1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1325 OF 2003
1) Janhit Manch )
Through its President Bhagvanji )
Raiyani, Kuber Bhuvan, Bajaj
ig )
Road, Vile Parle (West), )
Mumbai - 400 056. ... )
2) Bhagvanji Raiyani )
Kuber Bhuvan, Bajaj Road, )
Vile Parle (West), Mumbai - )
400 056. )
3) Gaurang Vora )
Plot - 275/3, Gope Nivas, Sion )
(East), Mumbai - 400 022. ) ... ... Petitioners.
Versus
1) The State of Maharashtra )
through the Principal Secretary )
of Environment, Govt. of )
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
2
Maharashtra, Mantralaya, )
Mumbai - 400 032. ... ... )
2) The Member Secretary, )
The Maharashtra Pollution Control )
Board, a Maharashtra Government )
Organisation, Kalpataru, Opp. Cine )
Planet, Near Sion Circle, Sion (East),
ig )
Mumbai - 400 022. )
3) The Union of India )
through the Ministry of Environment, )
CGO Complex, Near Lodhi Road, )
New Delhi - 110 003. )
4) Central Pollution Control Board, )
a union of India Organisation, Parivesh )
Bhavan, East Arjun Nagar, Delhi - )
110 032. )
5) The Commissioner, )
Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation )
Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai - 400 001. ).. .... Respondents.
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
3
The petitioner No.2 present-in-person.
Mr. Pradeep Jadhav, AGP for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Abhay Patki for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Rajiv Chavan with Ms. Rutuja Ambekar for Respondent No.3.
Mr. C. M.Lokesh for Respondent No.4.
Ms. Ajit Kumar for Respondent No.5.
CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and
A. P. DESHPANDE, JJ.
RESERVED ON: 9TH APRIL, 2008.
igPRONOUNCED ON : 22ND JULY, 2008.
(In Chamber at 2.45 p.m.)
JUDGMENT (Per Bilal Nazki,J.) :
This petition was filed in public interest claiming various reliefs. The
matter has been pending in Court for a long time and when the matter was
taken up by this Bench on 30th January, 2008 we had directed the Chief
Secretary Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.5 Corporation to file their
respective affidavits for the reasons given in the order itself. There are
many reliefs claimed by the petitioners. We have heard petitioner No.2 in
person and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. Some of
the reliefs claimed are the reliefs which could not be granted because they
relate to geographical areas which are outside the jurisdiction of this
Court. Therefore, the petitioner made a submission that he will confine
this petition to the reliefs claimed for the areas which fall within the State
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
4
of Maharashtra. The said reliefs are :
(a) To immediately ban the practice of immersion of any idols of
gods, goddesses, tajia or otherwise under religious rituals or
under any other pretext in natural streams as defined under
section 2 of The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)Act, 1974;
(b) The respondents to provide adequate inspection and nuisance
detection machinery on the Juhu beach and other naturalstreams against people throwing puja nirmalya and plastic bags
and punish them as per rules;
(c) The 1st and 5th respondents to construct adequate no. of toilets at
the stretch of the beach between Santacruz and Khar Danda with
adequate quantity of water supply;
(e) To immediately ban the immersion of full or half burnt bones of
dead bodies (Asthi Visarjan) or ashes thereof in the Water
Streams as defined under The Water (Prevention and Control ofPollution) Act, 1974;
(f) To ban the mass or community bathing during auspicious
religious occasions such as Kumbha Melas, Chhath Parvas,
Ekadashis, Shravan Mondays, etc. in the natural water springs
under the scriptural edicts and under the provisions of TheWater (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and also
under Article 48-A and 51-A of the Constitution of India;
(g) To ban the use of water bodies and their banks for washing
anything, bathing cattle, discharging faeces, excreta andurinating;
(h) To appoint the committee of experts for exploring the possibility
of setting up a water treatment plant of appropriate size at the
mouth of Mithi river in the Mahim creek for discharge of treated
water;
(i) To order all industries discharging effluents in Mithi River and
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
5such other rivers across the country to set up water treatment
plants of appropriate sizes to treat the effluents beforedischarging the same into water bodies.
(j) To punish the officials and employees of the Respondents under
the appropriate rules not performing their duty in protecting theenvironment and more particularly the natural water resource
under their respective jurisdiction.
(k) To levy the penalty to the people and the owners of the
industries under Section 15 of The Environment (Protection)
Act, 1986, violating the provisions of The Water (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and other the closure ofindustrial units not complying the norms and standards required
under the said Acts.
(l) To make environment as compulsory subject in schools and
colleges as ordered by the Supreme Court in M. C. Mehta V/s
Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 382.
