Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9
PETITIONER:
RAMJI PATEL & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
NAGRIK UPBHOKTA MARG DARSHAK MANCH & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/02/2000
BENCH:
Y.K.Sabharwal, R.C.Lahoti, S.S.Ahmad
JUDGMENT:
S.SAGHIR AHMAD, J.
The Madhya Pradesh
High Court, in a Public Interest Litigation, instituted
under Article 226 of the Constitution, has directed, by the
impugned judgment dated 16.12.1996, that the dairies,
located on the outskirts of the Jabalpur City, be shifted
from their present location to the alternative sites. This
judgment was passed in the Writ Petition in which the
following reliefs were claimed:- "(a) to direct the
respondents to take appropriate, effective and immediate
steps to remove the Cow/Buffalow dung and urine from the
pipe line of water filteration plant at Lalpur, Gwarighat.
(b) direct the respondents to ensure that in future also no
storage of Cow/Buffalow dung and urine of animals may be
done on the water supply pipe line of Lalpur, Gwarighat as
stated in the body of the petition; (c) direct the
respondents to take appropriate steps against the persons
who have stored these hazardous materials on the water
supply pipe lines; (d) Any other order/orders, writ/writs
or direction/directions that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
and proper, may also kindly be given." The principal ground
on which the petition was founded was that the main water
pipelines, which supplied water, after its filtration at
Lalpur Filtration Plant, to the Jabalpur City, passed
through the place where a number of dairy-owners, had
started storing the cow/buffalow dung and waste of the dairy
products, and that too, near the pipelines which was likely
to contaminate the pure water supplied to the residents of
the City for home consumption. On this aspect, the High
Court recorded the following findings:- "We called the
Public Health Engineering persons and the Corporation
Authorities. The Corporation Authorities informed us that
proceedings under Sec. 133 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure were taken against these persons and against Shri
Manohar Singh Marwaha. Against Marwaha dairy, final order
has been passed which is also the subject of revision before
the Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in which interim order has been
passed by the Sessions Judge restraining the M.P.
Electricity Board from disconnection of their power supply.
We also sought reports from the Public Health Engineering
Department, Revenue Authorities and Corporation Authorities
and after considering the matter, we find that keeping all
these dairies around these water supply lines is a great
hazard to the lives of the people of Jabalpur, because most
of them get water from these pipelines on which cow/buffalow
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9
dungs are being stored by the dairy owners as a result of
which there is every likelihood of pollution in the town by
the supply of polluted water." The High Court, thereafter,
considered the question of rehabilitating the dairy-owners
at some other place and passed the following order on a
consideration of the case of each dairy-owner individually:
"5. We, therefore, explored the possibility of
rehabilitating these dairy owners from the present location
so that cow\buffalow dungs may not pollute the water supply
lines. We have been informed that so far as dairy owner
Ramji Patil is concerned, his present dairy is situated on
Khasra No. 15/3 at Gwarighat. He has 107 cattle heads. He
has other lands in village Lalpur, i.e. Settlement No.
641, bearing Kh. Nos. 134, 154/2, 135 and 136/3. It is,
therefore, directed that since Ramji Patel has a site
available on the lands bearing the aforesaid Khasra numbers,
he should shift his dairy from the present site to any of
the above mentioned sites of Kh. No. 15/3 at Gwarighat
within two months from today. 6. Shiv Kumar Patel has got
his dairy at Gwarighat on Khasra No. 15/2. He has 18
cattle heads. He has also a land in Khasra Nos. 4 and 5/2
at Gwarighat which site is sufficiently away from the
present site. He is also directed to remove his dairy to
any of the above mentioned places from the present one
within two months from today. 7. Hariram Rajak has his
dairy at Gwarighat. He does not have any land of his own.
He has 30 cattle heads. He does not have any alternative
land. Therefore, we asked the S.D.M. Jabalpur that he may
be provided a site for his dairy. He has pointed out that
there is a land available at village Tilhari, bearing Kh.
No. 200/1 of Patwari Circle No. 23/27, measuring about
30.106 hectares. We asked the Public Health Engineering
Department authorities also to go and find out whether there
is water available in that area or not. Shri A.K. Tiwari,
Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department
Jabalpur and his Executive Engineer both have inspected the
area and also conducted hydrological tests. According to
their report, there is plenty of water in that area.
