Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.26 seconds)
Compliance Of Municipal Solid Waste ... vs . on 7 July, 2022 cites

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

32. We have suggested change in approach in realizing that remedial action cannot wait for indefinite period as is being proposed by the Administration. Action cannot be linked to outside funds nor delayed on that pretext. Sources of funding are laid down in the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Responsibility of the State is not merely to plan utilisation of Central funds or funds from World Bank, as appears to be happening, but having comprehensive plan to control pollution which is its absolute liability, which is not being unfortunately understood. If there is deficit in budgetary allocations, it is for the State and state alone to have suitable planning by reducing cost or augmenting resources. By way of suggestion, one may consider harnessing traditional knowledge and community involvement. People must be involved in the problem by appropriate awareness and strategies to encourage public participation and contribution. At the cost of repetition, health issues cannot be deferred to long future. Long future dates which, breach of which is established from the track record of last several decades, is not convincing solution. There is no accountability for the past breaches. It is poor substitute for compliance. This approach may project lack of concern or not realizing the grim ground situation crying for emergent remedial measures on priority. There is no time for leisure, reflected in timelines proposed for bridging the 24 acknowledged gaps. Claimed success by some local bodies in setting up waste processing plants and harnessing benefits of bio-CNG/power energy8 may need to be looked into and if found useful the same need to be followed with suitable modifications.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 293 - J S Khehar - Full Document

Almitra H. Patel And Anr. Petitioners vs Union Of India And Ors. .. Respondents on 15 February, 2000

31. It is a matter of concern that even after 48 years of enactment of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and expiry of 23 timelines for taking necessary steps for solid waste management in terms of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and binding direction in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal in Almitra H. Patel vs. Union of India & Ors. and Paryavaran Suraksha vs. Union of India, supra, huge gaps still exist. Are there insurmountable difficulties for State authorities or lack of will and determination? We find it difficult to believe the first. In our view, it is lack of good governance and determination responsible for the situation which needs to be remedied soonest.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 257 - Full Document

Municipal Council, Ratlam vs Shri Vardhichand & Ors on 29 July, 1980

In this regard, reference may also be made to orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Municipal Council, Ratlam vs. Vardhichand2 and B.L. Wadhera v. Union of India and Ors.3 laying down that clean environment is fundamental right of citizens under Article 21 and it is for the local bodies as well as the State to ensure that public health is preserved by taking all possible steps. For doing so, financial inability cannot be pleaded. We note that even after 26 years of monitoring, 18 years by Hon'ble Supreme Court and eight years by this Tribunal, ground situation remains unsatisfactory.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 212 - V R Iyer - Full Document

B.L. Wadhera vs Union Of India & Ors on 19 April, 2002

In this regard, reference may also be made to orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Municipal Council, Ratlam vs. Vardhichand2 and B.L. Wadhera v. Union of India and Ors.3 laying down that clean environment is fundamental right of citizens under Article 21 and it is for the local bodies as well as the State to ensure that public health is preserved by taking all possible steps. For doing so, financial inability cannot be pleaded. We note that even after 26 years of monitoring, 18 years by Hon'ble Supreme Court and eight years by this Tribunal, ground situation remains unsatisfactory.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 123 - Full Document
1   2 Next