Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.60 seconds)

Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 22 February, 2017

13. There can be no dispute about need for restoring and maintaining the lake to its pristine position. No untreated sewage can be allowed to be discharged. The statutory mandate of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, principles of 'Sustainable Development', 'Public Trust' doctrine as well as other statutory provisions applicable, including the Municipal Corporation Act and the Rules need to be complied. MCGM has to exercise its statutory powers to prevent discharge of sewage. The Wetland Authority under the Wetland Rules, 2017 has to ensure compliance of statutory plan for demarcation of prohibited and regulatory areas around the lake. Reference in this regard may also be made to judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha v UOI, (2017) 5 SCC 326 and M.K. Balakrishnan vs. UOI, (2017) 7 SCC 805. The Wildlife Department is required to take action in terms of the WPA. The State PCB and the CPCB have to take action as regulators to prevent and remedy environmental norms. Apart from specific statutory provisions of Water, Air, WPA, EP Acts and Rules, powers under Section 133 of the Cr.P.C, sections 268 to 271 IPC and Section 3 of the PMLA Act, 2002 read with the Schedule to the Act can also be invoked wherever necessary. There is thus no inadequacy of powers available with the statutory regulators. Conclusion and Directions
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 293 - J S Khehar - Full Document
1   2 Next