$BETVVEEN:m
3 go
IN THE HIGI-ii COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANgALO-z%L'r: '» V.
DATED THIS THE 22% DAY 01? FEBRUARY, zoid -- H
PRESEN"1" "
THE HONBLE MR. JUsT1C::°'x¢1£e;R
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE--A;,'N1..V'ENUGO'PALA»COWDA
w.A. N0. 4S3§_4,5's_, {1;A--.REs)
SHR? DWAKARA. BEAT,'
S[Q. M.UKJE{§{APRAl\I_A Ac..1¢1ARr%-(A,
AGED --A}3oU*§f 63 YE§AIRS,_
r:;/ 0,, -L%PP;A,RJ_GE» MAQNE.'
K'QLAC1-1L1_R;«.§:1,LURU_QRAMA.
NANI)IK.UR"--P(3ST, '
_UDUP:.. I)'1sf£'Is:1C'~r_ 4 * 574 I38.
' ' smzl ..%1RANACA:\zA.THA SETTY,
S"/'O. _1v1«1;_I)DU SETITY.
_A' "ABOUT 45 YEARS.
« 1%-,/0, MOGDUMANE,
. KOL'ACI+Ii'UR, ELLURU GRAMA,
N.AND:~KUR POST.
U:>.._UP1 DISTRICT M 574 138.
I ' ~. SPIKE JAGANNATI-i MULYA.
S/O. YELLU MULYA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/ O I--IOSAI\/EANIEC.
KOLACHUR, ELLURU GRAMA.
NANDIKUR POST,
UDUPI DIS' RICT - 574 138.
SHRI RAG}--IURAM' SETTY,
S/O. LATE RAGA SETIY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YELARS,
R/O KONKONOTTU,
NANDIKUR POST, I
UDUPI DISTRICTM 574 138.
[BY SR1 G.V. SI*IAI\ITI~IARAJU,' SaIa:N1O"£>,_COUNS'I%;::', ;
APPI13ARINGI+'OR A <
Sm SM. ARUN, ADVOCATE) '
ANDH
1.
Id
UNION OF INDIA, " 'I 7
BYITS SECRETARY?" _ I
MI1\IISTRY_ OE ENfvIRONM.I':N.T_AN-D,I«"ORES'r.
PARYAVAIQAIJ' BHAWAN, _' =
CGO_.C'O'MPI.aEX{'LOD'inII ROAD, .
NEw3DIa.I,I'I_.IwI-«I0't::{I3.*-._.-- "
SfI'Af_I'I:. OF.ELARNAT_A}IS'RIP;IRA;sI--~SRP;:I'TY'ea; HEGDE ASSTS.. FOR C /Rs?)
(BY SRI.GO.I;TI«IAMI:<; CRAJPSIIWAR, ADVS.. FOR C/R~6}
{BY SR1 T..P. SRINIv"AS...AGA FOR R2. R3 es; R4)
_;'TI:«II5s£ wR_IT" APPEALS ARE FILED 1.1/8 4 OF THE
KARRA.TARA H1GH-----------COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
'£'.P_i?E_+2 ORD_ER__ PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION" 2195*
21:99/2.QIIQ""QATED Io/2/20:10.
Sqbpeals <:OIIa:'.ng on for preiiminary hearing this
day. RAG, J ., d61iVt".}'€d the foilcawingt
JUDGMENT
The Deputy Commissioner, Udupi. issued preliminary
” ~–‘IIOtifi(rat§On dI,.7.2.2009 14/5 46} Of the Land Acquisition Act
for aCqu1’SitioI1 of about 38.0825 acres Of land S:’.tuaIe in
YI-31lL1;.”._ Nandikoor and P€:’L1.i1}12:3.I’ vi11£1geS Of Udupi Taiuk. The
acquisition is for the purpose of lying; railway
Koncon railway line to iihe power piant fol’ _i.ra_risportai.ioiib of__
coal. The final notification dt. i4.81;:20Q’Siiu«i_!
Acquisition act is also isst1ed,:§_”’11e award. is yfqtifio be “passed.
In the total extent sougyIA1_t1_i:t,V:cp5~.i}g_eacquiredytiiepvvvappellants
Own 2 acres of la n d_ challenging
the aequisitioncnu the:.grouridV raiiway line for
transporta1:.io§ny stipulation imposed
by the ‘I’:i:f%,eVV’i’esponcierit;s at the time
of enxriro1irn’e.:/itélil’~ ci’e.a”ra_nce.’ had submitted that the
transporiation by “closed conveyor system”.
Th§f’t:’ansportatio’n by raii would amounts to violation of
‘A «stipulation;therefore, the purpose of acquisition shown is
A ‘Viii’egai;T’fT[fhe::ap:pe}1ants’ inter~a1ia filed an application for stay
oi’-«.aeqVu’isition proceedings.
