the Supreme Court in Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. (3) Vs. Bombay Environmental Action Group reported in 2006 (3) SCC 434 and extracted para 272 of the said judgment which reads as under:

"22...The development of the doctrine of sustainable development indeed is a welcome feature but while emphasising the need of ecological impact, a delicate balance between it and the necessity for development must be struck. Whereas it is not possible to ignore intergenerational interest, it is also not possible to ignore the dire need which the society urgently requires. Again in the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2008 (2) SCC 222 (T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad (104) Vs. Union of India and Ors.) has set out the principle relating to 'Sustainable Development' vis-a-vis environmental protection in the following words in para 3:

"3. As a matter of preface, we may state that adherence to the principle of sustainable development is now a constitutional requirement. How much damage to the environment and ecology has got to be decided on the facts of each case. While applying the principle of sustainable development one must bear in mind that development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs is sustainable development. Therefore, courts are required to balance development needs with the protection of the environment and ecology. It is the duty of the State under our Constitution to devise and implement a coherent and coordinated programme to meet its obligation of sustainable development based on inter-generational equity (see A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu). Mining is an important revenue-generating industry. However, we cannot allow our national assets to be placed into the hands of companies without a proper mechanism in place and without ascertaining the credibility of the user agency."

36. On an analysis made from the above decisions, we find that the following principles have to be kept in mind while dealing with the issue relating to environmental protection viz.,

(i) Natural resources which includes lakes, forests, rivers, wildlife are held by the State as a trustee of the public and can be disposed of only in a manner that is consistent with the nature of such a trust.

(ii) The public trust doctrine is more than an affirmation of State power to use public property for public purposes.

(iii) The Courts when confronted with a situation where violation of such public trust doctrine is put against the State, the Courts while scrutinising such actions of the State, have to make a distinction between the State's general obligation to act for the public benefit, and the special obligation which is entrusted with it as a trustee of such public resources.

(iv) The three types of restrictions on Governmental authority as stated by Prof.Sax, assumes significance which are as follows:

(a) The property subject to the trust must not only be used for a public purpose, but it must be held available for use by the general public;

(b) The property may not be sold, even for fair cash equivalent;

(c) The property must be maintained for particular types of use (i) either traditional uses, or (ii) some uses particular to that form of resources.

(v) The Court has to strike a balance between sustainable development and environment protection.

37. Keeping the above principles in mind when we consider the various facts involved in the case on hand, at the outset it will have to be stated that even the petitioners are not averse to the starting of the medical college in Villupuram District. In fact in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioners have categorically stated that they welcome the move of the State for setting up a Medical College in the Villupuram District. Another relevant factor to be noted is that the proposed site viz., Mundiambakkam lake is in disuse for more than 15 years according to the State and at least for more than 5 years as contended by the petitioners. Though ayacut lands of nearly 25 hectare were attached to the Mundiambakkam lake, since the lake did not have any water storage for more than a decade, the Ayacutdars have admittedly made their own arrangements by setting up their own bore wells or open wells. The only source of water to the Mundiambakkam lake is the surplus water from the Orathur lake which is stated to be about 5 kilometers away from Mundiambakkam lake. Since there was no discharge of excess water from Orathur lake, even in the channel leading to the Mundiambakkam lake, which is also connecting Panayapuram lake, is stated to have practically no trace of water flow though one or two sluices en route the channel continue to remain, which are in a dilapidated condition and are covered by thorny bushes. Though the petitioners have taken a fervent appeal that the State should have explored the possibility of acquiring available poramboke or patta lands for the location of the Medical College, there was no averment in the affidavit as to the availability of any such vast extent of poramboke land within the vicinity of the Head Quarters of the Villupuram District. As far as acquisition of patta lands are concerned, it is common knowledge that the procedure for acquisition of land would involve very many pitfalls and that may not serve the purpose, when the opening of a Medical College and Hospital needs some urgency in the interest of public at large. That apart locating and acquiring such a vast extent of contiguous land within the vicinity will also be a time consuming exercise.

