1

                                         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                       Civil Appeal   No(s).       12038/2018


     STATE INFRASTRUCTURE AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
     CORPORATION OF UTTARAKHAND LTD. (SIDCUL)                                   Appellant(s)

                                                      VERSUS


     SIDDH GARBYANG KALYAN SEWA SAMITI & ORS.                                   Respondent(s)

     WITH
     C.A. No. 3342/2019


                                                   O R D E R

While considering Original Application No.123 of 2018 and other connected matters, the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi vide its order dated 13.11.2018 passed following directions:

“1. The CPCB may forthwith consider whether the norms fixed by the Station Pollution Control Board, vide the order dated 14.06.2018, are in order and if not, what modifications are required. Such consideration may take place within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

2. The CPCB may carry out fresh inspection of CETP and the industries in question within one month.

3. The State PCB may take appropriate legal action based on the findings in the fresh inspection report. The action may also include initiating prosecution, imposing penalty, talking performance guarantee from the CETP, as the situation may require.

Signature Not Verified

4. For the past failure as noticed above, we assess the Digitally signed by INDU MARWAH Date: 2019.05.14 damage to the environment and the inhabitants to be 12:00:19 IST Reason: Rs.1 crore. This amount be deposited by the CETP and the SIDCUL to the extent of 50% each. Dispute of apportionment, if any, may be resolved separately. The amount may be deposited with the CPCB within one month. For any delay, interest @12% per month will accrue.  2 Out of the amount deposited, the CPCB may pay a sum of Rs.1 lakh as honorarium to the learned Amicus Curiae. Remaining amount may be spent on restoration of environment, as per norms and action plan.” These appeals are filed principally challenging the direction No.4 under which, after assessing damage to the environment and inhabitants at Rs.1 crore, further direction was passed directing CETP and the SIDCUL to deposit the amount in question. One of the submissions raised in the appeals is to the effect that before passing such direction, opportunity was not afforded to the appellants of hearing in connection with the report of the CPCB.

Mr. Raj Panjwani, learned Senior Advocate appearing for Respondent No.1 invited our attention to the counter affidavit filed by the State, wherein following averments were made:

“..

5. It is relevant to mention herein that the State of Uttarakhand accepts the report of Uttarakhand Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board. And is being directed to take action as provided under relevant sections of The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.

6. It is also pertinent to mention herein that the directions are also being issued to State Industrial Development Corporation of Uttarakhand Limited (SIDCUL) to ensure that all industries and CEPT,s located in Sitarganj Industrial Area adhere to all the conditions stipulated by Uttarakhand Environment Protection and Pollution Control Board at the time of giving CCA (Consolidated Consent and Authorisation).” The aforesaid counter affidavit was filed sometime in 09.04.2019 while the directions in question were passed by the National Green Tribunal on 13.11.2018.

Be that as it may, since the grievance is raised that no opportunity was given, we relegate the parties to the National  3 Green Tribunal and direct the parties to appear before the Tribunal on 01.05.2019 to raise appropriate grievance. We request the Tribunal to consider the grievance and decide the matter afresh.

The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 1 st May, 2019 with their appropriate grievance and will not plead for any further adjournments.

After considering the objections/grievances, the National Green Tribunal may pass appropriate orders.

The appeals are disposed of with aforesaid direction. We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter ………………………………………………………………….J.

[UDAY UMESH LALIT] ………………………………………………………....J.

[INDU MALHOTRA ] New Delhi, April 25, 2019.

ITEM NO.6                 COURT NO.8                SECTION XVII
                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal    No(s). 12038/2018

STATE INFRASTRUCTURE AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF UTTARAKHAND LTD. (SIDCUL) Appellant(s) VERSUS SIDDH GARBYANG KALYAN SEWA SAMITI & ORS. Respondent(s) (Applications for exemption to file O.T. & ex-parte stay) WITH C.A. No. 3342/2019 (XVII) (IA No.47840/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.47838/2019-EX-PARTE STAY and IA No.47839/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.47841/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING) Date : 25-04-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA For Appellant(s) Mr. Rahul Verma, Adv.

Ms. Filza Moonis, AOR Mr. Manoj K. Singh, Adv Nilava Bandyopadhay, Adv.

Mr. Rahul Pandey, Adv.

Mr. Prem Prakash, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Raj Panjwani, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Meera Gopal, Adv.

Ms. Shibani Ghosh, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned.

The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(INDU MARWAH)                                      (RAJINDER KAUR)
COURT MASTER                                        BRANCH OFFICER

(signed order is placed on the file) 5