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

1999 Supreme(Guj) 622

D.H.WAGHELA, R.K.ABICHANDANI
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF AHMEDABAD – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: ASIM J.PANDYA, K.H.BAGCHI, P.M.RAVAL, S.B.VAKIL

R. K. ABICHANDANI, J.

( 1 ) THE Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad has in this group of petitions sought a declaration that the requirements denoted by the word "successfully" and by the words "and so long as it functions successfully" in Rule 6 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Rules, 1976 are inconsistent with the provisions of Section 7 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 and therefore inoperative and void. The petitioner Corporation has challenged the order dated 31st December, 1985 passed by the appellate authority and the revised assessment order dated 9/01/1985 which was consequentially made.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the polluting parameters as mentioned in the conditions imposed under the consent granted to the petitioner under Section 25 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the maximum permissible limits of ranges allowed as per the consent condition were as under: (1) b. O. D. 20 mg. /l. (2) suspended Solids 30 mg. /l. The Legislature with a view to provide adequate funds to the State Boards for their effective functioning, enacted the Water (Prevention and Control of Poll



















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