38. In fact, the respondents have stated in their counter affidavits that the efforts made to locate any available poramboke land for the required extent was not fruitful and that any attempt to be made to acquire patta lands may pose resistance which may prevent the State from going ahead with its object of setting up Medical College in the Districts in the near future. The proposed site viz., Mundiambakkam lake site is admittedly within 4 kilometers from Villupuram town, and it is right adjacent to the National Highways and thereby providing frequent transport facilities for the public at large to reach the hospital which will be attached to the college to avail the treatment. It is also stated that at present there is a 300 bed hospital at Villupuram town which is not able to cater to the needs of the people living in and around Villupuram town and therefore there is a dire need for setting up another hospital as a welfare measure in the proposed Medical College hospital. It is stated that apart from providing 300 bed facilities, various other super specialties have also been planned which would enable the people living in Villupuram District to avail better hospital facilities in that District itself which is part of fundamental duties cast upon the State as a welfare measure in the interest of the public at large. In the various reports, right from the Union Engineer's Report to that of Collector of the District, it is revealed that every other citizen living in the Villupuram District have welcomed the setting up of the Medical College hospital at the proposed site and they have not raised any objections, though it was raised only by the first petitioner in his capacity as Co-ordinator of Water Resources Protection Movement. In fact the objections raised by the petitioner has been recorded by the Revenue Divisional Officer, wherein the first petitioner has stated that the construction of medical college buildings may affect the water source to Panayapuram lake and that the inundation of water due to discharge from Orathur lake may affect the Medical College. He also raised objections to the effect that such construction of Medical College may affect the water storage facility and it may lead to other consequential disorder.

39. Apart from the 1st petitioner's objections, only other objection was made by one Prof.K.Dhanraj, Member of Parliament (Tindivanam Constituency). In his objections, he has stated that the lakes in the Villupuram District are not properly maintained and there by the groundwater level get affected which consequently affect the ayacut area. According to him, since there is a sugarcane mill and sugarcane crops in and around Mundiambakkam lake, cultivation of sugarcane will also be affected. He further sought for the constitution of a Committee before finalising the site in question.

40. One other relevant factor brought to our notice is the categorization of Vikravandi sector where Mundiambakkam lake is situated which has been noted as falling under critical category as on January 2003, in so far as the ground water storage is concerned. In fact in the earlier categorization made as on January 1992, the said area viz., Vikarvandi lake was shown under the category Dark Blocks and Over Exploited and which had now come under the next category of Critical i.e. exploited between 90% to 100% of the ground water. Pointing out the said statistics Ms.Geetha, learned counsel for the petitioners in her submissions stated that when even as per the Water Resource Organisation of the Public Works Department itself, the area has been brought under over exploited zone, the existing water body should not be defaced. We keep in mind such a submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners while considering the prayer made in the writ petition.

41. The State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.161, dated 30.08.2006, in the first instance after the budget announcement for the year 2006-2007, for the setting up of the Government Medical College at Villupuram. In the said G.O. permission was granted to set up the Government Medical College with 100 students from the academic year 2007-2008 and created the post of Special Officer to attend the initial works relating to the establishment of the College. An initial sum of Rs.12 crores was sanctioned for the construction of the buildings and stated that separate orders will be issued for the purchase of equipment's, furniture's and other infrastructure facilities.

42. The State Government thereafter issued G.O.Ms.No.258, dated 18.05.2007, for setting up of the Medical College Hospital at Villupuram in an extent of 18.20.0 hectares in Mundiambakkam village in Rs.No.144/1, 149, 155/1 and 155/2. The necessary exemption for transfer of the above lands was also ordered apart from strengthening of the existing channel by providing stone bunds. The G.O. also stipulates that no building or construction materials should be heaped on the vayakal i.e. channel through which water passes to Panayapuram lake or block the sewerage water that may get discharged from the hospital and thereby cause pollution to the water flowing through the channel. The G.O. also makes it clear that there should not be any water stagnation in the channel and it should be given top priority. The State Government has made provisions for issuing further conditions at the time of transfer of the land. Subsequently the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.197, dated 04.06.2007, wherein the State Government has sanctioned a sum of Rs.41.01 crores in Phase-I for setting up the Medical College Hospital as against the earlier grant of Rs.12 crores in G.O.Ms.No.161, dated 30.08.2006. By yet another order in G.O.Ms.No.602, dated 19.10.2007, the transfer of land to an extent of 18.20.0 hectares in Survey Nos.144/1, 149, 155/1 and 155/2 at Mundiambakkam Village, Villupuram Taluk and District in favour of the Health and Family Welfare Department for establishing the Medical College under free land value was ordered with the condition mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.258, Revenue Department, dated 18.05.2007, as well as four other conditions prescribed in the G.O. itself.

