IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (PIL) No. 6141 of 2008
Rajneesh Misra Vs. Union of India & Others
With
W.P. (PIL) No. 720 of 2010
Smt. Manju Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.
With
W.P. (PIL) No. 1872 of 2010
Ashish Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.
With
W.P. (PIL) No. 2519 of 2010
National Hawker Federation, Ranchi Vs Union of India & Ors.
With
W.P. (PIL) No. 1968 of 2010
Ashish Kumr Sijgh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.
With
W.P. (PIL) No. 1329 of 2010
Ashish Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.
With
W.P. (PIL) No. 1911 of 2010
Ram Ayodhaya Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.
With
W.P. (PIL) No. 4081 of 2009
Dilip Rajgarhiah Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.
CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL
For the Petitioner : J.C. to Mr. D. Jerath
For the RespondentState : R.R.Mishra, G.P.II.
For the RespondentPollution Control Board : M/s. S. Anwer, Sr. Advocate
A.K. Pandey
For the Respondent RMC & RRDA : M/s R.R.Nath, A.K.Singh
For the Respondent UOI : Mr. Md. M. Khan
For the Intervenor : Mr. V.P. Singh, Sr. Advocate
For the IntervenorJharkhand Chamber of
Commerce & Industries : M/s Pandey Niraj Rai
Mr. Rohit Ranjan Sinha
30/11.03.2011
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Today, an Intervention Application has been filed on behalf of
Jharkhand Chamber of Commerce and Industries. It is a happy
development that the Captains of industries has chosen to come to Court.
It was put to the counsel appearing for the Chamber of Commerce that the
Chamber of Commerce, as a protector of the business communities’
interest, has also responsibility for safeguarding the interest of the society
at large. The grievance raised was that some forceful action is taken
against the alleged encroachers in the shape of wrong assessment, which
is not rightful. It was put to the counsel for the Chamber of Commerce
that if the Chamber of Commerce is prepared to take upon itself that all
those who are encroachers will be persuaded to vacate the unlawful
encroachment and all those who are in possession of the land other than
their rightful title land will be persuaded by the Chamber of Commerce to
vacate the same, this Court would be happy to entrust the responsibility
to the Chamber of Commerce and extend all lawful resources to the
Chamber of Commerce so that it can accomplish this social responsibility
for the city and also for the whole of the State.
Learned counsel for the Chamber of Commerce wants time
to seek instructions from his client. For this purpose, the matter will be
taken up on Monday (14.3.2011).
Before this Court, a grievance is raised that one Mr. Ram
Kumar Singh is functioning as Town Planner, who has no training or
qualification as Town Planner. He may not be a rightful person to take
right decisions for removal of the encroachment because his qualification
may not equip him to take rational decision. This grievance has been put
up in an affidavit today before this Court.
The counsel appearing for the R.R.D.A wants time to seek
instructions and file counter. Let counter affidavit be filed. In the
meantime, the R.R.D.A will not lose sight of the fact that a qualified
person is required to assess all the encroachments in a rightful manner
and it may also seek help of a qualified person who can do it and such
person can be engaged on contract as the State Government has already
committed itself that any such appointment will be supported by the State
Government financially.
Certain petitions have been filed before R.R.D.A and they
were required to file their response. They will do so by Monday
(14.3.2011).
This has been brought to the notice of the Court that there
are applications pending in the office of the R.R.D.A and Ranchi Municipal
Corporation for sanctioning the plans and they are very old. Both the
authorities, R.R.D.A and Ranchi Municipal Corporation, are mandated that
such applications for sanctioning the plans should be disposed of forthwith
in lawful manner. It is asserted that no application is pending for
sanctioning any plan by R.R.D.A. An affidavit to this effect be filed by
Monday (14.3.2011).
Mr. Sohail Anwar, Sr. Advocate, has drawn attention of this
Court that in a writ petition being C.W.J.C No. 1852/2000 certain
instructions were given by this Court but such instructions have not been
complied till date. Let this petition (C.W.J.C No. 1852/2000) be also
tagged with these petitions and on the next date of hearing this Court will
see as to what were the orders and as to why they were not complied
with. Mr. Sohail Anwar also appearing for one of the respondents in these
petitions drew attention of this Court that the district authorities are not
acting for fulfillment of their legal obligations for taking care of the
environmental, air, water, sound and other pollutions. Apart from this, the
grievance of Mr. Sohail Anwer is that today one of the Newspapers namely
‘Prabhat Khabar’ published that the ‘Polythene is a big menace in this City’
and it is inhibiting the proper growth and the water resources of the city
and the environment is being adversely affected.
The State Government should take steps into it and the
learned counsel for the State is directed to inform the State Government
about pollution. The State Government is also required to make a policy
regarding use of Polythene in the State.
Mr. A.K. Pandey, counsel appearing for the Pollution Control
Board has brought to the notice of this Court that this Court has already
passed an order that the Plastic Bag of a particular specification can only
be used but not otherwise, but this order is not being implemented.
For non implementation of this order, before this Court
issues contempt notices to the State authorities, they are called upon to
explain as to what has happened to the implementation of the order for
nonuse of plastic of a particular specification.
It is reported that certain vigilance enquiry has been made
with regard to the sanctioning of the plans. The Vigilance department
will look into its report and if any cognizable offence is made out, F.I.R
will be registered and proper action taken by the Vigilance Department.
The counsel appearing for the State Government is directed to inform the
Vigilance Department that what action is taken by the Vigilance be
informed to Court.
Yesterday’s situation of rampant encroachment is being
submitted to this Court in the form of a ‘C.D.’ by the counsel for the
petitioner. The same may be kept on record in a sealed condition.
The matter will be taken up for doing needful on 14.3.2011.
(Bhagwati Prasad,C.J.)
(D.N.Patel, J.)
Dey/SI