- (1.) Today, when the matter reached hearing, we have informed learned Counsel appearing for respective parties that following Issues arising in this petition are required to be complied with. They are as follows: Steps required to be taken in 'A Quite Flows Maili Yamuna' (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 725 of 1994)
(2.) This Writ Petition came to be registered on a suo moto notice issued by this Court upon an article published in the Hindustan Times dated 18th July, 1994. The scope of this petition was even sought to be enlarged by filing an application being I.A. No. 27 in this Writ Petition praying for interlinking of all major rivers in India. This prayer was not granted by the Court, but I.A. No. 27 was ordered to be independently registered as Writ Petition (Civil) No. 512 of 2002, which has been disposed of vide a separate judgment by this very Bench today. Therefore, in the present Writ Petition, this Court is concerned only with the pollution being caused to the river Yamuna and complete deterioration in the quality of water in the said river, not only in Delhi, but also in the States of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. This Writ Petition is of the year 1994 and has been pending in this Court since then (approximately for a period of 18 years). This Court should find appropriate ways to pass such orders which would dispose of this petition while attaining the object of making the Yamuna pollution free. It should also ensure that no person, including corporations or other industries, discharge their sewage, trade or other effluents directly into Yamuna, without treating the same in accordance with the provisions of the Environment Protection Act. In order to have a complete background of this case and the directions required to be passed by this Court, it is required that: (i) the learned Counsel appearing for the parties be directed to file written submissions supported by an affidavit stating the complete background of the case according to that authority, litigant or industry, (ii) Whether any treatment plants have been constructed by the public authorities, in particular for treatment of sewage before its discharge into river Yamuna at Delhi, Haryana and the districts of Uttar Pradesh. If the answer to the same is in affirmative, then its details and if the same is in the negative, its reasons. It may also be stated as to why was it not possible for the concerned authorities to construct such treatment plants and ensure their functioning even after lapse of such a long period of time. If they could not be made operational, why the alternative systems of sewage or trade disposal were not adopted rather than discharging metric cubic tonnes of discharge into the Yamuna River. Whether any of the State Governments and particularly Haryana, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh has appointed Consultants to finalize the design and places of installation of sewerage treatment plants. If so, whether such experts have submitted their reports to the State Governments and what action has been taken by the respective State Governments.
(3.) Committees: - How many committees have been appointed under the orders of this Court or otherwise, by the State Governments, directly with reference to this writ petition. Details with regard to the functioning of these Committees, analysis of the reports, if any, submitted by the said Committees and implementation of their reports, may also be furnished.;