43. Consequent upon the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.602, dated 19.10.2007, the Tahsildar, Villupuram carried out changes in the Village / Taluk accounts in respect of Survey No.144/1 and other Survey numbers incorporating the name of the Government Medical College as against the original entries of the respective water bodies.

44. Having bestowed our thoughtful consideration to the various submissions and other relevant factors involved in this case, we are of the clear opinion that the attempt of the State Government in establishing the Medical College with an attached Hospital in the proposed site at Mundiambakkam lake, cannot be interfered with by this Court.

45. We find that though Mundiambakkam lake is a classified water body it was solely dependent on the discharge of excess water from Orathur lake. We are also convinced that at least for more than 15 years there was no storage of water in the so called lake. There were different spells of heavy rains at least in the recent past 5 years but yet even as per the averments contained in the affidavit sworn to by the second petitioner dated 14.08.2008, there was no water for the past four years. The water storage particulars are maintained by the Revenue Authorities as well as the Water Resources Organization of the Public Works Department. Even according to the various statistics maintained by the Water Resources Organization the Mundiambakkam lake which falls within the Vikravandi sector did not have water storage at all in as much as the ground water exploitation was in the Critical category. Apparently, such a statistical figure between 1992-2003 makes it clear that there was no water storage in the lake and the ground water was over exploited during the said period viz., 11 years i.e. from 1992 to 2003. It only supports the stand of the respondents that Mundiambakkam lake which was getting its water sources by way of excess water discharge from Orathur lake, did not receive even a drop of water for the past more than 15 years. It is not in dispute that such excess water discharge from Orathur lake also gets transmitted through the same channel to Pannayapuram lake which is 1 = kilometers away from the Mundiambakkam lake. Therefore, even in the future years if due to unprecedented rain or due to any other natural cause discharge of surplus water from Orathur lake is to take place, such surplus water can be conveniently stored in the Panayapuram lake by clearing the existing channel leading to the said lake and also by deepening the Panayapuram lake as a special condition to be imposed as part of this order. As the Mundiambakkam lake has now become obsolete in so far as water storage purpose is concerned and the Ayacutdhars have also reconciled to the position that they can no longer depend on the water supply by making their own arrangement of erecting bore wells and open wells, the State Government's endeavour to put the said barren land for better use, namely for the construction of a Medical College, with an attached full fledged Hospital in public interest, should not be scuttled. Our above conclusion is in tune with the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as enunciated in 'Intellectuals Forum case' 'Susetha' and 'T.N.Godavarman Thirumulpad (104) reported in 2006 (3) SCC 549, 2006 (6) SCC 543 and 2008 (2) SCC 222 respectively. In fact the various reasons which weighed with the Hon'ble Supreme Court to sustain the order of this Court in relation to the conversion of water body on the East Coast Road are fully prevalent in the case on hand. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the attempt of the respondents in locating the Medical College in the Mundiyambakkam lake does not call for interference.

