JUDGMENT

Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J.-The petitioner is a practising advocate. She has filed the present petition as a public interest petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are the Gas Authority of India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as GAIL ), the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ONGC ), the Central Pollution Control Board and the Union of India.

2. The petitioner contends that the high pressure gas pipelines laid by GAIL and/or ONGC are unsafe in certain specified places and are potentially hazardous. The petitioner has prayed that these pipelines should be closed until an independent enquiry by experts certifies and declares that these pipelines are safe for further operation. The petition was filed pursuant to gas leakage from a high pressure gas pipeline of GAIL at Dhaula Kuan in Delhi on or about 8th of July, 1993.

3. GAIL was formed in the year 1984 for the purpose of handling natural gas related activities. Originally ONGC had planned the HBJ pipeline which was to run from Hazira to Babrala and Jagdishpur for supply of gas to the fertilizer and power plants enroute. This pipeline was taken over by GAIL from ONGC in the conceptualisation stage itself. Subsequently, GAIL added additional pipelines and spurlines to the HBJ pipeline. ONGC had also laid around 680 kms. of pipelines in various locations of the country such as the Gujarat region, Assam region, Bombay region, K.G. basin, Cauvery basin etc. All these pipelines were transferred to GAIL during the period 1994-95. According to GAIL, a health check of all these lines was carried out when it took over these pipelines. After the check, necessary corrective action which included replacement of some of the pipelines was also taken by GAIL both from the safety point of view as well as operational point of view. As of now, GAIL operates a total of 2974.856 kms. of pipelines.

6. The petitioner has contended that the pipelines have not been laid as per applicable international standards ANSI/ASME B 31.8 of 82. The specific averments in the petition relate to the DESU-Maruti Spurline laid by GAIL which admeasures about 35 kms. According to the petitioner, the terms and conditions on which GAIL had given the contract for laying this pipeline have not been complied with. She contends that gas leakage detection and automatic shutting down system has not been provided. Telesupervisory system is not provided. Gas pipeline was required to be buried at least 1.5 meters below the ground. But the gas pipeline has not been so laid. The gas pipeline was required to be laid keeping adequate distance from human settlements but this has also not been done and lastly she contends that GAIL has not obtained clearance from the Department of Explosives. She has alleged lack of experience, lack of supervision or control by GAIL officials and mismanagement by GAIL so that the contractors have used sub-standard material and bad workmanship in laying the pipeline in violation of the safety guidelines. This resulted in gas leakage from this pipeline at Dhaula Kuan on 8th July, 1993.

4. GAIL has filed a detailed affidavit in reply to these allegations. It has laid before us three reports of experts in connection with the laying of the DESU-Maruti Spurline as also in connection with the safety of its pipeline system. GAIL has also furnished to us detailed technical material in connection with the allegations made by the petitioner.

5. GAIL has submitted that it had decided to lay the DESU-Maruti Spurline which is a short line by using their in-house experience. They had given a contract for the laying of this pipeline stipulating all the necessary conditions ensuring safety of the system. The contractor, however, defaulted in many ways while laying this pipeline. Ultimately GAIL was compelled to terminate his contract. There is an arbitration pending between GAIL and the contractor in connection with the defective workmanship and the ter