Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2000 DIGILAW 1576 (SC)

State of Uttar Pradesh v. M. C. Mehta

2000-09-13

M.B.SHAH, M.JAGANNADHA RAO

body2000
JUDGMENT : R.P. (C) No. 291/1998 1. Air Pollution being the main threat to the ecologically fragile Taj Mahal, the level of Air Pollution affecting Taj becomes a critical factor in its protection. Hence the Central Government is required to take a specific stand for protecting this world-famous monument by controlling air pollution and on the question as to whether foundries run by means of coal are required to be continued near the Taj. 2. The case has a long history. But before going into various aspects of the matter, we want to have an idea of the air pollution in this area, as of today. 3. The Central Pollution Control Board will therefore make an inspection within two days of the Taj Trapezium and find out the levels of various types of pollution having relevance not only to public (sic) but also to the Taj monuments. The Central Pollution Control Board will also visit the Foundry Nagar industries in connection with this case and file a report as to whether they are meeting the standards of pollution prescribed in this behalf. The report will be filed within two weeks but the inspection will be done within two days as directed above. 4. The Central Pollution Control Board will again repeat the above exercise after one week or thereafter, by way of a surprise check. The foundries in Foundry Nagar will co-operate during the course of these inspections. 5. Dr. S.K. Ghosh and Dr. R.C. Trivedi of the Central Pollution Control Board shall be part of the inspection team. Sri. Krishan Mahajan, Advocate, Supreme Court is requested to accompany the team. A report will be submitted by the abovesaid officers and Sri. Krishan Mahajan after 2 weeks as to the results of these two inspections. 6. The Central Government will file an affidavit within two weeks as to whether the directions in regard to protection of the Taj Monument given by this Court in 1997 (2) SCC 353 have to be modified and also whether, in the opinion of the Central Government, the Foundry Nagar industries should be allowed to continue to use coal or should be directed to shift to gas/electricity. 7. The copies of this order will be served on the learned counsel Mr. Ishwar Singh appearing for the Central Pollution Control Board. 8. 7. The copies of this order will be served on the learned counsel Mr. Ishwar Singh appearing for the Central Pollution Control Board. 8. The copies of this report and counter affidavit will be filed within two weeks and will be served on the State of U.P. and on the counsel for the industries and to Mr. M.C. Mehta. 9. Matter may be listed on 18.10.2000. 13th Report of Central Pollution Control Board: 10. Considering the seriousness of the defaults pointed out in the 13th report of Mr. Krishan Mahajan Committee we direct the Commissioner of the Agra Division Mr. Rajiv Gupta and Mr. D.B. Sharma to remain present in the Court at 2.00 p.m. tomorrow i.e. on 14th September, 2000. Mission Management Board: 11. This Court passed an order on 2.5.2000 directing the Mission Management Board to inform this Court as to what has been done by the Board after its constitution. Pursuant to the said directions a report has been filed annexed to the affidavit of Shri A.K. Bitt on 13.7.2000. There are two annexure to the said report one dealing with the progress of various projects under Taj Trapezium Zone Project upto May, 2000. 12. In the last column of these annexure “percentages” of financial progress and project progress are mentioned but no details of the actual work on the work site have been referred to. This Court will not be satisfied with the “percentages” but requires details of the project work done at the site, and in particular with regard to the electricity supply. At page 57 of the second annexure dealing with financial progress several of the columns are shown blank. 13. It is unfortunate that the Mission Management Board has not presented the real picture of the progress of work at the workshops before this Court. We, therefore, direct it to file a fresh and better affidavit with better annexure. 14. The affidavit will be filed within four weeks. The copies of the same will be served on the other sides also. 15. List on 18th October, 2000. Order accordingly.