RUMA PAL, S.B.SINHA, S.H.KAPADIA
M. C. MEHTA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
ORDER
1. It appears that a meeting was held between the Joint Director (Tourism), Regional Officer, U.P. Pollution Control, Agra, the representatives. of CISF, the representatives of the Agra Development Authority, Agra, the representatives of ASI, the police and the District Magistrate, Agra on 19-72004 at which certain proposals like with regard to the illumination of the Tajmonument at night were agreed to. The proposals do not appear to have been cleared by NEERI. This must be obtained before this Court can act on the . basis of the proposals. The proposals should also incorporate the suggestions made by ASI in para 17 and para 3 of the parawise comment of the affidavit filed by ASI. In addition, the proposal should include a direction that Mr Krishan Mahajan, Advocate, should on occasions and according to his convenience, visit the Taj during the night viewing programme in order to see whether the proposals are complied with. Put up after NEERIs clearance and after the x-ray machines have been put in as per CISFs requirements, and computers have been installed by ASI, the cost whereof shall be borne by the State of V.P.
2. ASI as well as CISF are granted liberty to place their
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.