ORDER : IAs Nos. 15 and 22 S.C. Agrawal, B.N. Kirpal and S. Rajendra Babu, JJ. 1. These applications filed by Respondents 4 to 8 in Writ Petition No. 967 of 1989 relate to Direction 1 contained in the judgment of this Court dated 13-2-1996, Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, 1996 (3) SCC 212 relating to the remedial measures that are required to be taken. As per the direction contained in the judgment, the said respondents were required to submit their response to the Report of NEERI estimating the cost of such remedial measures at Rs. 37.385 crores. The said respondents submitted a report prepared by their experts. The experts were also given a hearing by the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. The experts did not furnish any information on the cost estimates. 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, has thereafter recorded his findings wherein he has referred to the Report of NEERI and the views expressed by the Committee of Experts from relevant fields that was constituted to consider the estimate of cost suggested by NEERI. 3. In the said findings it is stated as follows: "The Hon'ble Court has already concluded that it is the respondents who have caused the damage and that the pollution of the wells is on account of the wastes discharged by them. Further it was held that the Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests and Respondents 4-8 shall proceed on the assumption that the affected area is 350 ha, as indicated in the NEERI Report. Therefore, it was decided to proceed ahead and a Committee of Experts from relevant fields was constituted to consider the estimate of cost suggested by NEERI. The Committee along with experts from the Ministry visited the site on 1-6-1996 and made some suggestions. They could however not arrive at a definite cost estimate. The Central Pollution Control Board, National Productivity Council, Water and Power Consultancy Services India Ltd., and Engineers India Limited were then consulted for ascertaining the cost. On examination of the relevant records including the reports and submissions made I am of the view that the remedial measures as well as the cost estimates in the report of NEERI are acceptable. The Central Pollution Control Board, National Productivity Council, Water and Power Consultancy Services India Ltd., and Engineers India Limited were then consulted for ascertaining the cost. On examination of the relevant records including the reports and submissions made I am of the view that the remedial measures as well as the cost estimates in the report of NEERI are acceptable. However, as remedial measures on such a scale are being done for the first time and not much practical experience is available in the country the cost estimates can be finalised only when pre-remedial work is undertaken. Against this background, considering the views given by experts, the possibility of increase in the spread of contamination subsequent to the NEERI Report, I come to the conclusion that the cost of remedial measures will not be less than the estimate of Rs 37.385 crores made by NEERI." On the basis of these findings a Letter dated 18-3-1997 was sent to the respondents by the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, requiring them to deposit an amount of Rs 37.385 crores within 30 days. 4. Shri N.D. Nanavati, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent applicants has submitted that the Report of NEERI on the basis of which the demand of Rs 37.385 crores has been made was submitted in 1994 and since then considerable change has taken place in the environment and that it would be appropriate that NEERI be asked to make a fresh assessment in the light of the present condition of the soil and subsoil water and submit its proposal for remedial measures that are required to be taken and the estimated cost thereof. The learned Senior Counsel states that the respondents undertake not to dispute such fresh estimate that is prepared by NEERI after such examination. 5. On behalf of the Ministry of Environment and Forests an affidavit of progress report of Dr. M. Sengupta as well as the additional affidavit of Dr. M. Sengupta have been filed. In the affidavit of progress report the Government of India has proposed that for the purpose of undertaking the work relating to remedial measures the National Productivity Council (NPC) may be appointed as the project management consultants and on the basis of the feasibility report submitted by NPC, tenders may be invited for entrusting the remedial work. 6. In the affidavit of progress report the Government of India has proposed that for the purpose of undertaking the work relating to remedial measures the National Productivity Council (NPC) may be appointed as the project management consultants and on the basis of the feasibility report submitted by NPC, tenders may be invited for entrusting the remedial work. 6. It is also proposed that a High-Level Advisory Committee would be constituted consisting of the representatives from (1) Ministry of Environment and Forests, (2) National Productivity Council, (3) Central Pollution Control Board, (4) NEERI and (5) Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board to review periodically and give directions and also to approve decisions to be taken. According to the said affidavit, work would be undertaken in two phases. The cost of Phase I would be Rs. 1.1 crores (Rs 50.00 akhs for project management consultancy and Rs. 60.00 lakhs for feasibility studies) and the cost of Phase II (actual remediation) would come to Rs. 40.1 crores. 7. In the additional affidavit of Dr. M. Sengupta detailed reasons have been given why it has not been possible to accept the report of the experts on which reliance was placed by the respondents. We have perused the said reasons given in the said additional affidavit filed on behalf of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and keeping in view the reasons given therein we are unable to accept the report of the experts on which reliance has been placed by the respondents. We accept the proposal submitted by the Government of India for the purpose of taking remedial measures by appointing the National Productivity Council as the Project Management Consultant. In our opinion the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India has rightly made a demand for Rs 37.385 crores. 8. Since we have accepted the aforesaid proposal of the Government of India we put it to Shri N.D. Nanavati that in order that further steps as per the said proposal are taken the respondents should immediately deposit a sum of Rs. 5 crores in advance so that the National Productivity Council may be asked to undertake the works of Project Management Consultant and have the feasibility studies conducted and prepare the terms for reference for inviting the tenders. 5 crores in advance so that the National Productivity Council may be asked to undertake the works of Project Management Consultant and have the feasibility studies conducted and prepare the terms for reference for inviting the tenders. Shri Nanavati, after taking instructions from the representative of the respondents, expressed the inability of the respondents to deposit the said amount and states that they are in a position to deposit Rs. 5 lakhs only. 9. In these circumstances, the only alternative left is to direct that the Ministry of Environment and Forests shall take the necessary steps to implement the directions contained in the judgment of this Court. All that we will say at this stage is that the decision regarding remedial measures taken on the basis of the NEERI Report shall be treated as final. The IAs are disposed of accordingly. IA No. 16 10. As far as IA No. 16 is concerned, the learned counsel for the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board submits that in view of IA No. 23 no orders need be passed in this application. IA No. 23 11. This application is submitted by the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board for direction regarding reimbursement of the amount of Rs. 4,65,817 to the Board out of the sale proceeds realised from the stocks of Respondents 4 to 8 lying with the respondent Board. The said amount is on account of expenses incurred by the Board towards wages for the security guards, securing electricity connection, telephone connection, installation of sodium lights for security purposes and other expenses incurred on miscellaneous items connected with safety and security of the plant and machinery in the premises. The said application is allowed and the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board is permitted to reimburse itself to the extent of the amount of Rs. 4,65,817 out of the amount lying with it. Court Masters.