SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- G.B. Pattanaik and M.B. Shah, JJ.

IA No. 419 in IAs Nos. 45 and 22 in WP (C) No. 4677 of 1985. D/d. 24.11.1999.

M.C. Mehta - Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others - Respondents

M.C. Mehta - Petitioner

Versus

Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate C.E.T.P. Society, Re - Respondents

For the Petitioner :- M.C. Mehta, Petitioner-in-person and Ms. Seema Midha, Advocates.

For the Applicant:- R. Mohan, Senior Advocate (S. Sukumaran, Advocate for JBD & Co., Ranjit Kumar (Amicus Curiae), Vijay Panjwani, V.B. Saharya, Advocates for Saharya & Co., Advocates with him).

For the Union of India :- C.V.S. Rao, B.V. Balram Das, D.N. Goburdhan, Ms. Geeta Luthra, S.K. Bhattacharya, R.C. Verma, Ms. Madhu Sikri, Ashok Bhan and Ms. Sushma Suri, Advocates.

Environment and Pollution - Central Effluent Treatment Plant (CETP) - Application seeking exemption from payment of contribution for CETP construction on grounds that applicant had paid money to Municipal Corporation for construction of STPs - Clarified that it was not the intention of Supreme Court while directing construction of CETP to allow any industry to have their own STP and in that view of the matter the question of construction of STP to be a substitute for CETP does not arise - Application dismissed.

[Para 1]

ORDER

G.B. Pattanaik, J. - This IA has been filed by Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate CETP Society alleging therein that since they have their sewerage treatment plants (STP) being constructed by MCD and they have paid necessary money to MCD it will not be necessary for them to make any contribution for the construction of CETP. This Court in consideration of the requirement of all the industries in the area issued direction for construction of CETP and has passed orders as to the proportion of expenses to be borne by the industries in question. After the order, to the report by NEERI when grievances were made by several industries, the Court was persuaded to request NEERI to re-examine the grievances as it was found that certain inaccuracy had crept in the said report of NEERI. After hearing the grievances of the industries concerned, NEERI itself has given a revised report which has already been accepted by this Court. The present application was filed subsequent thereto. Even in the case in hand, in view of the assertions made we had called upon NEERI to submit its response indicating as to whether in terms of the order of this Court the applicant would be required to make contribution for the construction of CETP. Dr. S.N. Kaul and Mr. Gupta, Scientists, NEERI, Nagpur have filed affidavit indicating therein that the statement made by Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate CETP Society is not in conformity with the statement made by the Society before the Committee constituted by the Director, NEERI to hear the grievances of the Society. It has further been indicated that it was not the intention of this Court while directing construction of CETP to allow any industry to have their own STP and in that view of the matter the question of construction of STP to be a substitute for CETP does not arise.

2. Accordingly, we dismiss this application.

Application dismissed.