Therefore, there will be no difficulty so far as supply of
water to this dairy is concerned. It is directed that
Hariram Rajak shall make a proper application before the
Nazul Officer, Jabalpur and the Collector, Jabalpur shall
forward the same to the State Government for allotting 0.50
hectares of land to him for running his dairy. The State
Government is directed that 0.50 hectares of land shall be
allotted to Hariram Rajak on usual charges within a month
from today. The Public Health Engineering Department shall
dig a tubewell for him at that place at the cost of the
State Exechequer within another period of one month.
Hariram Rajak shall be removed from the present place within
a period of two months to the newly allotted site. All this
exercise should be done by the State Government and the
Public Health Engineering Department within a period of two
months from today. It will be the responsibility of the
Corporation to see that the dairy of Hariram Rajak is
removed within two months from today and all formalities
shall also be completed by the State Government within this
period. 8. Another dairy owner is Shri Manohar Singh
Marwaha. He shall also be allotted land at Tilhari. He has
his dairy on 0.148 hectares of land at Gwarighat. He has
150 cattle heads. He shall be allotted land at Tilhari out
of Kh. No. 200/1, Patwari Circle No. 23/27, measuring
30.10 hectares. Out of this Khasra, he will be given 0.50
hectares of land on usual charges. He shall make an
application before the Nazul Officer, Jabalpur and the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9
Collector shall forward his application to the State
Government. The State Government is directed to allot this
piece of land to Shri Manohar Singh Marwaha. The Public
Health Engineering Department shall also dig a tubewell on
this land at the cost of the State. All this exercise
should be done within a period of two months from today. It
will be responsibility of the State Government and the
Public Health Engineering Authorities that all these
facilities are made available to the aforesaid dairy owners.
It will also be the responsibility of the Jabalpur
Corporation to remove all the aforesaid dairies within two
months from today to the locations mentioned above." On the
Special Leave Petitions being filed in this Court, the
following order was passed on 3.2.1997: "I.A. is allowed.
Permission to file S.L.P. is granted in both the matters.
Issue notice on Special Leave Petitions as well as on stay
application returnable on 3.3.1997. Dasti service in
addition. Notice may also be issued to the Divisional
Manager, Railway, Jabalpur. The learned counsel for the
petitioners state that the petitioners would not allow
cowdung or urine to accumulate within 20 feet of the pipe
line in question on both sides. There shall be interim stay
of the impugned direction regarding shifting of the dairies
of the petitioners for 6 weeks." On 5.9.1997, a Bench
comprising Hon. S.C.Agrawal and G.T. Nanavati, JJ., passed
the following order : "The learned counsel appearing for
the Jabalpur Municipal Corporation and the State of Madhya
Pradesh prays for eight weeks‘ time to file an additional
affidavit indicating the response of the authorities to the
proposal of the petitioners to construct a wall around their
dairies so as to prevent the cow-dung spreading near the
pipe line. They will also show the plan of the pipe line as
it passes from near the dairies of the petitioners. Time
prayed for is allowed. Put up after eight weeks." The
following order was passed by the same Bench on 7.11.1997:
"One of the questions that arises in these petitions is
whether the cowdung and urine from the cattle maintained by
the petitioners in their dairy farms can be dealt with so as
to prevent contamination of the water being carried through
the pipeline as well as the soil surrounding the pipeline.
