Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2004 DIGILAW 1431 (SC)

M. C. MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA

2004-10-07

RUMA PAL, S.B.SINHA, S.H.KAPADIA

body2004
ORDER 1. It appears that a meeting was held between the Joint Director (Tourism), Regional Officer, U.P. Pollution Control, Agra, the representatives. of CISF, the representatives of the Agra Development Authority, Agra, the representatives of ASI, the police and the District Magistrate, Agra on 19-72004 at which certain proposals like with regard to the illumination of the Tajmonument at night were agreed to. The proposals do not appear to have been cleared by NEERI. This must be obtained before this Court can act on the . basis of the proposals. The proposals should also incorporate the suggestions made by ASI in para 17 and para 3 of the parawise comment of the affidavit filed by ASI. In addition, the proposal should include a direction that Mr Krishan Mahajan, Advocate, should on occasions and according to his convenience, visit the Taj during the night viewing programme in order to see whether the proposals are complied with. Put up after NEERIs clearance and after the x-ray machines have been put in as per CISFs requirements, and computers have been installed by ASI, the cost whereof shall be borne by the State of V.P. 2. ASI as well as CISF are granted liberty to place their affidavits on record. Court Masters