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

1992 Supreme(Bom) 249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(PANAJI BENCH)
Pendse M.L. Kamat G.D., JJ.
Goa Foundation another.... Petitioners.
Versus
Konkan Railway Corporation others.... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 170 of 1992, decided on 29-4-1992.
Advocates appeared :
A. Grover Mrs. Norma Alvares, for petitioners.
S.K. Kakodkar, S.A. with E. Afonso, for respondent No. 1.
J. Dias, A.G. with Mrs. S. Albuquerque, A.G., for respondents Nos. 2 4.
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, Standing Counsel, for respondent No. 3.

Headnote:Article 226-Public Interest litigation-Protection and Improvement of natural environment,

       Project providing new broad guage Railway line passing through States of Maharashtra, Goa & Karnataka. For improving economic conditions of public. Approval of renowned experts in area for project existing. Alleged in petition that project destructive of environment, churches, temples and ecosystem and violative of citizens rights under Article 21. High Court declined to interfere with project of such gigantic magnitude.

       Articles 226-Public interest litigation-Providing of new broad guage railway line-Passing through three States-Writ against Alignment would extinguish ecologically sensitive areas like C wetlands where migratory birds visit during course of year-This would prevent such birds from reaching State of Goa-Apprehension entirely imaginary and without substance - Petition to be turned down.

       ENVIRONMENT (PROTECTION) ACT 1986.

       Section 3 (3)-Laying of new broad gauge railway line-Public interest litigation-Ground-Work of bunding needed for the purpose would require clearance from Environment Ministry as per Notification issued under Section 3 (2).

       Held-Providing of railway line not an industry. Hence activities of bunding undertaken by Corporation not a prohibited activity, said notification prescribing restrictions on setting up and expansion of industries, operations or process in the coastal Regulation zone not applicable to laying of view railway line, No clearance required from Environment Ministry.

       FORESTS (CONSERVATION)ACT, 1980

       Section 2-Laying of new broad gauge line-Grievance in petition-Alignment passing through Forest land-Corporation not secured prior approval of Central Government for use of land for non-forest purpose.

       Held-Project already approved by Central Government and Railway Ministry. Use of forest land not going to affect or damage existence of forests prior approval of Central Government under Section 2 not necessary.

       

       PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION.

       See Constitution of India, Article 226.

JUDGMENT - PENDSE M.L., J.:—Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Kakodkar waives service on behalf of respondent No. 1. Mr. Dias, Advocate General, on behalf of respondents Nos. 2 and 4 and Mr. Khandeparkar on behalf of respondent No. 3. Heard Counsel.

Very few people are fortunate to see their dreams fulfilled and people residing on the west coast saw fulfilment of their dream when the Central Government decided to provide a broad gauge railway line from Bombay to Mangalore and thereafter to extend to the State of Kerala. It was a long-standing demand of the people in the region for a cheap and fast transport to improve the economic conditions and to make accessible the hinterlands in the State of Maharashtra, State of Goa and State of Karnataka. The Central Government was considering providing a railway line for a considerable length of time but the project was postponed from time to time due to lack of requisite funds. Ultimately the Central Government took a decision to provide the line and to achieve that purpose The Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd., a public limited Company, was set up. The length of the line from Bombay to Mangalore along the west coast is to be 760 Kilometres and out of that 106 Kilometres line runs through the State of Goa. The cost of the project was envisaged at Rs. 1391 crores in the year 1991-92. The Central Government set up a Corporation as the total allocation of the Planning Commission was only to the order of Rs. 300 crores and, therefore, it was incumbent for the Corporation to raise the funds for seeking equity contribution from the Ministry of Railways and the beneficiary States of Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka and Kerala. The Corporation was also conferred with powers to raise money with issuance of 9% tax-free bonds from financial institutions and public borrowings. The Konkan Railway alignment passes through different terrain in different States and the Corporation is required to construct large number of tunnels and projects over rivers. The Railway line will have 136 major bridges and 1670 minor bridges and there will be 71 tunnels with a total length of 75 Kms. The Konkan Railway is the biggest railway project undertaken in the Indian sub-continent in the present century. The project was approved after detailed and long-drawn survey of various aspects of the matter and the Corporation was constituted in July, 1990 to undertake the exercise which is of an extensive magnitude. The project commenced on October 15, 1990 and the Government of Goa approved the alignment passing through the State of Goa on December 17, 1990.

2. The petitioner No. 1 is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and claims to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, river and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures. The petitioners approached this Court by filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution with the prayer that the Corporation should be compelled to procure environment clearance for the alignment passing through the State of Goa from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, and until such clearance is secured all the work in respect of providing railway line should be withheld. The grievance of the petitioners is that the proposed alignment has been planned and undertaken without an adequate Environment Impact Assessment (E.I.A.) and an Environment Management Plan (E.M.P.). The petitioners claim that the proposed alignment is wholly destructive of the environment and the eco-system and violates the citizens' rights under Article 21 of the Constitution. The petitioners also claim that even though the ecological damage will not be felt immediately, such damage will be gradual and will lead to the deterioration of the land quality and will affect large number of people. The petitioners further claim that as the proposed alignment passes across the rivers, creeks, basins and backwaters, the Corporation cannot proc
























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 Back to top