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

2024 Supreme(MP) 689

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sanjeev Sachdeva and Vinay Saraf, JJ.
Somesh Agrawal & Others v. The State of Madhya
Pradesh & Others
Writ Petition No. 5160 of 2024 (Jabalpur);
Decided on 16.12.2024

Advocates appeared:
Naman Nagrath assisted by Anvesh Shrivastava for petitioners; Prashant Singh, Advocate General with H. S. Ruprah, Additional Advocate General, Amit Seth, Additional Advocate General and B. D. Singh, Deputy Advocate General for respondent/State; Sandeep Kumar Shukla for respondent No. 3; Vikram Johri for respondent No. 6; Ms. Avani Bansal for respondent intervenor.

The court recognized that procedural unfairness by the National Green Tribunal can justify the maintainability of a writ petition despite statutory alternative remedies existing.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - National Green Tribunal Act, 2006 - Writ petition challenging ex-parte orders for interim compensation following a factory explosion - Claim of violation of principles of natural justice in assessment and notification of compensation - High Court allowed petitioners to raise objections with NGT regarding classification and quantum of compensation. (Paras 1, 3.1 - 3.4, 4.1 - 4.8, 7, 8, 11)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, owners of firecracker factories, faced claims following a deadly explosion that led to multiple fatalities and injuries. The NGT issued interim orders for compensation without established procedures, prompting a writ petition.

Findings of Court:
High Court recognized petitioners' grievances regarding the NGT's unilateral actions and operational procedures, allowing them to contest the liabilities assessed.

Issues: The primary issues addressed include the maintainability of the writ in light of available statutory remedies and whether the NGT's actions were devoid of procedural fairness.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that despite an alternative statutory remedy existing, the significant procedural deficits in the NGT's actions warranted consideration of the writ petition, emphasizing the necessity of following principles of natural justice.

Result: Writ petition partially allowed.

Table of Content
1. court's jurisdiction under article 226. (Para 1 , 3)
2. challenge to maintainability of writ petition. (Para 4)
3. arbitrary and unlawful interim compensation by ngt. (Para 5)
4. necessity for identifying victims and compensatory amounts. (Para 6 , 7)
5. ngt must consider objections raised by petitioners. (Para 9 , 10)
6. directions for future proceedings. (Para 11)

ORDER

Saraf, J. -- 1. Instant petition is preferred by petitioners under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :--

(i) Allow the writ petition and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 6.2.2024 passed by NGT in OA 20/24 (CZ)(Annexure -P/11), in theinterest of justice.

(ii) Further be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 12.2.2024 the Ld. Collector (Annexure -P/12)in the interest of justice.

(iii) Further be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 23.2.2024 the Ld. Collector (Annexure -P/ 13) in the interest of justice.

(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice.

2. Heard Shri Naman Nagrath, Senior Advocate with Shri Anvesh Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Prashant Singh, Advocate General along with Shri H.S. Ruprah, Additional Advocate General, Shri Amit Seth, Additional Advocate General, Shri B.D. Singh, Deputy Advocate General for the respondent/State. Shri Sandeep Kumar Shukla, Advocate for respondent No.3. Shri Vikram Johri, Advocate for the respondent No.6. Ms. Avani Bansal, Advocate for the intervener.

Facts in short --

3. Short facts sufficient for disposal of present writ petition are :--

3.1 Petitioners are brothers and were running four different factories producing fire crackers under the LE-1 & LE-5 licenses issued in terms of the Explosive Rules, 2008, which were renewed till 31.3.2026 and by order dated 26.9.2022, Collector, Harda suspended the licenses after issuance of show cause notices on the allegation of violation of explosive rules as also license conditions, however, in appeal Commissioner, Narmadapuram on 14.10.2022 stayed the order of collector. ADM and SDM reported due rectification of all the irregularities by petitioners in report dated 18.10.2022, thereafter, fresh show cause notices were issued by Collector on 16.10.2023 and 18.10.2023 on the basis of an inspection report dated 5.9.2023.

3.2. On 6.2.2024series of explosion occurred in the firecracker factory of the petitioners, which caused huge explosion and blast affecting several persons and houses and an FIR was registered against the petitioners on 6.2.2024 bearing Crime No. 42/2004 upon the allegation that there was huge quantity of explosive material kept in the shop, which was not properly managed and there was no safety provision, which laid to the explosion and fire incident.

3.3. National Green Tribunal (NGT), Bhopal took suo motu cognizance on news regarding blast in the factory of petitioners and passed interim order directing payment of interim compensation to the victims on the same day i.e. 6.2.2024. NGT observed that more than 60 houses have been damaged due to fire incident and explosion in the fire crackers kept in the industry and more than 100 houses were forced to vacate. It was further observed by NGT in the order that as per reports 13 persons died and more than 50 persons were injured. Accordingly owners of the industry are responsible to immediately pay and deposit amount as interim compensation to the victim. NGT awarded Rs. 15 lacs per death, Rs. 3 lacs per small injury case, Rs. 5 lacs burn injury case and grievous injuries, Rs. 5 lacs per damaged or burnt house and Rs. 2 lacs to each person, who has been forced to vacate his house.

3.4. In compliance of the order passed by NGT, Collector Harda calculated the liabilities against the petitioners to tune of Rs.15.80 crore by order dated 12.2.2024 and ordered

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