High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.J. MUKHOPADHYA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR
S. Venkatesan & Others
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department & Others
Writ Petition Nos.19388 of 2006 and 7243 of 2007 and Miscellaneous Petition Nos.1 and 2 of 2006 in W.P.No.19388 of 2006 And Miscellaneous Petition No.1 of 2007 in W.P.No.7243 of 2007 and Miscellaneous Petition No.1 of 2008 in both writ petitions
Decided on: 22-07-2009
The court held that the government should consider the municipality's resolution to establish a bus stand on Ery land in light of the law laid down by the courts and the various Government Orders and laws enacted concerning the protection of water bodies. The court also directed the government to pass an appropriate order regarding the location of the bus stand, taking into account all aspects highlighted before the court, particularly the protection of water bodies, pollution, and allied issues.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves two writ petitions filed in public interest challenging the resolution of the Tindivanam Municipal Council to establish a new bus stand on Tindivanam Ery land, which is a water body. The petitioners argue that the resolution is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to environmental law, as it would damage the water resources and the environment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the government had issued two Government Orders (G.O.Ms.No.101 dated 3. 2001 and G.O.Ms.No.136 dated 19. 2005) granting permission to put up a bus stand in two different locations. The court also noted that the municipality's resolution had been changing from time to time.
Issues: The main issues in the case are: 1. Whether the resolution of the Tindivanam Municipal Council to establish a new bus stand on Tindivanam Ery land is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to environmental law. 2. Whether the government should consider the municipality's resolution in light of the law laid down by the courts and the various Government Orders and laws enacted concerning the protection of water bodies.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the government should consider the municipality's resolution to establish a bus stand on Ery land in light of the law laid down by the courts and the various Government Orders and laws enacted concerning the protection of water bodies. The court also directed the government to pass an appropriate order regarding the location of the bus stand, taking into account all aspects highlighted before the court, particularly the protection of water bodies, pollution, and allied issues.
Final Decision: The court disposed of both writ petitions and dismissed the impleading petitions. The court also closed the other miscellaneous petitions. No order was made as to costs.
R. Sudhakar, J.
The Writ Petitions are filed in public interest to issue a writ of declaration to declare the resolution of the 3rd respondent dated 16. 2006 in the emergency meeting held on 16. 2006 to establish the new bus stand in the Tindivanam Ery land (Survey Nos.33/4 and 36/5) as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Environmental law declared by the Honble Supreme Court and consequently direct the respondents to implement G.O.Ms.No.136 dated 19. 2006.
2. In both the writ petitions the facts and the relief sought for are similar. Hence, both the writ petitions are taken together and disposed of by this common order.
3. The brief facts of the case of the writ petitioners in both the case is as follows:-
(i) After construction of fly over in Tindivanam Municipal Town, the existing old bus stand was not sufficient to cater to the needs of the public and is causing traffic congestion. The Tindivanam Municipality, initially has taken a decision to establish new bus stand in Tindivanam Ery in R.S.Nos.33/4 and 35/5 measuring 6 acres. The Council of the third respondent, on 211. 1991 requested the first respondent government to grant permission to enter upon the land pending finalisation of alienation of the land. Thereafter, the then elected body of the Municipal Council of the third respondent passed Resolution No.473 dated 25. 1998 giving its concurrence for the alienation of Tindivanam Ery and thoppu poramboke lands for the new bus stand. The District Collector, Villupuram by his communications dated 1. 2000, 23. 2000 and 16. 2000 recommended the proposal of the Tindivanam Municipal Council to the first respondent. The first respondent Government in G.O.No.101 dated 3. 2001 passed orders alienating the Ery and thoppu lands in all measuring 6 acres in R.S.Nos.33/4 and 36/5 to the third respondent on payment of Rs.12,79,488/-towards cost of the land and Rs.1,361/- towards the cost of standing trees. On payment of money, the land was handed over to the third respondent on 11. 2003. After this no action was taken.
.(ii) The construction of new bus stand on the Ery is not a good proposal in public interest. The public are opposing the construction of new bus stand on the Ery land as the same would damage the water resources and the water table of Tindivanam Town will go down. The rain water should accumulate in the Ery, however, if the same is filled up for the bus stand purpose, it would result in the flooding of Tindivanam Town during monsoon and other rainy seasons. If new bus stand is put up in the Ery land, it will result in development of the adjacent places and it will cause further damage the entire Ery resulting in pollution. In this process, the entire rain water body, the Ery will be decimated in the near future and cannot be revived by any means. It will cause a permanent and irrevocable damage to the ecology.
(iii) In view of the public opposition for establishing new bus stand in the Ery land, the then elected body of the Tindivanam Municipal Council, on 30.7.2004 passed a resolution No.354 to establish the new bus stand in the land belonging to Wakf Board at Survey No.202 measuring 6 acres on the National Highways No.45 in Gidangal village on the Mylam Road, Tindivanam. The said land is about 250 metres away from the existing bus stand and the same is within the Town limits of Tindivanam. Second respondent Commissioner of Municipal Administration permitted the third respondent to appoint a consultant for construction of new bus stand vide its proceedings dated 6. 2004. Third respondent Municipality passed resolution No.444 dated 30.9.2004 to appoint consultant for designing the bus stand.
(iv) As two resolutions were passed by the Tindivanam Municipality one on 25. 1998 by the past elected body of Municipal Council to establish the new bus stand in the Tindivanam Ery and other one on 30.7.2004 by the subsequent elected body of the Tindivanam Municipal Council to establish the new bus stand in Wakf B
3. Krishnan.L. – vs. - State of Tamil Nadu 2005(4)CTC 1
7. Pasupuleti Venkateswarlu v. Motor & General Traders (1975)1 SCC 770 : (1975)3 SCR 958
1. Anti Corruption Movement – vs. - Government of Tamil Nadu (2008)1 MLJ 417
2. Hinch Lal Tiwari – vs. - Kamala Devi and others (2001)6 Supreme Court Cases 496
4. Susetha – vs. - State of Tamil Nadu and others (2006)6 Supreme Court Cases 543
8. Hasmat Rai v. Raghunath Prasad (1981)3 SCC 103 : (1981)3 SCR 605
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.