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

2013 Supreme(HP) 891

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
RAJIV SHARMA AND V.K.SHARMA, JJ.
SANJEEV KUMAR, Reeta Devi - Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF H.P. - Respondents
CWP No. 1732/2010 along with CWP Nos.1885/2010 7033/2010, 4665/2013 and 4675/2013 & 4723/2013
Decided On : December 26, 2013

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Ajay Mohan, KARAN SINGH KANWAR, AJAY SHARMA, JANESH GUPTA, AJAY VAIDYA, R.L.SOOD, ARJUN K.LALL, VISHWA BHUSHAN, SHRAWAN DOGRA, M.A.KHAN, VIVEK SINGH, DEPUTY, RAMESH THAKUR, BHAWNA DUTTA, VIVEK THAKUR, ARJUN LALL, SANDEEP SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

RAJIV SHARMA, J.-

1. SINCE common questions of law and facts are involved in all these writ petitions, the same were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by a common judgment. However, in order to maintain clarity, facts of all these CWP Nos. 1732/2010, 1885/2010, 7033/2010, 4665/2013 and 4675/2013 and 4723/2013 have been taken into consideration.

2. THE petitioner is an agriculturist by occupation. He owns 35 Kanals of agricultural land. According to the averments contained in the petition, respondent No.2, i.e. Himachal Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. has invited tenders for purchase of 14 lacs plastic bottles/pouch packs of Kachhi Ghanni Mustard Oil Agmark Grade-I for supply to its various godowns in the State of Himachal Pradesh. The petitioner has only challenged the tender process to the extent inviting tenders of mustard oil in pouch packs in violation of the Himachal Pradesh Non-Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act, 1995. According to reply filed by respondent No.2, the use of plastic pouches for the supply of essential commodities is economical and use of the same is inevitable. It is further averred in the reply that pouch packing is cheaper by Rs.2.29.

The petitioner belongs to family of agriculturists. He is also an agriculturist by profession. He and his family own agricultural land in Village Basaral and the individual land holding of the petitioner is about 35 Kanals. The petitioner has highlighted ill effects of plastic and polythene, i.e. non- biodegradable material on the environment in general and on agricultural activities and domestic animals in particular. According to the petitioner, the respondent-State is remiss in implementing the Himachal Pradesh Non-Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act, 1995 and various notifications issued from time to time by the respondent-State. The first notification was issued by the respondent-State on 26.11.1998, whereby the respondent-State was pleased to impose prohibition on the traders, retailers and vendors in the State of Himachal Pradesh for using the coloured polythene carry bags manufactured from recycled plastic, for packaging the goods traded/sold by them w.e.f. 1.1.1999. The Department of Science and Technology, Government of Himachal Pradesh issued notification No. STE- A(3)-4/2003 dated 4.6.2004 whereby stockists, traders, retailers and vendors within the State of Himachal Pradesh were ordered not to use carry bags made of non-biodegradable material listed in the Schedule to the Himachal Pradesh Non- Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act, 1995 having thickness less than 70 microns and size less than 12" x 18". There was reference to earlier notification dated 26.11.1998. The respondent-State issued another notification dated 7.7.2009 in suppression of earlier notification dated 4.6.2004 whereby it was directed that no person including shopkeepers, vendors, wholesalers, retailers, hawkers, rehriwala etc. shall use plastic carry-bags (irrespective of their sizes and thickness) and plastic items having one time use such as disposable plastic cups, glasses and plates, which are made up of non-biodegradable material as listed in the Schedule to the Himachal Pradesh Non- Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act, 1995. The respondent- State issued another notification dated 13.8.2009 whereby it was notified that ban imposed on carry bags and littering of non-biodegradable waste was to take effect from 2.10.2009 instead of 15.8.2009. The words "plastic waste" mentioned in notification dated 7.7.2009 were substituted by the words " non- biodegradable waste".

3. IT is averred in the petition that the respondent- State has not taken any affirmative action to discourage the use of plastic bags in the shape of pouches etc. which are being used by manufacturers or producers for sale of their products. According to the petitioner, products such as milk, lassi, refined oil, iodized salt, desi ghee, paneer, pulses, gutkas, pan masalas, flour, shamp





























































































































































































































































































































































































































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