(m) The Honourable Court to recommend, if thought fit to the 1st
and 3rd respondent to enact a legislation for setting upenvironment protection commissions at national, state and
district level headed by retired judges and judicial officers with
powers to watch, monitor and give directions to the Central and
State pollution boards on their working and also with powers toreceive complaints from the public on environment violations to
deal with and resolve the same. ”
2. The first relief claimed is that this court should ban the practice of
immersion of any idols of gods, goddesses, tajia or otherwise under
religious rituals or under any other pretext in natural streams. The
petitioner has taken us to various religious scriptures to canvass that the
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
6
immersion of idols in river cannot be justified on any count. According to
the petitioner in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region alone about 1,50,000
Ganesh idols are immersed in rivers, wells, lakes and sea every year during
10 days Ganpati festival in the month of September. Out of these 1,50,000
Ganesh idols about 1,00,000 come to the share of the Mumbai beaches.
These idols measure from 2 ft. to 20 ft. in height which are made of plaster
of paris mixed with several ingredients and paints which are poisonous
and fatal to marine life. Then he has contended in his petition that all
religions preach love, compassion and non-violence, particularly Hindu
and Jain religions. The ban on cow slaughter is the state policy and due to
intense agitation and fasting by some Jain munis against new slaughter
houses the Union Government had to shelve the project. He also
contended that Ganpati Bappa, so merciful and kind will hate a pooja
destroying marine life.
3. So many reliefs have been claimed as is pointed out above. The
petitioner appears to be mainly concerned with the immersion of the
Ganesh idols during Ganpati festival days. Then he has taken quotations
from Mahabharat and Ramayan and according to the shloka no. 95:17-18
excerpted from Ramayan in Sanskrit and as per the translation in English
given by the petitioner it appears to be a conversation between Lord Ram
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
7
and Sita and according to it, Lord Ram says to Sita – “O Sita, sitting with
you in this wonderful place, eating these sweet fruits and roots, neither do
I want to return to Ayodhya nor do I desire a kingdom. The bank of this
Mandakini river, frequented by elephants, where lions and monkeys come
to drink water, decorated and lined by flower laden trees it is impossible
that person does not forget sorrow and feels happy”. He has referred to
various other religious authorities to suggest that the pollution of
atmosphere and water bodies was against every religion, particularly
Hinduism. He also quoted the scripture, which says: “On arrival at the
sacred waters of the Ganga, thirteen practices are forbidden. They are:
defecation, washing of person, hands or sacred vessels, ablution, discharge
of water, throwing of used floral offerings, rubbing filth, body shampooing,
joking / merry making, frolicking, acceptance of donations, obscenity,
offering inappropriate hymns/praises, discarding garments, beating and
swimming across”.
4. The counter affidavit filed by the Chief Secretary says, nobody can
justify the pollution of atmosphere or of water bodies. This court will not
be in a position to decide about what a religion permits and what a
religion does not permit. But the public sentiments and the public interest
sometimes do not go hand-in-hand and at times it is found difficult to
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
8
reconcile between two and it is always necessary in such situations that the
Government handle the matter in a way which would ultimately serve the
public purpose. The Union of India has filed an affidavit through the
Additional Director in the Ministry of Environment and Forests. It is
submitted in his affidavit that the pollution caused by the immersion of
idols is not disputed. He has further stated that the Central Government is
seized of the matter and is taking further steps to evolve guidelines at
National level for the immersion of idols and other pooja materials during
festival and another occasions in the water bodies. The Chief Secretary in
his affidavit has answered point by point the assertions made in the
petition and has also stated in his affidavit that after the court passed an
order on 30th January, 2008 directing him to file an affidavit a meeting
was held with concerned departments to put up a report to him. On the
basis of the said reports the affidavit was filed by the Chief Secretary. With
regard to the ill effects of water and noise pollution, the Chief Secretary
has maintained that creating public awareness would be as important as
implementation of laws. But unfortunately the Chief Secretary has not
given any details about its programme of creating public awareness about
the pollution of water bodies and the environment in general. It is merely
stated that for creating public awareness print and electronic media is
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
9
being used. He has also stated that the environmental education is now
being imparted to the school children which is a welcome step.
5. We expect that the Government would constitute a Committee and
divide the methodology by which the public shall be made aware about the
needs to protect the water bodies and the environment.
6. As there is no dispute that the pollution must be controlled,
therefore, some reliefs claimed can immediately be granted such as a
direction to respondents to construct adequate number of ladies and gents
toilets at the stretch of the beach between Santacruz and Khar Danda.
Therefore, we direct that the State Government should take up this
construction of toilets at the earliest.
7. Other reliefs, mainly, are again with respect to the water bodies as
the petitioners seek a direction that there should be ban on the immersion
of full or half burnt bones of dead bodies or ashes in the water streams,
the petitioners claimed that there should not be mass or community
bathing during auspicious religious occasions in the water bodies. The
Central Government in its counter affidavit has stated, as has been pointed
out hereinabove, that the Government is seized of the matter and is taking
further steps to evolve guidelines at National level for the immersion of
idols and other pooja materials during festival and another occasions in
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::
10
the water bodies. We expect that the Central Government will consider
laying down of guidelines for immersion of idols and would also consider
related matters with regard to pollution of water bodies. Both the Union
Government as well as the State Government shall consider it
expeditiously because the time lost involving the pollution might prove
dangerous for environment of the country in long run.
8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
ig Sd/-
(BILAL NAZKI, J.)
Sd/
(A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 13:37:11 :::