SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 860

A.P.MISRA, N.S.HEGDE
Indian Council For Enviro Legal Action – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


(1) IT has been pointed out to us that in the Order, D/- 11/4/2000 at internal Page No. 5 it has been recorded "We notice from the report of the State Pollution Control Board that no provision yet has been made for the confiscation of tankers which are illegally transporting the industrial effluents under the E.P. Act." We are informed that there is already such notification on 5/7/1999. To that extent the said order stands modified.

(2) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(3) TODAY we took up the report of the District Judge, Medak, D/- 25/10/1999 in pursuance to our earlier order for considering the payment of compensation to the persons, affected villagers as recorded therein.

(4) AT the outset an objection has been raised by some of the polluting industries who could not get the earlier report of the District Judge, D/- 7/1/1998 and even the present report they have received recently, hence could not file objections. Their further objection is that this report increases the area more than five times than what was recorded in the last report. Hence the amount of the excess area should not be reimbursed now. They have also raised objection to the i





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top