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.