Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.23 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The Water (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1974
Keystone Realtors Pvt. Ltd. vs Anil V. Tharthare on 3 December, 2019
8. On merits, there are thus, violations which can been looked into by
this Tribunal and have to be remedied either by compliance or by
compensation on polluter pays principle. The first violation is failure to
obtain prior EC for the project of more than 20,000 sq. mtrs. The Project
Proponent has applied for ex-post facto EC on 09.09.2019. Explanation
that the PP was not informed about the requirement of EC while issuing
commencement certificate cannot be accepted as ignorance of law is no
excuse. The matter is covered by Alembic 2020 SCC online 347 and
Keystone vs. Anil Tharthare (2020) 2 SCC 66. This apart, there are other
violations. Part of constructions is in blue and red flood lines of river Mula.
According to the Committee, till 2017, this part was not being complied
with. Had EC/consent been sought, this could have been got complied.
The PP has benefitted itself by this violation. STP has not being provided
in the project with more than 20,000 sq. mtrs for atleast some of the
buildings. Further, there is no explanation about the source of water for
the swimming pools, if not illegal extraction of groundwater. Oral
explanation that water is brought by tankers is neither substantiated nor
probable.
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union Of India & Ors on 28 August, 1996
The right to a clean and pollution free environment, is also a right
under our common law jurisprudence, as has been held by this Court
in Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum v. Union of India5 where this Court
held: (SCC p. 660, para 16)
"16. The constitutional and statutory provisions protect a person's
right to fresh air, clean water and pollution-free environment, but the
source of the right is the inalienable common law right of clean
environment."
The Air (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1981
1