The kearned Singie Judge has found that in respect. the
Hépower plant. in question, pubiic litigation is pending in
W.P.No.2180/2007, wherein the question of environrneni
and_eco1og;ica1 issues are involved for adjudication. In the
£/
said writ petition the imerirn prayer g’Q”p_
commissioning the power piant is rejected and_”e.oni7ilfi114ed in ‘
I3
the writ appeal. The learned Single
the question in the present petiti(mand..in i,lief’.preseni.’;easeF.
is identical. it is frrrther speC:iai”‘Ar.a_.il\t%ay “project
involves public ir1te1fest.., rne’i~éi”oi.~’j¢. V”i’ejeet.edlV”‘th”e interim
prayer. Hence this Writ applealif
Sri. G.\{..Shai1thaA_R;3jl1j;.;i Vselriior counsel for the
appellant i’st1’i§i’nittelti_ points to assail the
impughéé’ orfiér: it :5′ ‘”
i
islno ~I:l’_?€I1i.lO1} about the iying of railway
,_ in rhe«.”r1otii”i;fg1–i.1<§;:1 issued u/s 4(1) of the L.A. Act.
line K.oric.'on raiiways. The same is meiitiorreci
only ifiiiie final notification issued 11/ s 6(1). of
therefore, the Correct nature of public
lu"v».__ptiri)ose is not stated in the notification issued
* _v.:~'ti/S€(',. 4(i) o1'.'i,he Act, therefore, the acquisition
proceedings are vitiated.
it is rnanclatoriiy stipulated in the clearance
granted by the Ministry of Environment. that
transportat.ior1 of coal shall be by a “elosecl
conveyor system”. The eoriternplated method of
transportation of Coal by rail is not in conforrnity
_k
(9
with the stipulation. Hence, ac.:quis1ition’Vi’o1Wfih’e_
stated purpose is bad in law.
Sri. Udaya Holla. learnedj senior.. ‘oo:;msel’–_i’or”‘the«
respondent, referred to the Cl(?t;?1i’E1i}(“:é,’–giiQ–‘€il”1 by btiiel’ iiarnz-31talga’~.V
State Pollution Control Bola’i:el”‘i.{l’or short ail’
Annexure–‘K’ in para«Ili¥A[iii) itlils”si§ip1i’i:3i.ed thtis:
‘ the coal transpoi*.tation:’ :iro_m”‘-l\lvei§i1=__lV£angalore Port
shall be by railxand du-;=in_g»tl1–e vtransportation er1–route to
power plant _siiea_t*l’1er€[ shai_i.:riot”*b_e._any:«i’ngitive emissions.
Proper devices snails be ‘iprovideci to prevent the same. During
ti’ansporta§tion _~thei’e’__shaii., __r1’ot be “s_pili:iges of dust.”
gilsovreferred ‘ioathe Environment clearance given by
the KSPC.l’:3l dt.2’4i..1P2009’*–.p’ert.aini.h.g to CO1’1Sl;1’LiCTlOi1 of Jetty.
ln el.’Noi…8 it is’»stipt1lated thus:
“trarispolrtation of the coal shall be through
. V .railWay_ix~ia_goAris_oniy from NMPT to the project area at Udupi
pF’i’1_gitivef-dost’-emission during coal transportation shall be
L:.ontrolled–by?’watei’ sprinkling methods. The existing facility
.s.liall be erihancecl ané through Koncon Railway
iine theieoal shall be transported.
AA Counsel also referred to the Ruling of the Supreme
lflotiri, in Ramntklal Bhuuia & another Vs. State of
lHMaharasi’ra and others, { 1997} I SOC 184. to bring home the
point. that the balance should be struck between economic
development. and Enviroiiinentai needs. It is he_ld~.
thus:
” The time has come where the (‘.()t.’il’tS s”ho~:,il’d rhe.,p_iaifg_er
public interest in mind while e:’=rereisi*i1g izheirj power “oi”
5I”c1I1ti.'{}5 sta /irrunction. ower under Ali*i,iele 2’26′<is'=.
discretionary. It will be exer_ei's.ed only in ivur'i;he:ra.n–Ce olv.
interest of justice and not nieisiy on [iii-E2'iVTi1'3,1i:{iI'i'g out of a
legaipoini." 9
The crux of the i:r}rthe,'ba;3pella11t appears
to be that the'transp_ortgation"«.oi;'.::oa.l__:shaii be only by a
"closed rail transport. On the
perusal the KSPCB we do find
that is permitted. however. a
conditiondis "in1pr_)se~»:i thlat, fugitive emissions should be
…..
duestioii that arises would be whether
“iiransp<)rtat_ioi1 by' rail in a closed wagon is permitted and
servesllthe purpose of preventing damage to environment. and
eoology. in this regard. there is no technical niateriai
"iavailable. besides a. question would arise whether the
H petitioners while ehailenging ihe acquisition of their land can
urge issues pertaining to eiivironment and ectoiogy which is
S
essentially to be question by way of public interest
lelowever all these qL1esi.i0ns have to be (to11sid_–ei*ed_ii1~fie1:§i;b. *
in the writ petition. The comp1eti
for final disposal. In that vievifof: the n1éiti.ef_; lithe} appeal is
dismissed. 7′ u
M01959
sa
§€£§§?é
Gps*