w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Manoj Mishra v/s Union Of India & Others

    Miscellaneous Application No. 75 of 2020, 76 of 2020 & Original Application No. 6 of 2012

    Decided On, 27 January 2021

    At, National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi


    For the Appearing Parties: Sameer S. Sinha, Advocate.

Judgment Text

1. These applications have been filed by Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) seeking permission for construction of CRPF Camp/Premises in flood plains of Yamuna, as per provisions of MPD 2021 and Development Control norms.

2. The direction sought is in conflict with the orders of this Tribunal dated 13.01.2015 as follows:-

"94. ....... we hereby issue the following directions in the larger environmental and public interest:

xxx xxx xxx

v(b) We direct and prohibit carrying on of any construction activity in the demarcated flood plain henceforth. We further direct the Principal Committee to identify or cause to be identified, all existing structures as of today which fall on the so identified and demarcated flood plain. Upon identification, the Principal Committee shall make its recommendations as to which of the structures ought or ought not to be demolished, in the interest of environment and ecology, particularly, if such structures have been raised in an unauthorised and illegal manner.

(c) The Principal Committee may keep in mind that certain structures need to be protected, amongst other reasons, for their historical, mythological and heritage importance and/or are protected structures. The Committee shall clearly spell out the regulatory regime that should be provided for dealing with such existing structure in the flood plain.

xxx xxx xxx

xxiii. We constitute the 'Principal Committee' which shall be responsible and under whose supervision the directions contained in this judgment and the project reports shall be completely, effectively and expeditiously complied with. All concerned Authorities, Corporations, DJB and any other department, responsible for carrying out directives of this judgment, shall report the matters and submit the respective reports and data to the Principal Committee, for onward transmission to this Tribunal. The Committee shall file quarterly report of compliance before the Tribunal.

The four Members, namely, Professor C.R. Babu, Professor A.K. Gosain, Professor Brij Gopal and Professor A.A. Kazmi shall be the Members of the Principal Committee and shall be associated with commencement and completion of all the aspects of this project.

xxx xxx xxx

xxviii. We grant liberty to all the parties, the applicants or even the public, to approach the Tribunal for any clarification or modification or for removal of any of the difficulties felt by them in implementation of the directions contained in this judgment and/or of the project reports."

3. Similar application filed by the Delhi Police was rejected vide order dated 28.09.2020 with the following observations:-


4. We are of the view that there is no ground to vary the directions in the order dated 13.09.2015 for the purpose sought. Having regard to the pitiable condition of river Yamuna, in spite of repeated directions of this Tribunal, what is necessary is stringent compliance of directions and not relaxation thereof. Activities which may be beneficial for the rejuvenation of the river like bio-diversity parks, artificial wetlands, afforestation etc. are required not the constructions. Idea of semi-permanent or temporary construction for utilization of the Police officials may not be a very germane idea. Such requirement is not temporary. Alternatives for viable permanent constructions may need to be explored.

5. The Tribunal considered the scope of varying the direction for prohibiting construction in the flood plain zones, even on the recommendation of the Principal Committee, vide order dated 05.02.2020 in M.A. No. 09/2020 as follows:-

"4. It is well settled that it is not be open to this Tribunal to pass any further order at variance with the judgment, in exercise of inherent power.[1] Liberty given in terms of para 94 (xxviii) is confined to clarification of a confusion and not to allow variation of the order. This Tribunal is not an authority to allow or disallow any particular project when such issue is required to be dealt with by concerned statutory authorities in the first instance.[2] However, issues arising out of orders of this Tribunal, to the extent the same have not attained finality, can be gone into by this Tribunal.

5to 7...xxx.....................xxx.....................xxx

8. We have given due consideration to the issue. As already observed above, while the modification of order of this Tribunal may not be permissible after the judgment, recommendations of the Principal Committee, within the purview of original order, can certainly be considered by this Tribunal, subject to any legal objection to the project and compliance of statutory requirements. The order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court does not deal with the issue of permissibility

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

of the project and it is not conclusive of the issue before this Tribunal." In the said application, the project was permitted on recommendations of the Principal Committee, as the project was found to be in public interest, not in any manner affecting the flood plains, subject to the cumulative impact assessment. The present project is right on the flood plains and has potential for generating solid waste and sewage, unlike the project which was earlier allowed." 4. Accordingly, these applications are dismissed.