Since there is no material on record on this aspect, we
consider it appropriate to direct the Central Water
Pollution Control Board to depute a specialist who may,
after inspecting the site, suggest measures which can be
taken for treatment of cowdung and the urine of the cattle
to prevent it from flowing above the pipeline and exclude
the possibility of contamination of the water passing
through the pipeline. The Central Water Pollution Control
Board shall submit the said report within a period of two
months. The petitioners will jointly pay the charges for
such inspection and the report. A copy of this order may be
sent to the Secretary, Central Water Pollution Control
Board." On 16.1.1998, a notice was directed to be issued to
the State Pollution Control Board. Thereafter, on
20.2.1998, the following order was passed : "Notice on
Central Pollution Control Board has been served but nobody
enters appearance on behalf of Central Pollution Control
Board and, therefore, we do not know as to what steps have
been taken by the Central Pollution Control Board in
pursuance of the directions contained in our order dated
November 7, 1997. Put up on March 27, 1998. In the
meanwhile a communication be sent to the Secretary, Central
Pollution Control Board to be personally present before this
Court on March 27, 1998." The order passed by this Court on
27.3.1998 is as follows : "An affidavit of Dr. S.P.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9
Chakrabarti, Member- Secretary, Central Pollution Control
Board, has been filed in response to the directions given by
this Court in the Order dated November 7, 1997. In the said
affidavit measures have been suggested for treatment of
cowdung and the urine of the cattle and other waste water
from the dairies so as to exclude the possibility of
contamination of the water flowing through the pipeline. An
affidavit has also been filed by Dr.S.N. Nema, Zonal
Officer, M.P. Pollution Control Board agreeing with the
said affidavit of Shri Chakrabarty. In these circumstances,
the Central Pollution Control Board is directed to prepare a
project report in respect of the measures which are required
to be taken as per the affidavit of Shri Chakrabarty. The
petitioners will bear the cost of the preparation of the
said project report. The learned counsel for the Central
Pollution Control Board prays for four weeks time to submit
the project report. Put up in the 1st week of May, 1998."
On 31.8.1998, Shri Vijay Panjwani, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the Central Pollution Control Board stated that
the Project Report would be submitted within two weeks. On
the submission of the Project Report of the Central
Pollution Control Board, it was stated by learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the
recommendations made by the Central Pollution Control Board
and the measures suggested by them would be implemented and
carried out. The Court, therefore, passed the following
order on 6.10.1998 : "It has been stated by the learned
counsel for the parties that the recommendations made by the
Central Pollution Control Board and the measures suggested
shall be implemented and carried out. The cost amounting to
Rs.93,000/- incurred by the CPCB shall be paid to the CPCB
by the Marwah Dairy, Ramji Dairy, Hariram Rajak and
Shivprasad Patel in equal shares within 6 weeks. List after
3 months." When the matter was taken up on 8.1.1999, the
Court passed the following order : "The cost of Rs.93,000/-
(Rupees Ninety three thousand) has been deposited with the
Central Pollution Control Board. In the affidavit dated 3rd
January, 1999 of Sri Ramji Patel filed on behalf of the
petitioners, it has been stated that they have entered into
an agreement with the Sunraj Construction Company for the
construction of the bio-gas plant of 45 cubic meter capacity
and that the Executive Engineer of Madhya Pradesh Urja Vikas
Nigam Ltd. has also been informed. The petitioner has also
applied for the subsidy for the construction of the bio-gas
plant. The Madhya Pradesh Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. shall
monitor the construction of the bio-gas plant on the spot
and submit a report to this Court after 2 months. The other
recommendations of the Central Pollution Control Board
contained in its report dated 27th March, 1998 shall also be
complied with by the petitioners. List after 2 months."
Thereafter, time for completing the work for the
construction of Bio Gas Plant etc. was extended from time
to time and the Union of India, through the Ministry of
Agriculture, was also directed to release the subsidy amount
of Rs.64,000/- for the Bio Gas Plant, to the petitioners.
In the meantime, an affidavit of Dr. M.R. Tiwari, Health
Officer, Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, dated 25.3.1998,
was filed in which it was, inter alia, stated as under :
"4. That a meeting was held on 21/10/97 and following
decision has been taken : ‘This is determined by full
majority that to keep environment of the city neat and clean
due to earthquake and from the point of view of pollution
all dairies within the Municipal Corporation limits must be
removed from the city limits upto end of Nov., 1997.
Simultaneously dairies which are running in Lalpur nearby
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9
Public Health Engineering Pipe Line should also be removed
because some complaints regarding the pollution in drinking
water pipe line are received. This action is very necessary
from the health point of view of the citizens.’ A copy of
Resolution dated 21/10/97 is marked as Annexure R-4-1." 5.