46. In such circumstances, it will have to be held that the attempt of the District Authorities as well as the State Government proposing to convert the Mundiambakkam lake as a full fledged specialty Medical College Hospital with all facilities as a prudent step in the right direction in the interest of public at large. Such a step in our considered opinion would toe in time with the concept of 'Sustained Development' without infringing or causing any iimpact on the environmental set up or injuring the ecological set up. Mustering all our courage, we state that by applying the principles of Sustained Development which has now come to stay and by striking a balance as between the said concept viz-a-vis the environmental protection, we will be justified in affirming the action of the State in proceeding with its attempt to set up a Medical College and Hospital in the lake site. We say so because having been convinced that the so called lake has ceased to be a lake for nearly 15 years which has also provided some scope for encroachment as has been pointed out by the District Administration, if the State Government is not allowed to develop the said property in a fruitful manner it may ultimately go into the hands of unscrupulous elements who may try to grab the lands for their personal ends. The Court cannot shut its eyes to such hard realities taking place which will not be in the interest of public at large.

47. Further, the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.258 dated 18.05.2007, while granting exemption for the construction of the Medical College in the water body has simultaneously issued certain other directions to maintain the channel running between Orathur lake and Panayapuram lake apart from imposing certain restrictions from causing any pollution to the channel by way of discharge of sewerage into the channel or due to the construction of the Medical College and Hospital. We feel that by ensuring the strict implementation of all such directions as well as by imposing certain other directions in this order, the State Government and the District Administration can be made to preserve the concerned water sources and there by the concept of 'Sustainable Development' on the one hand and the maintenance of environmental ecology by adopting Precautionary Principle and the The Polluter Pays Principle can be effectively monitored. In this context, it is also relevant to note that apart from the general public, the real persons who would be affected by defacing the water body will be the ayacutdhars. When the Revenue Inspector, issued notice calling for objections the only objection received was from the first petitioner in his capacity as Co-ordinator of Lake, Pond, Water Resources Protection Movement. Even in his objections, he has only apprehended that the construction of the College at Mundiyambakkam lake may affect the flow of water to the other lake lying 1= kilometers away viz., Panayapuram lake as the channel may get blocked. As far as the said objection is concerned, the G.O.Ms.No.258, Revenue Department dated 18.05.2007, itself will take care of that apprehension. That apart, we can issue required directions as has been empowered by the Honble Supreme Court in the decision reported in 1996 (5) SCC 647 (Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum Vs. Union of India and others), wherein the Honble Supreme Court has invested this Court with required powers to deal with the cases of all environmental matters and pass any appropriate order / orders in the pursuit of environment and ecology maintenance.

48. As far as the other objections raised by the first petitioner that due to blockade of the channels the proposed college and the hospital itself may be inundated with water during heavy rainy seasons is concerned, here again, taking note of the fact that the State itself has come forward to strengthen the channels by stone walls in order to ensure free flow of water up to Panayapuram lake from Orathur Lake, the said apprehension of the first petitioner can also be sufficiently safeguarded.

49. As far as the depleting ground water level is concerned, which is one other objection raised by the first petitioner, in our considered opinion the said objection can also be validly taken care of by directing the State Government to provide artificial percolation systems in and around Villupuram District, apart from strictly implementing Rain Water Harvesting System in the entire District to over come the said crises which would provide a long standing solution to the vexed problem.

50. We also wish to refer to the exercise carried out by the District Administration in the presence of the Petitioners counsel as well as the Government Pleader on 09.08.2008, in pursuance of our order dated 04.08.2008, in order to ensure that the claim of the respondents that Mundiambakkam lake has virtually become disused and that such a submission has not been made in order to achieve their objective for conversion of the land by some hook or crook. In the presence of the District Collector as well as the learned counsel for the respective parties, the inspection of the lake was carried out and as directed by us, as many as 45 photographs of the lake from all directions were taken and have been placed before us by the 4th respondent. A perusal of the photographs discloses that the entire area is found to be filled with wild growth of bushes and grass providing scope for grazing by animals and in some parts of the lake sugarcane and other crops are raised by the encroaches. The sluices along side the channel are also virtually concealed with wild growth of bushes and thorns and all the sluices are practically in an abandoned state. The Report submitted by the 4th respondent District Collector along with the above photographs therefore merits acceptance. The objections filed by the second petitioner to the said report does not deal with any of the factual details noted in the report or photographs filed along with the report. Even in the said objections on behalf of the petitioner it is only attempted to contend that the water body should not be allowed to be defaced and nothing more.

