SUO MOTU Vs. STATE OF GOA
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
STATE OF GOA
Click here to view full judgement.
F.M. Reis, J. -
(1.) Heard Mr. Shivan Desai, learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. Dattaprasad Lawande, learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents, Mr. V. A. Lawande, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in MCA No.657 of 2017, Mr. V. Rodrigues, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in MCA No.656 of 2017 and Ms. A. Gode, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in MCA No.647 of 2017.
(2.) Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel. The learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the respective respondents waives service.
(3.) The Suo Motu cognizance was taken with regard to pollution in the vicinity of Sonshi mine based on the newspaper report of "Herald" dated 16.04.2017. After notice was issued to the concerned respondents, the reply filed by the respondents in fact does accept the position that immediate measures had to be taken in view of the disturbance in the environment and the safety of the people living in the vicinity of Sonshi mine. In this connection, an order was passed on 17.04.2017 inter alia issuing some directions to the respondents. Thereafter, an affidavit was filed and the matter was examined and with the assistance of the learned Amicus Curiae the matter was re-examined and by an order dated 27.04.2017 directions were issued to take effective measures to control the pollution at the site and even examine diverting the mining trucks to ensure that no health hazard would occasion to the inhabitants of the locality. It was also recorded therein that the respondents should provide potable drinking water to the affected villagers of the locality. A liberty was also reserved to any inhabitant or citizen affected to make a representation to the Pollution Control Board to examine such grievance. In the meanwhile, the respondents sought an opinion from the Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad who are stated to be experts to recommend measures to control mining pollution. Accordingly, a report has been submitted clearly specifying the measures which are required to control the pollution at the site. A clarification was sought on the applicability of the measures to be taken to control the pollution at the site. Some clarifications are mentioned at para 6 of the affidavit namely at paras (i), (ii) and (iii) which read thus :
(i) Since the alternate proposed route is passing through the mines roads of contiguous leases, standards for the emission or discharge of the environmental pollutants as prescribed in Rule 3(1) will apply.
(ii) The Ambient Air Quality w.r.t. settlement zone/residential areas adjoining the lease boundaries will be governed by Rule 3(3B).
(iii) NAMP locations will be governed by Rule 3(3B)."
Besides, the affidavit of the Pollution Control Board further states that at the meeting of the Board, it was resolved to accept the clarification and take measures in such direction.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.