Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) THE appellant herein was the respondent No. 6 in WPS No. 4819/2003 which was allowed in favour of the petitioner -Central Coalfields Limited (1st respondent herein). By the judgment impugned dated 17th December 2003, learned Single Judge quashed the order dated 15th June 2003 issued by the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board (Respondent No. 6 herein) directing the writ petitioner to help the appellant to remove the slurry from the plot Nos. 836P, 837, 839P, 840 and 841P. It also quashed the Memo issued by the Deputy Collector Incharge, Bokaro to officer -in -charge, Gumla Police Station directing the writ petitioner to give all possible assistance to the appellant in removing the slurry from the plots in question. The appellant had earlier preferred a Public Interest Litigation being CWJC No. 4304/90 before the Patna High Court seeking issuance of writ/order/or direction upon the chairman of the Bihar State Pollution Control Board to stop flow of slurry from the Swang Coal Washery alleging that the same were being made at the raiyati land of the petitioner. He also sought direction to prohibit the respondents from creating obstruction against the petitioner from removing the slurry deposited in his raiyati land. The petitioner/appellant herein, in the said writ petition claimed to have the Registered Power of Attorney executed by Sri Sahdeo Nayak and Sri Chandradeo Nayak who had given the power of right, title and interest in respect of the said plots in favour of the petitioner. The public interest litigation was dismissed by the Division Bench of Patna High Court by judgment and order dated 18th November 1991, by observing that the writ petitioner had sought to achieve indirectly which could not be achieved directly and that the public interest litigation was filed with object of personal gain which the writ court refused to allow. It categorically observed that the petitioner cannot claim any direction from the Court forbidding the respondents from obstructing the petitioner from removing sludge/slurry from the plots in question. Incidentally, while dismissing the said PIL, the Division Bench at the end, made a passing observation i.e., if the petitioner persists in doing so without authorization from the Central Government in accordance with law, the authorities may be justified in taking appropriate action against the petitioner.
(2.) PERHAPS , taking a cue from the observation made, the appellant herein approached the Ministry of Forest and Environment, Government of India stating that the respondent Central Coalfields Limited has been depositing slurry for the last 15 years on his rayati land which he may be allowed to remove. Consequent thereupon, Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board issued an order dated 15th June 2003 directing the Central Coalfields Limited to help the appellant in removing slurry from his land. The writ petitioner -Central Coalfields Limited being aggrieved by the said direction, challenged the same in the writ petition from which the impugned judgment arises.
(3.) IT is the case of the appellant that the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition however chose to make an observation in relation to right, title and interest of the appellant over the land in question and that he was not entitled to remove slurry from those plots of the land, which was completely beyond the scope of the writ petition. In this background, the appellant had preferred the instant appeal.;