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

2015 Supreme(Bom) 368

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S. OKA & A.K. MENON, JJ.
Campaign against Manual Scavenging – Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Others – Respondents
Public Interest Litigation No. 8 of 2012 & Civil Application No. 45, 50 of 2015
Decided On : 5.3.2015

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Mihir Desai, Advocate Amicus Curiae.
Mr. N.D. Pote i/b Asim Sarode, Kulkarni and Associates for the Petitioner.
Mr. A.B. Vagyani GP a/w Mrs. M.P. Thakur for the Respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 6.
Mr. Uday Warunjikar, Mr. T.J. Pandian, Mr. R.V. Govilkar, Mr. Rahul Shivaji Kadam for the Applicant.
Mr. R.S. Apte, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Mandar Limaye for Warkari Sahitya Parishad.
Mr. Sarang Satish Aradhye for Respondent No.4.
Mr. Gopal Krishna Shivram Hegde for Respondent No.8.
Mr. Parag Vyas for Respondent No.2.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the protection of the environment and the fundamental rights of the citizens, as enshrined in the Constitution of India, justified the prohibition on activities on the river bed, including religious ceremonies.

Headnote:

Interim Directions - River Bed Use - Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2010 - Article 25, Article 51A, Article 21 of the Constitution of India - Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 - Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - Bhagwan Dass vs. U.P. and Others, (1976) 3 SCC 784 - Association of Environment Protection and State of Kerala and Others, (2013) 7 SCC 226 - Intellectuals Forum Tirupathi vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, (2006) 3 SCC 549 - Vellore Citizen's Welfare Forum vs. Union of India and Others, (1996) 5 SCC 647 - M.C. Mehta and Others vs. Union of India, (1997) 3 SCC 715 - Commissioner of Police and Others vs. Acharya Jagdishwarandanda Avadhuta and Another, (2014) 12 SCC 770

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dispute over the use of the river bed of the river Chandrabhaga for various activities, including the erection of temporary structures and holding of religious ceremonies. The court had issued interim directions to prohibit the use of the river bed for such activities, citing concerns about pollution and environmental degradation.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the activities on the river bed were leading to pollution and health hazards, and that the prohibition on such activities was necessary to protect the environment and the fundamental rights of the citizens to live in a clean and pollution-free atmosphere.

Issues: The main issue was whether the prohibition on activities on the river bed, including religious ceremonies, infringed upon the fundamental rights of the citizens, particularly under Article 25 of the Constitution of India.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prohibition on activities on the river bed was justified to protect the environment and the fundamental rights of the citizens. It cited various legal provisions, including the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2010, and interpretations of Article 25, Article 51A, and Article 21 of the Constitution of India, to support its decision.

Final Decision: The court rejected the prayers made by the Warkari organizations for modification of the interim directions, and directed a committee to identify areas where religious activities could be held. It also granted time to the State to file an affidavit on the implementation of statutory provisions.

ORDER

1. There are detailed interim orders issued by this Court at different stages. The main interim directions issued by this Court are contained in the orders dated 3rd July, 2014 and 24th December, 2014.

2. An occasion for reconsidering some of the interim directions arises in view of the prayer made by the learned senior counsel appearing for Warkari Sahitya Parishad, Maharashtra which is ordered to be impleaded as a party respondent under the order dated 13th June, 2014. Also there is an application being Civil Application No.50 of 2015 filed by another organisation of Warkari (Devotees of Lord Vithoba/Pilgrims who visit Pandharpur), namely, Warkari Seva Sangh. The main issue raised by both the organisations of Warkari is as regards the interim directions issued under the order dated 24th December, 2014 in relation to the use of river bed of the river Chandrabhaga for carrying on various activities. Based on the recommendations of the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), this Court issued directions on 24th December, 2014 directing that the river bed of Chandrabhagha shall not be used for any activity including for erection of temporary pendols, booths, shelters or for any other prohibited activity. Clause (v) of the operative part of the order dated 24th December, 2014 reads thus:

“(v) The Officers of the State shall ensure that river bed of river Chandrabhaga shall not be used for erection of any temporary pendols or any other construction or shelters or for any other prohibited activity. The State shall examine whether there are any illegal constructions erected on the river bed or by the side of the river bed as it is alleged that some construction made by ISKCON is illegal. If any such construction is found to be illegally constructed, the State or the Municipal Council, as the case may be, shall take necessary steps for the removal of the illegal structures. The Municipal Council shall ensure that barricades are erected at all important locations for preventing the entry of vehicles to the river bed. We direct the police authorities to render adequate police protection to the staff of the Pandharpur Municipal Council for the purposes of erecting barricades.”

(Emphasis added)

3. Before, we deal with submissions made in support of the prayer for modification of the first part of clause (v), we must note that learned Government Pleader assured the Court that necessary steps are being taken for identifying the illegal structures erected on the river bed or by the side of the river bed. He stated that the State Government is examining whether the construction made by ISKON is legal. He assured that the necessary action will be taken.

4. As far as the organisations of Warkari is concerned, in the order dated 24th December, 2014 this Court has extensively dealt with submissions made by the organisations of Warkari, which are applicants in Civil Application No.50 of 2014 and Civil Application No.192 of 2014.

5. Learned Senior Counsel representing Warkari Sahitya Parishad at the outset made it clear that said organisation reveres and respects the river Chandrabhagha and its members are not against the cleanliness of the dry river sand bed. He placed reliance on fundamental right to freedom of religion conferred by Article 25. He urged that there is a long standing custom and tradition which exists for 700 years and more of holding of Bhajans, Kirtans and Gajar on the river bed. He submitted that this practice is an essential part of the religion. He relied upon clause (f) Article 51A which postulates fundamental duties of the citizens as regards value and preservation of the rich heritage of our composite culture. He submitted that during Ashadi Ekadashi festival, there is no occasion to use the river bed as it is covered by the water. He submitted that during various other festivals, there is a tradition to use dry river sand bed for holding Kirtans, Bhajans, Gajar and Arti. He urged that this is a


























































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