That as per the resolution of Standing Committee, Municipal
Corporation, Jabalpur some of the dairies has been removed
and the proceeding of removal of dairies is still under
process." The proceedings of the meeting of the Municipal
Corporation which adopted a Resolution on 21.10.1997, was
also annexed which indicated that the Municipal Corporation
had adopted a Resolution that all dairies within the
Municipal limits must be removed from the city of Jabalpur
by the end of November, 1997. It was also resolved that
dairies at Lalpur near the Public Health Engineering
Pipeline should also be removed because a number of
complaints regarding pollution caused in the drinking water
pipeline were received. It may be stated that Madhya
Pradesh Cattle (Control) Act, 1978 was enforced within the
Municipal limits of Jabalpur with effect from 27th January,
1978, and in the Notification issued by the Commissioner,
Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, on September 24, 1979, it
was stated that the cattle could not be kept within the
limits of Jabalpur Municipal Corporation, except in the
villages which were specified in the list set out in the
Notification. This list included Gwarighat and Lalpur
villages also but in pursuance of the Resolution adopted by
the Municipal Corporation on 21.10.1997, both the villages,
namely, Gwarighat and Lalpur, were taken out of the list of
"excepted villages" vide Notification published in the Govt.
Gazette on 19.3.1999. In view of the above Notification, by
which the villages of Gwarighat and Lalpur were excluded
from the "excepted villages", where cattle could be kept, it
is contended by Mr. Anoop G. Choudhary, learned Senior
Counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Madhya Pradesh,
that the petitioners have to shift outside the Municipal
limits of Jabalpur city, if they, at all, intend to keep
their dairies, but the dairies, particularly at the spot at
which they have established their business cannot be
permitted to be run or maintained, not only for the reason
that both the villages, namely, Gwarighat and Lalpur fall
within the limits of Municipal Corporation and have, in the
meantime, become densely populated, but also for the reason
that keeping of cattle in the close proximity of the main
pipeline which supplies drinking water from Lalpur
Filtration Plant to the city of Jabalpur, would be hazardous
to the health of the people on account of the possibility of
the water carried through that pipeline being contaminated
by the Gobar (cowdung) as also the urine of the hundreds of
cattle kept there by the petitioners. This is also the
stand of the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, on whose
behalf Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, learned counsel made
submissions, that in the face of the exercise of statutory
power by the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, by which the
establishment of dairies or the keeping of cattle within the
limits of Municipal Corporation, has been totally
prohibited, the petitioners cannot contend that they are
still entitled to retain their dairies at the disputed
sites. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned Senior Counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioners has, on the other hand,
contended that the Resolution dated 31.10.1997, which was
adopted by Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, was a colourable
exercise of power, inasmuch as the exclusion of Gwarighat
and Lalpur from the "excepted villages" as detailed in the
Notification issued in 1978, has been done only during the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9
pendency of the present petitions in this Court in which an
interim order was also granted that the judgment of the High
Court would not be implemented. It is contended that the
proceedings in this regard cannot be rendered nugatory by
adopting the Resolution that the dairies could not be run in
Gwarighat and Lalpur villages. It is contended that since
the Resolution was adopted only to harm the interests of the
petitioners whose rights were under adjudication by this
Court in the present proceedings, the same is liable to be
quashed and cannot be given effect to. It is also contended
that the list of "excepted villages" set out in the
Notification of 1978 contained many villages, but the
Resolution was adopted only in respect of Gwarighat and
Lalpur villages where the present petitioners are running
their dairies. No reason, it is contended, has been shown
by the Municipal Corporation why dairies are still permitted
to be run in other villages, although those other villages
also fall within the Municipal limits of Jabalpur. It
appears that there has been previous litigation between the
parties with regard to the running of dairies which, at that
time, were being run by the petitioners within the Municipal
limits of Jabalpur. In 1971, a writ petition for the
shifting of dairies was filed in the Madhya Pradesh High
Court which by its judgment dated 6.2.1976 framed a scheme
directing the Corporation to reserve three plots outside the
Municipal limits of Jabalpur where the dairy-owners would
shift their dairies. On account of the dispute having
arisen between the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur and the
dairy-owners with regard to the developemnt charges which
the dairy-owners were required to pay, another writ petition
was filed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court by about 89
dairy-owners. Since a choice was given to the dairy-owners
to make their own arrangment for establishing and running
their dairies outside the Municipal limits of Jabalpur, the
writ petition was dismissed by the High Court on 2.1.1976.
