AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Application has been filed for modification/clarification of order dated 04.10.2018 and 10.12.2020 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No. 435/2016.
By order dated 04.10.2018, the Tribunal considered the issue of stopping of activities of servicing, repairing, denting, painting and junk dealing etc. being carried out by various unauthorised car workshops and car mechanics in the area near and around Chaudhary Brahm Prakash entry gate of village Nahar Pur and near Bhagwan Ram Mandir Temple Complex, Block-E, Rohini Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi110085, including sealing of the such unauthorised car workshops and mechanics shops. The Tribunal considered the grievance that these activities were in violation of Master Plan for Delhi 2021, and judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors., (2004) 6 SCC 588 and directed the Chief Secretary, Delhi, who was directed in MC Mehta, supra to oversee compliance, to look into the matter and take remedial action. Reference was also made to earlier orders of the Tribunal, in the light of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in MC Mehta, supra, dated 02.11.2015 in Original Application No. 197/2014 in Aviation Employees Cooperative Housing Building Society Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, EDMC, dated 20.07.2018 in Original Application No. 56(THC)/2013, Satish Kumar Vs. Union of India & Ors. and dated 28.09.2018 in Original Application No. 726/2017, Chattar Singh Rachhoya Vs. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors. directing the Chief Secretary, Delhi and other authorities to take necessary action. Operative part of order dated 4.10.2018 is as follows:
“(a) The units carrying out illegal activities and creating pollution, including unauthorized workshops, carrying out servicing, repairing, denting, painting, and junk dealing etc. in violation of law may be stopped forthwith. Report of action taken may be submitted before this Tribunal within one month.
(b) Respondents are held liable to pay environmental compensation of Rs. Fifty Thousand each for damage to the environment by their persistent defaults and inaction towards violations of the rules and directions issued by the Tribunal. This amount should be recovered from the heads of the said respondents personally to be deposited with the CPCB within one month.
(c) The Chief Secretary, Delhi may call a meeting of the concerned authorities and direct an action plan to be prepared and implemented by a team comprising the DCP of the area, SDM and the senior officer of DPCC. The said team must also conduct a public hearing on the spot atleast once in every week.
(d) The Chief Secretary may also indicate persons accountable for such repeated default and failures and take appropriate action under CCS (CCA), Rules, 1965 and submit action taken report to the Tribunal.”
Thereafter, vide order dated 10.12.2020, the matter was further considered along with other connected matters in light of compliance report filed before this Tribunal, leaving further monitoring to the statutory authorities in terms of order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta (Supra). The operative part of the order is reproduced below:-
“13. The matter having been monitored before this Tribunal for more than seven years, we do not find it necessary to keep the matter pending for indefinite period. It is for the statutory authorities to continue further steps for enforcement of environmental norms as per law. In view of order dated 20.3.2020, disposing of the final report of the OC headed by Justice Pratibha Rani, former Judge, Delhi High Court, further monitoring will be in terms of order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta (supra), by the Chief Secretary, Delhi.
Accordingly, we close the proceedings with hope and expectation that the concerned authorities will take necessary steps for maintaining environmental norms. There has to be continuous vigil against causing of pollution, particularly burning of plastic and other waste for protection of environment and public health. The amount of compensation recovered must be properly utilized for legitimate purpose with the approval of the CPCB, as already directed. If there is any violation of environmental norms, the aggrieved party will be free to take remedies as per law, as and when necessary. All the applications will accordingly stand disposed of. Pending IAs/MAs will also stand disposed of.”
In the present application for clarification/modification filed by Umesh Yadav and Dheeraj Yadav (M.A. No. 44/2023 and 45/2023) and Giriraj Yadav, Ajit Singh Yadav, Brahmjeet Yadav and Jagbir Singh (M.A. No. 46/2023 and 47/2023), it is sought to be argued that properties of applicants have been sealed illegally.
We have heard learned Counsels for the applicants.
We find that the issue sought to be raised is beyond the scope of post decisional ‘clarification’ jurisdiction which does not involve any fresh adjudication as is involved in the issue raised. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in MC Mehta, supra or this Tribunal in issuing directions for remedial action by authorities against activities against master plan, in violation of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court, did not adjudicate individual cases. This was left to be done by the statutory authorities on individual merits. May be, status report of the authorities was noted in the orders, but it did not amount of adjudication of individual issues by the Tribunal. Any dispute arising in respect of any individual cases may have to be adjudicated upon at appropriate forum and not in ‘clarification’ jurisdiction, as sought to be done.
The applications are disposed of accordingly.