Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1985 DIGILAW 416 (SC)

M. C. Mehta v. Union of India

1985-12-07

D.P.MADON, P.N.BHAGWATI

body1985
ORDER : 1. We are glad to note that the three learned Experts appointed by us have been good enough to visit the chlorine plant and to examine the situation with a view to ascertaining whether the recommendations made in the Report of the Expert Committee have been carried out. We are indeed grateful to them for sparing their valuable time and responding to the request of the Court. Of course the time at their disposal has been very short and they have not been able to make a close and detailed examination but they have given their prima facie opinion in regard to the implementation of the various recommendations contained in the Report of the Expert Committee. While making this order we bear in mind the oral report made by them. 2. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing by us the learned Additional Solicitor General stated that the District Magistrate, Delhi has made an order today under sub-section (1) of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 directing and requiring Shriram Food & Fertilizer Industrises within two days from the date of issue of the order to cease carrying on the occupation of manufacturing and processing hazardous and lethal chemicals and gases including chlorine, oleus, super chlorine, phosphate etc. at their establishment in Delhi and within seven days to remove such chemicals and gases from the said place and not again to keep or store them at the said place or to appear on 17th December, 1995 at 11 a.m. in the court of the District Magistrate, Delhi to show cause why this order should not be enforced. We may make it clear that the interim order which is being made by us will not stand in the way of confirmation or enforcement of the order made by the District Magistrate, Delhi. We are a little surprised that the District Magistrate, Delhi who apparently thought that the chlorine plant should be closed down within two days and chemicals and gases should be removed within seven days should have given time to Sriram Food and Fertilizer Industries to show cause against the enforcement of the order until 17th December, 1985, thereby virtually defeating the urgency of the action to be taken. But we are not sitting in judgment over this order of the District Magistrate, Delhi and we do not, therefore, propose to say anything more about it at the present moment beyond expressing our surprise that though the order seems to have been made by way of taking urgent action, its enforcenment should have been postponed upto 17th December, 1985. 3. We may make it clear that this order made by us shall not be construed as in any manner precluding the Delhi Administration or the District Magistrate from making any order for immediate closure of the Chlorine Plant of Shriram Food & Fertilizer Industries, if they so think fit. 4. The question which arises for consideration on this application for interim relief is whether until the hearing of the writ petition which we propose to fix at 10.30 a.m. on 13.12.1985, the chlorine plant of M/s Sriram Food & Fertilisers Industries should be directed to be closed down. We would have been inclined to direct immediate closure of the chlorine plant but the three learned experts appointed by us have pointed out that the major element of hazard or risk lies in the use of two one-hundred metric ton tanks for storage of chlorine and when they inspected the chlorine plant, they found that these two one- hundred metric ton tanks were empty. Mr. Mehta who is the petitioner has stated before us that these two one-hundred metric ton tanks were emptied last night and chlorine which was stored in these two one hundred metric ton tanks was removed post haste in order to show to the three experts who were going to visit the chlorine plant pursuant to the order of this Court that there was no element of hazard or risk arising on account of use of these two one-hundred metric ton tanks. We do not propose to gointo this controversy at the present moment but we would direct that until the final disposal of the writ petition, neither of these two one-hundred metric ton tanks shall be used for the purpose of storage of chlorine save and except as a dump or surge tank. The petitioner will be entitled. We do not propose to gointo this controversy at the present moment but we would direct that until the final disposal of the writ petition, neither of these two one-hundred metric ton tanks shall be used for the purpose of storage of chlorine save and except as a dump or surge tank. The petitioner will be entitled. to appoint three experts or representatives and any one or more of them will we given full access to the chlorine plant at any time of the day for the purpose of ensuring that the use of these two one-hundred metric ton tanks for storage of chlorine has been discontinued in obedience to this order of the Court. The petitioner along with his experts or representatives will also be entitled to visit the chlorine plant for the purpose of ascertaining whether the various recommendations of the Expert Committee have been carried out of not and whether there are any other draw-backs or deficiencies likely to endanger the lives of workmen and the public for this is a question which we have still to determine, for the purpose of deciding whether the chlorine plant should be closed down or not. The petitioner will submit the report of his experts or representatives by 10 a.m. on 11th December, 1985. Shri Hardev Singh, learned Advocate for the Delhi Bar Association, assures us that all possible assistance and stenographic facilities will be provided to the petitioner for this purpose. Copies of the report submitted by experts and -representatives of the petitioner will we made available to the advocates appearing on behalf of the parties immediately after the same is filed. M/s Sriram Food & Fertilizer Industries will file their reply, if any, to the Report of the experts or representatives of the petitioner by 5 p.m. on 12.12.1985. Mrs. Kumaramangalarn appearing on behalf of the DCM Chemicals Employees Lok Hit (Cong.) Union will also tile an affidavit setting out the various incidents of leakage of Oleum or Chlorine gas which, according to her, have occurred in the past prior to the leakage of Oluem gas on 4.12.1985 M/s Sriram Food & Fertilizer Industries will be at liberty to file their reply to this affidavit by 5 p.m. on 11.12.1985. 5. We are informed by Mr. 5. We are informed by Mr. Hardev Singh that there are a large number of people who have suffered on account of leakage of gas from certain cylinders which were being transported and from which leakage of gas took place on 21.1 1.1985. Some of those persons have been badly affected and are in need of immediate medical attention and treatment. We would direct the Delhi Administration to take steps to see that immediate medical care and attention is provided to these persons whose particulars will be supplied by Mr. Hardev Singh to the Superintendent, Bara Hindu Rao Hospital. 6. The question remains as to what compensation is payable to the persons who are affected by the leakage of gas in the course of the various incidents and by whom. We propose to appoint the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi as the officer before whom claims for compensation may be filed by those who are affected by leakage of gas in the course of various incidents. We would fix the time of four weeks from today within which such claims for compensation may be filed before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi. The Court will then consider what should be the principles on which compensation should be payable to the affected persons and who should be liable to pay the same and what should be the machinery through which claims for compensation should be decided on the basis of the principles and norms laid down by the Court. This direction is being given by us with a view to expediting adjudication of claims for compensation on behalf of persons affected by leakage of gas. We would like to dispel an impression in the public mind that claims for compensation cannot be speedily adjudicated upon in the Indian courts. 7. We shall take up the hearing of the writ petition at 10.30 A.M. on 13th December, 1985. Notice of the writ petition shall be given immediately to Delhi Water Supply & Sewage Disposal Undertaking, Link House, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi and the Delhi Municipal Corporation who will file an affidavit by 4 p.m. 10.12.1985 stating as to how much quantity of chlorine consumed by them every day, what are the sources from which they are drawing on or can draw their supply of chlorine. Notice may also additionally be served on the Municipal Commissioner, Delhi. Pending the disposal of the petition.