It was, thereafter that the dairy-owners purchased plots of
land outside the Municipal limits and established their
dairies. The plots of land were purchased by the
petitioners in villages Lalpur and Gwarighat in 1982 and
they shifted their dairies to those villages which had
already been excepted from the operation of the Madhya
Pradesh Cattle (Control) Act, 1978. The petitioners have
set out in the present petitions that one Shri K.K.
Nayakar, a Mimicry Artist of repute, purchased a plot of
land and constructed a house at Gwarighat which was at a
distance of about 500 meters from the dairy of one of the
petitioners and as Shri Nayakar did not like the presence of
dairies near his house, he filed a complaint under Section
133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jabalpur, for the removal of
nuisance created by the petitioners. While the proceedings
were pending before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under
Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a writ
petition was filed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court which
ultimately resulted in the judgment which is being impugned
before us. From the facts set out above, it will be seen
that when the Special Leave Petitions were filed in this
Court, the villages Lalpur and Gwarighat were in the list of
"excepted villages" where dairies could be established and
run and cattle could be kept. Since it was stated in the
writ petition that the main water pipeline from the
Filtration Plant at Lalpur passed nearby the dairies set up
by the petitioners on account of which the drinking water
was likely to be contaminated by the Gobar (cowdung) and
urine of hundreds of cattle kept there, this Court, while
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9
entertaining the Special Leave Petitions, considered the
possibility of a project being devised so as to prevent
altogether the possibility of pollution/contamination of
water carried through pipelines already embedded about four
feet below the surface of the earth. It was for this reason
that this Court by its order dated 7.11.1997 directed the
Central Pollution Control Board to consider this matter and
to report whether the likelihood of pollution to the
drinking water carried by the pipeline in question could be
ruled out by any device suggested by it. On the submission
of the Report of the Central Pollution Control Board, which
was also supported by the State Pollution Control Board, the
Court directed a project to be prepared for that purpose.
On the submission of the Project Report, since it was given
out by the petitioners that they would implement the project
and carry out all other recommendations made by the Central
Pollution Control Board, the Court directed the petitioners
to implement the project which included, inter alia, the
setting up of a Gobar Gas (Bio Gas) Plant. The petitioners,
apart from making a payment of Rs.93,000/- to the Central
Pollution Control Board towards its Inspection Fee etc.,
also took up the construction of a Gobar Gas Plant and
entered into an agreement for purchase of certain additional
land as suggested by the Central Pollution Control Board.
Time to complete the construction of the Gobar Gas Plant was
extended from time to time by this Court and ultimately an
affidavit was filed on behalf of the petitioners that the
Gobar Gas Plant has been constructed and established. The
construction was carried out under the supervision of the
Madhya Pradesh Urja Vikas Nigam as directed by this Court
and Madhya Pradesh Urja Vikas Nigam also submitted its
progress report. An affidavit to the effect that the Gobar
Gas Plant had become functional was also filed before the
Court. The cost of construction of the Gobar Gas Plant
which was incurred by the petitioners is more than Rs. 5
lakhs. While these proceedings were pending in this Court,
the Municipal Corporation adopted a Resolution to exclude
from the list of "excepted villages" the two villages where
the dairies in question are situate, namely, Lalpur and
Gwarighat, so that the dairies may be shifted from these two
villages and established elsewhere outside the limits of
Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur. An affidavit to this
effect was, for the first time, filed on behalf of the
Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, in March 1998. But the
Notification issued on the basis of that Resolution was
still not filed before the Court and this has been placed
before the Court during the course of the arguments. While
it is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the
Resolution adopted by the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur,
and the consequent Gazette Notification issued on its basis
were liable to be quashed on account of the abuse of power,
or to put it differently, on account of colourable exercise
of power, it is maintained on behalf of the State Govt. as
also the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, that the
Resolution was adopted in the interest of public health and
could not be said to be a colourable exercise of power
merely because the proceedings were pending in this Court.
