IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     W.P. (PIL) No.6141 of 2008
Rajneesh Misra       ...    ...     ...     ...     ...       ...     Petitioner
                          Versus
The Union of India and others ...     ...     ...     ...   Respondents
                      ------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

-----

For the Petitioner: M/s. Abhinesh Kumar, Vineet Vashistha For the Respondents: M/s. Dilip Jerath, A.R. Choudhary, K.K. Ambastha

------

79/Dated: 21st November, 2016 Per D.N. Patel, J.

1) The prayer in this Public Interest Litigation reads as under: -

"..... for the issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction, commanding upon the respondents to forthwith implement the directions of the Central Government under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, all its rules, the air (Prevention of Central of Pollution) Act 1981, its rules as also under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 in so far as they relate to standards of environment pollution caused by automobiles, other vehicles and generators both diesel and petrol and to strictly enforce the pollution norms as laid down under schedule 3 and schedule 4 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 and to forthwith ban plying of air polluting vehicles in the city limits of Ranchi, Dhanbad, Jamshedpur, Bokaro, Hazaribagh and Dumka to permit registration and running of only such commercial vehicles as comply the requirement of clean fuel vehicles"

2) When this Court asked the counsel for the State Government Mr. Vikash Kumar, he is unable to point out any direction issued by the Central Government under,

(a) the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986;

(b) the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981;

(c) the Rules under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981;

(d) the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988;

(e) the Rules under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

(f) the Environment Protection Rules, 1986;

3) Not a single guideline or direction issued by the Central Government could be pointed out by the counsel appearing on behalf of the State, nor he is pointing out anything how the State of Jharkhand is planning to implement those guidelines given by the Central Government under the aforesaid Acts and Rules.

4) Despite the Advocate General and the Additional Advocate General are available, we are not getting proper assistance from the State of Jharkhand.

5) We, therefore, appoint Sri Rajiv Ranjan, Senior Counsel, as Amicus Curiae to assist this Court on behalf of the State of Jharkhand in this matter.

6) Registrar General of this Court is directed to supply copies of the writ petition as well as the affidavits filed by all the parties in this litigation and the order-sheets passed by this Court in this matter, within a period of three weeks from today.

7) We also direct the Officers of the State of Jharkhand to assist the Amicus Curiae appointed by this Court, so that he can argue out the matter effectively and efficiently on behalf of the State Government on the next date of hearing.

8) This matter is adjourned to be enlisted on 14th December, 2016.

                                                          (D. N. Patel, J)


Manoj/                                                (Ratnaker Bhengra, J)