STATE OF KERALA Vs R. SUDHA .
Bench: H.L. DATTU,DIPAK MISRA
Case number: C.A. No.-005522-005522 / 2013
Diary number: 31304 / 2011
Advocates: RAMESH BABU M. R. Vs
SHIV SAGAR TIWARI
Page 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5522 OF 2013 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CIVIL)NO.30493 OF 2011)
STATE OF KERALA & ORS. ...APPELLANTS
VERSUS
R. SUDHA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order
passed by the High Court of Judicature of Kerala at Ernakulam in
W.P.(C)No.34496 of 2009, dated 22.08.2011.
3. The High Court by its order dated 06.01.2011 has issued
certain directions to the State Government. The directions reads as
under :
“This is a public interest litigation filed by an Advocate alleging dumping of waste, human excreta and other rubbish in rivers and in forests in and around Munnar. Reports of dumping of toilet waste in public places and in rivers are not so infrequent in the State. An amendment is brought to the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 by introducing Section 219 S whereby deposit of rubbish or filth or excreta in a public watercourse or water body or any water source within a Panchayat, is made a non-bailable offence punishable under the Act. It is not known whether there is corresponding provision in the Municipalites Act making same offence punishable in Municipalities. We are of the view that unless the State or the Municipal or Panchayat authorities provide space and facilities for treatment and disposal of sewage, toilet waste and other rubbish, people will continue to dump all these waste in rivers, water
Page 2
: 2 :
bodies or public places including Forest in the night as is done presently. Toilet cleaning is a regular operation going on in the urban areas and no Authority has ever bothered to find out where it is dumped. Only few cases of offence get detected because dumping is done in the night in a clandestine manner. Therefore, problem has to be sorted out by providing space for treatment and for disposal of sewage and other waste at various centres in the State and only licensed agencies should be engaged in cleaning operations. In fact hotels, resorts and even houses could be called upon to make contributions for treatment and disposal of sewage, human excreta and other rubbish generated by them. Constitution under Article 48 A specifically casts duty on the Government to protect the environment which obviously includes the water sources and rivers and, therefore, the Environment Ministry of the State should address the problem and find out solutions and implement the same at the earliest. We direct the State Environment Ministry to take a decision in consultation with the Ministry of Local Self Government and file a detailed report within three weeks from now. Government Pleader will forward copy of this order to the Government and file the report within the time stipulated above.”
Before the impugned order was passed, various orders were passed by
the High Court on 01.03.2011, 10.03.2011, 23.05.2011 and 18.07.2011
respectively.
4. When the matter was posted before this Court on
21.11.2011, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants and the Advocate General of the State of Kerala, had
sought for a short adjournment to make a statement before this Court
as to within what time the sewage treatment plant would be set up in
the State of Kerala. Thereafter, this Court by an interim order
dated 17.01.2012 while entertaining this appeal had stayed further
proceedings before the High Court in Writ Petition (C) No.34496 of
2009. The matter came up before this Court on 10.05.2013. On that
Page 3
: 3 :
day, we had observed that we are not satisfied with the affidavit
filed by the Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Government
of Kerala, dated 07.05.2013. In that view of the matter the Chief
Secretary of the State of Kerala was directed to file an appropriate
affidavit on the next date of hearing.
5. Pursuant to the direction so issued by us, the Chief
Secretary to the Government of Kerala has filed an affidavit. In our
view, this is nothing but a reiteration of the same affidavit filed
earlier. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that
the project implementation is adversely affected by wide spread
protest against setting up of sewage treatment plants and are
therefore not in a position to comply with the directions of the
High Court. The aforesaid reasons put forth by the learned counsel,
in our opinion, is not satisfactory and the reasons despite being
within the capacity of the appellants, have not exercised their
powers to resolve it. We once again reiterate that the affidavit
filed by the Chief Secretary is wholly unsatisfactory. In our view,
at this stage, it may not be necessary for us to go into the details
of the affidavits filed by the Chief Secretary and it would be in
the interest of justice of the parties that the interim orders
passed by this Court be vacated and thereafter the matter be left to
the High Court of Kerala to continue the proceedings in Writ
Petition (C)No.34496 of 2009. It is for the High Court of Kerala to
monitor the case and get appropriate affidavits from the authorities
in implementation of all its orders and directions issued earlier.
Page 4
: 4 :
6. In view of the above, we vacate the interim order granted
by this Court and further dispose of the appeal. It is now for the
High Court of Kerala to continue the proceedings in aforesaid Writ
Petition.
Ordered accordingly.
.......................J. (H.L. DATTU)
.......................J. (DIPAK MISRA)
NEW DELHI; JULY 16, 2013.