Supply of pure drinking water is the statutory duty of the
Municipal Corporation and the supply of such water has to be
ensured to every citizen. In a situation, where the
interest of the community is involved, the individual
interest must yield to the interest of the community or the
general public. Since the Cattle (Control) Act, 1978 is
already in force within the Municipal limits of Jabalpur
city, the dairies cannot be established and cattle cannot be
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9
kept so as to cause public nuisance in contravention of the
statutory provisions. But the Court cannot also overlook
the fact that the petitioners, who had already been uprooted
from one place, and that too, at the dictate of the
judiciary, had established dairies at a place at which such
activity was not prohibited. In the list of villages
appended to the Notification issued under the Cattle
(Control) Act, 1978, Lalpur and Gwarighat were the villages,
besides other villages, where such activity could be legally
carried on. These villages were taken out of that list
during the pendency of the present proceedings by virtue of
a Resolution adopted by the Municipal Corporation on
21.10.1997. The petitioners have already invested huge sums
in setting up a Gobar Gas Plant at an expense of more than
Rupees Five lakhs and have also incurred an expense of
Rs.93,000/- towards Inspection Fee of the Central Pollution
Control Board in pursuance of the order passed by this
Court. The validity of the Resolution dated 21.10.1997 as
reflected in the Gazette Notification dated 19.3.1999 cannot
be legally adjudicated upon in these proceedings on the oral
submissions made by Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned Senior
Counsel, who also pointed out that although the Resolution
was adopted only in respect of Lalpur village, the
Notification published in the Gazette mentions Gwarighat
village also. If the Notification is intended to be
challenged by the petitioners, they have to initiate
appropriate proceedings in which they have to set out the
foundation for such challenge so that the State Govt. or,
for that matter, the Municipal Corporation may have adequate
opportunity of submitting their reply, particulary as they
have also to explain why only these two villages were taken
out of the list of "excepted villages" set out in the
Notification of 1978 and why the activity of establishing
dairies in other villages was not prohibited, although those
other villages were also within the Municipal limits of
Jabalpur city. Having regard to the facts and circumstances
of this case, we dispose of these Special Leave Petitions by
providing as under. (a) In view of the Notification
published in the Govt. Gazette on 19.3.1999., milk dairies
and the keeping of cattle at the place in question, or for
that matter, in villages Lalpur and Gwarighat, cannot be
permitted to continue nor can anyone be permitted to
establish it in those villages specially in the proximity of
the main pipeline through which drinking water is supplied
to the city of Jabalpur. (b) Whether the Notification
published in the Govt. Gazette dated 19.3.1999 is valid or
not cannot be decided in the present proceedings as there
are no pleadings in that regard. It will be open to the
petitioners to challenge the Notification by instituting
appropriate proceedings questioning its validity on all the
grounds which have been orally urged before us, including
the ground that the Notification reflected a colourable
exercise of power in the hands of the Municipal Corporation,
or that it intended to interfere with the proceedings
pending in this Court, but such proceedings shall have to be
instituted by the petitioners within three months from the
date of this judgment. The interim orders passed by this
Court in these petitions shall continue for another period
of three months and two weeks thereafter, to enable the
petitioners to approach the High Court and make appropriate
application for interim relief. (c) Since the Notification
dated 19.3.1999 was issued by the Municipal Corporation
during the pendency of these proceedings at a stage when
this Court had already allowed the petitioner to set up the
Bio Gas Plant and the petitioner in SLP(C) No.2927/97 has
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9
incurred an expenditure of Rs.5,86,000/-, the Municipal
Corporation, Jabalpur, shall, after deducting the amount of
subsidy as may have already been paid by the Government, pay
that amount to the petitioner in the Special Leave Petition
(C) No. 2927 of 1997 at the time of their shifting to the
new locations pursuant to the Notification dated 19.3.1999
and in the event of their challenge to the said Notification
being turned down by the High Court. He and petitioner No.1
in Special Leave Petition (C) No. 2926 of 1997 will also be
entitled to all the benefits indicated by the High Court in
the impugned judgment while dealing with the individual
cases of the petitioners. (d) The petitioners, namely, Mr.
Shiv Kumar Patel and Hari Ram Rajak in S.L.P.(C) No.
2926/97 have indicated their willingness to shift to new
locations in terms of the judgment passed by the High Court.
Consequently, the Special Leave Petition on their behalf
shall be treated to have been dismissed as not pressed.