Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 822 (HP)

Residents Of Village Khata v. STATE OF H. P.

2013-09-18

A.M.KHANWILKAR, KULDIP SINGH

body2013
JUDGEMENT A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. - 1. HEARD counsel for the parties. 2. THE petitioners essentially have raised two issues in these petitions. The first is about the no objection certificates granted in favour of the respondent-Company in breach of environmental laws and including that because of the construction of the plant, which is in the neighbourhood of the habitation of Village Rauri, that was and is causing excessive air and noise pollution. As regards this issue, it can be conveniently pursued before the National Green Tribunal, which is a special Authority created under the Statute and keeping in mind the observations of the Apex Court in the case of Bhopal Case Peedith Mahila Udyog Sanghthan and others versus Union of India and others, reported in (2012) 8 SCC 326 , paragraphs No. 40 and 41, in particular. However, the petitioners have clubbed another issue in rt the present petitions so as to maintain the present writ petitions ou before this Court. According to the petitioners, the respondent Company has failed to act upon the scheme and has committed breach of the scheme regarding rehabilitation and settlement of the project affected persons. It is, however, not in dispute that the said aspect can be examined by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Arki, District Solan. 3. IT is noticed that the Sub Divisional Magistrate has already considered this aspect and recorded his opinion/ recommendation on 23rd January, 2013. If the said Authority is convinced about the lapses committed by the respondent-Company, we have no manner of doubt that it can take appropriate corrective and remedial action in the matter so as to ensure that the respondent-Company fulfills its obligation under the scheme, pursuant to which the plant has been allowed to be established in the region. 4. SOMEWHAT similar grievance was considered by this Court in the case of Hari Ram & another versus State of H.P. & others, being CWP No. 9916 of 2012, decided on 12th September, 2013, and direction was given to the Sub Divisional Magistrate to examine the grievance of all the affected and aggrieved persons and pass a speaking order after giving opportunity to the respondent Company. If any party is aggrieved by the decision of the Sub Divisional Magistrate with relation to the enforcement of the scheme, under which the project has been established, the said party can then resort to the appropriate remedy, as may be advised. If any party is aggrieved by the decision of the Sub Divisional Magistrate with relation to the enforcement of the scheme, under which the project has been established, the said party can then resort to the appropriate remedy, as may be advised. We direct the Appropriate Authority to examine all aspects of the matter and pass speaking order not later than eight weeks from today. 5. THE parties shall remain present personally or through their representatives in the office of the Sub Divisional Magistrate on 25th September, 2013, at 11.00 a.m. and submit their respective claims which may be considered by the Sub Divisional Magistrate keeping in mind the observations made in this order. All questions raised by the respective parties are left open to be answered in appropriate proceedings. We are inclined to take recourse to this option as the grievance made by the parties may involve disputed questions of facts which will have to be addressed by the Appropriate Authority in the first place. 6. PETITIONS disposed of accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any. We reiterate that it will be open to the petitioners to pursue the issues regrading environmental laws before the National Green Tribunal, if so advised.