SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- Y.K. Sabharwal and P.P. Naolekar, JJ.

Writ Petition (CIVIL) NO(s). 460 OF 2004 With W.P(C) NO. 91 of 2005. D/d. 11.5.2005.

Goa Foundation - Petitioners

Versus

Union Of India - Respondents

For Petitioners :- Ms. Purnima Bhat,Adv. Mr. S.K. Dholakia, Sr.Adv. Dr. A. Francis Julian, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv. for M/s. Arputham, Aruna & Co., Advs.

For Respondents :- Mr. T.R. Andhyarujina, Sr.Adv. Mr. U.A. Rana, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. for M/s. Gagrat & Co., Advs. IAs.30-55 and 64: Mr. K.K. Venugopal, Sr.Adv. Mr. O. Athai, ADv. Mr. P. Venugopal, Adv. Mr. P.S.Sudheer, Adv. for M/s. K.J. John & Co., Advs. IAs.25-26: Ms. Shally B. Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Ashok Grover, Sr.Adv. Ms. Anupama Grover, Adv. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, Adv. -TISCO Ltd.: Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Sr.Adv. Mr. Arun Jaitley, Sr.Adv. Mr. Gopal Jain, Adv. Mr. R.N. Karanjawala, Adv. Mrs. Meena Lall, Adv. Ms. Nandini Gore, Adv. Mr. Bharat Singh, Adv. Ms. Kanika, Adv. Mrs. Manik Karanjawala, Adv. IA 124: Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Sr.Adv. Mr. Rajinder Barot, Adv. Mr. N. Ganpathy, Adv. .As.5 and 6: Mr. Sunil Dogra, Adv. Mr. S.U.K. Sagar, Adv. Ms. Bina Madhavan, Adv. Ms. Susan Zachariah, Adv. Mr. A.Venayagam, Adv. for M/s. Lawyer's Knit & Co., Advs. I.As.4 and 109: Mr. K. Parasaran, Sr.Adv. Mr. Pradeep Tiwary, Adv. Mr. S. Chandra Shekhar, Adv. I.A.12 and 14: Mr. K.K. Venugopal, Sr.Av. Mr. D. Srinivas Prasad, Adv. Mr. S. Chandra Shekhar, Adv. I.As.13 and 89: Mr. Gopal Subramanium, Sr.Adv. Mr. D. Srinivas Prasad, Adv. Mr. S. Chandra Shekhar, Adv. I.A.Nos.15 and 16: Mr. Arun Jaitley, Sr.Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh, Adv. Mr. S. Chandra Shekhar, Adv. I.As.77 and 63: Mr. Vijay Hansaria, Sr.Adv. Mr. S. Chandra Shekhar, Adv. I.As.25-26: Mr. Rishi Maheshwari, Adv. Ms. Shally B. Maheshwari, Adv. I.As.129-130: Mr. M.K. Dua, Adv. I.A.3: Mr. K. Parasaran, Sr.Adv. Mr. K. Swami, Adv. Mrs. Prabha Swami, Adv. Mr. G.E.Vahanvati, S.G. Mr. Anip Sachthey, Adv. Mr. Shriniwas R. Khalap, Adv. Mr. E. Venu Kumar, Adv. I.A.Nos.19-28 and 2 67-76: Mr. V. Munishi, Adv. Mr. Manoj Sharma, Adv. -MoEF: Mr. G.E. Vahanvati, S.G. Mr. Vikas Sharma, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv. Ms. Shilpa Singh, Adv. -Rajasthan: Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta, AAG. Mr. Naveen Kr. Singh, Adv. Ms. Shivangi, Adv. -Maharashtra: Mr. S.S. Shinde, Adv. Mr. A.P. Mayee, Adv. Mr. Bhavanishankar V. Gadnis, Adv. Mrs. B. Sunita B. Rao, Adv. Mr. B. Partha Sarthy,Adv. Mr. Bharat Sangal,Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain,Adv.

Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Section 5 - Constitution of India, Articles 21, 48A and 51A(g) and 47 - Mining and industrial activities - Direction for closure of defaulting units which continue to operate in violation of environmental laws - However, against the blanket order of Govt. of India, defaulting units may approach the Apex Court and Govt. of India may permit them to operate if they show compliance of environmental laws.

[Para 4]

ORDER

Y.K. Sabharwal, J.

W.P. (C) No. 460/2004.

1. In the order dated 21st February, 2005, this Court observed that the Government of India is not powerless to ensure compliance with the environmental laws, in particular, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Government was directed to issue requisite order within a period of ten days directing closure of defaulting units which continue to operate in violation of environmental laws and the State Governments were also directed to comply with the statutory directions issued by the Government of India. Pursuant thereto, the Government of India passed an order dated 2nd March, 2005. The effect of the order was closure of various units. This led to filing of spate of applications by various units which were closed or were apprehending closure pursuant to the order dated 2nd March, 2005. Having regard to the totality of the circumstances and in the background noticed in the order dated 11th March, 2005, the operation of the order dated 2nd March, 2005 issued by the Government of India was stayed while directing the Ministry of Environment and Forests to process the applications.

2. When the matter was taken up on 25th April, 2005, the Ministry of Environment and Forests was directed to examine various applications and file report so as to assist the Court on the issue of interim directions, particularly, in regard to the units which are operating in blatant violation of various environmental laws. Pursuant to the said order, learned Solicitor General has filed the status of the units as on 10th May, 2005. Presently, it may be clarified, this Court is only considering the issue of interim directions having granted a blanket stay of order dated 2nd March, 2005 of the Government of India in terms of the order dated 11th March, 2005.

3. The status report divides the total 292 units into two categories, i.e., Industry and Mining. There are 121 units in Industry category and 171 units in the Mining category. Insofar as the 121 units are concerned, having perused the status report, we do not think that for the present, any modification of order dated 11th March, 2005 is required at this stage. We are told by learned Solicitor General that in respect of the remaining 62 units, the matter is likely to be finalised in about three months' time as in most of the said cases, public hearing was supposed to have taken place in the month of April, 2005.

4. This leaves 171 units in the category of Mining. Out of 171 units, two units have been declined clearance. Their applications for grant of clearance has been rejected. Insofar as those two units are concerned, the order dated 2nd March, 2005 would operate. The Ministry seems to have granted clearance to 18 units and, therefore, there is no question of the said units being ordered to be closed at this stage. The 171 units of Mining category has also 35 coal mines in various States, in all, producing approximately 35 million tonnes coal. The said category of 35 units deserve to be protected for the present. Deducting the said 35 units from the list of 99 out of the aforesaid category of Mining, the remaining units are 64 falling in the category of Non-Coal Mining. Prima facie, it appears that the said 64 units are operating without the requisite clearance in violation of environmental laws. The order dated 11th March, 2005 is, accordingly, modified and it is directed that the order of the Government of India dated 2nd March, 2005 would apply to the said 64 units for the present.

5. This order would be without prejudice to the right of the said units to approach this Court and would also be without prejudice to the right of the Government of India to permit them to operate if any of the unit shows compliance of environmental laws and if clearance is granted by the Government.

W.P. (C) No. 91/2005.

6. List these matters in the first week of August, 2005.

.