51. We are therefore convinced that the Government Orders by which the lands in Survey Nos.144/1, 149, 155/1 and 155/2 at Mundiambakkam Village, Villupuram Taluk and District and other vayakals i.e. channel were identified for locating the Government Medical College and Hospital and the subsequent Government Order G.O.Ms.No.258, Revenue Department, dated 18.05.2007, in transferring the said land in favour of the Health and Family Welfare Department for establishing the Medical College and hospital as well as the subsequent changes carried out in the Village / Taluk accounts regarding the land transfer to the Government Medical College, Health and Family Welfare Department are fully justified and the same have been carried out in the larger public interest as a part of implemention of 'Sustainable Development' policy without in any way encroaching upon the maintenance or disruption of ecological balance.

52. We accordingly pass the following order:

(i) The G.O.Ms.No.161, dated 30.08.2006, G.O.Ms.No.258, dated 18.05.2007, G.O.Ms.No.197, dated 04.06.2007, G.O.Ms.No.602, dated 19.10.2007, the proceedings of the Tahsildar, Villupuram dated 29.10.2007 effecting changes in the revenue records are upheld.

(ii) The 7th respondent is directed to ensure cent percent observance of pollution control measures while considering the application for environmental clearance made by the 6th respondent as has been communicated in the letter of the Dean of the Government Medical College and Hospital, Villupuram dated 22.05.2008, made in the communication of the 7th respondent to the same date as well as the one dated 01.07.2008.

(iii) The 7th respondent while prescribing relevant stipulations should ensure zero percent discharge of Bio-medical wastes into the channel running between Orathur lake and Panayapuram lake or any other surrounding areas of the proposed construction of the Medical College and Hospital. The 7th respondent to confirm such compliance at every stage in the course of the construction of the building for the Medical College and Hospital and up to its completion and thereafter also.

(iv) The respondents 1,3,4 and 6 are directed to scrupulously apply various provisions to be made in the hospital as stipulated in the handbook of Bio-Medical Waste Management published by the Tamil Nadu Health Systems Project, Health and Family Welfare Department in tune with the Government of India Bio-Medical Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 1998 formulated under Environment Protection Act, 1986 without any deviation while setting up the Medical College and Hospital as proposed and continue to apply the directions contained in the said handbook for all time to come. The 7th respondent is directed to ensure before the commencement and opening of the institution viz., Government Medical College and Hospital at the proposed site at Villupuram whether such stipulations contained in the handbook referred to above have been scrupulously adhered to and report of that fact is filed in this Court two weeks before the opening of the institution.

(v) The respondents 3,4,5 and 6 are directed to comply with the conditions stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.258 dated 18.05.2007, in regard to the maintenance of the channel in R.S.No.155/5 as well as the other conditions imposed in paragraph 4 of the said G.O. before the commencement and opening of the College and Hospital at the proposed site.

(vi) The first respondent is directed to constitute a Committee of experts from Water Resources Organization and submit a report as to how any other artificial water percolation system can be introduced in the district of Villupuram as well as any other drought prone area for improving the ground water bed level and for the sustained maintenance of such water bed area, in order to maintain the ecology and environment balance. The respondents 1,3 & 4 are also directed to take necessary steps for deepening all the surrounding lakes viz., Panayapuram lake, Vadakurichipalayam lake, Ayyuragaram lake, Orathur lake, Sathanur lake, Otteri lake and Vikravandi Periya lake.

(vii) The third and sixth respondents are directed to file an affidavit into this Court in two weeks time from today undertaking to comply with various directions which the respective respondents are required to carryout and also the estimated schedule of time that would be required for completing the construction of the College and Hospital in order to ensure that the various directions issued in this order are duly complied with.

53. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions and all the interim orders stand vacated. No costs.

kk To

1. The Secretary to Government, Environment and Forest Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

2. The Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

3. The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

4. The District Collector, Villupuram District, Collectorate, Villupuram.

5. The District Revenue Officer, Villupuram District, Villupuram.

6. The Director of Medical Education, DMS Compound, Chennai 10.

7. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Guindy, Chennai

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court