Civil Appeal No. 4912 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) 17701/2012), Civil Appeal No. 4913 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) 19239/2012) and Civil Appeal No. 4914 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) 19240/2012). Case: Jal Mahal Resorts P. Ltd. Vs K.P. Sharma and Ors.. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Civil Appeal No. 4912 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) 17701/2012), Civil Appeal No. 4913 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) 19239/2012) and Civil Appeal No. 4914 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) 19240/2012) |
| Counsel | For Appellant: A.M. Singhvi and Shyam Divan, Sr. Advs., Kamaldeep Dayal, Ankur Saigal, Abhinav Agrawal, Arvind Jain, Harsh Kulshrestha, E.C. Agrawala and Ruchi Kohli, Advs. and For Respondents: S.P. Singh, Jaydeep Gupta and P.S. Narsimha, Sr. Advs., Mohan Prasad Gupta, S. Nagarajan, S.N. Terdal, B. Krishna Prasad, Aruneshwar Gupta, Irshad Ahmad... |
| Judges | Gyan Sudha Misra and Pinaki Chandra Ghose, JJ. |
| Issue | Environment Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2(1), 3; Jaipur Development Authority Act 1982 - Sections 21, 26, 39, 54(1), 54(3); Land Acquisition Act - Sections 4, 5A, 6; Rajasthan Municipality Act, 1959; Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules 2010 - Rule 4; Rajasthan Tourism Disposal of Land Rules, 1997; Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal... |
| Judgement Date | April 25, 2014 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Judgment:
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals by way of special leave have been preferred against the common judgment and final order dated 17.5.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in three public interest litigation petitions filed by the Petitioners K.P. Sharma, Dharohar Bachao Samiti, Rajasthan and Heritage Preservation Society respectively against the State of Rajasthan and the beneficiary of the project who was Respondent No. 7 in the High Court and is now the Petitioner/Appellant in Civil Appeal (arising out of SLP(c) No. 17701/2012. The three petitions were D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition No. 6039/2011, D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition No. 5039/2010 and D.B. Civil Writ (PIL) Petition No. 4860 of 2010 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court was pleased to cancel an Environment and Monument Improvement/Preservation and Tourism Development Project at Jaipur by declaring it as illegal which was awarded to the Petitioner/Appellant Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited via global tender floated in 2003 and finally granted in 2005 after all requisite approvals as per the Petitioner/Appellant under the Environmental Law including Environment Imp Assessment under the Environment Protection Act and the Notifications issued thereunder of the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board. However, in view of the cancellation of the project, the High Court has directed immediate dismantling act and removal of the entire project and diversion of the two drains which was done to purify waters of a man made artificial water body and detritus.
3. Other three Special Leave Petition bearing SLP (Civil) Nos. 22467/2012, 22820/2012 and 24341/2012 had also been preferred by the State of Rajasthan challenging the impugned judgment and order of the High Court referred to hereinbefore. But after the arguments were finally advanced by the learned Attorney General and the same also stood concluded, permission of this Court was sought by the senior Counsel Sri Jaydeep Gupta to withdraw these special leave petitions filed by the State of Rajasthan which were permitted by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2014. The petitions preferred by the State of Rajasthan assailing the impugned judgment and order thus stand dismissed as withdrawn. However, Sri Gupta submitted that he can still address the Court on merit in the connected special leave petitions bearing SLP (Civil) Nos. 17701 of 2012, 19239/2012 and 19240/2012 preferred by the Petitioner/Appellant Jal Mahal Resorts Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. against the PIL Petitioners before the High Court since the State of Rajasthan is still a party Respondent in these matters and hence it can support or oppose the impugned judgment of the High Court in spite of withdrawal of the special leave petition filed by the State assailing the judgment and order of the High Court. However, at this juncture we refrain from expressing further on its implication and would deal with the same, if necessary, at the appropriate stage.
4. In so far as the appeals preferred by the Appellant-M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited is concerned, we have noticed that the appeal has been preferred against the common judgment and order of the High Court under challenge herein whereby the writ petitions which were filed by the Respondents as public interest litigation bearing DB (CWP) No. 6039/2011 entitled Prof. K.P. Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. as also DB (CWP) PIL No. 5039/2010 entitled Dharohar Bachao Samiti Rajasthan v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. as also the 3rd writ petition bearing DB (CWP) PIL No. 4860/2010 entitled Heritage Preservation Society Rajasthan- and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. have been allowed by the Division Bench of the High Court and resultantly the Mansagar Lake Precincts Lease Agreement dated 22.11.2005 awarding 100 acres of land on lease for a period of 99 years to the Respondent No. 7/the Appellant herein/ M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited was declared illegal and void. As a consequence of the same, the Appellant Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited has been directed to bear costs to be incurred in restoration of the original position of 100 acres of land in removing the soil filled in by it and to restore back the possession of land to the Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation ('RTDC' for short) which in turn will hand over the land to Jaipur Development Authority ('JDA' for short), Jaipur Municipal Corporation ('JMC' for short) and the State of Rajasthan. The Appellant has further been directed to immediately remove all sedimentation and settling tanks from the Mansagar Lake Basin and to realize costs from M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited and to examine restoring position of Nagtalai and Brahmapuri Nala (drains) to their original position as redesigned by RUIDP under Mansagar Lake Restoration Plan in consultation with the Ministry of Environment and Forests ('MoEF' for short) of the Central Government. The Respondent authorities of the State of Rajasthan have been further directed to monitor, maintain and refix boundaries of the Mansagar Lake in its full original length, breadth and depth in consultation with the MoEF of Central Government and not to reduce normal water level. All encroachments made in the attachment area of the Mansagar Lake have been ordered to be removed immediately and the control erected by Appellant M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited into the lake is ordered to be dismantled and costs have been ordered to be realized from the Appellant M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited. All the three writ petitions were thus disposed of by the High Court.
5. Before we deal with the respective case and counter case of the contesting parties, it may be relevant and appropriate to state the background of the matter giving rise to these appeals. The writ petitions which have been dealt with by the High Court had been filed in public interest to quash Jal Mahal Tourism Project and cancel Mansagar Lake Precincts Lease Agreement dated 22.11.2005 giving 100 acres of land on lease for a period of 99 years to the Respondent No. 7. (Appellant herein M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited and Jal Mahal Lease and License Agreement dated 22.11.2005). In Writ Petition No. 6039/2011 which was filed by Prof. K.P. Sharma, prayer had been made to quash approvals and clearances contained in the orders dated 16.9.2009 and 22.9.2009 and to direct the Respondent No. 7/Appellant herein M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited to restore the original position of 100 acres of land by removing the soil filled in by it at its own costs.
6. The Appellant M/s. Jal Mahal Resorts Private Limited has assailed the judgment and order of the High Court on several grounds to be related hereinafter. But before doing so it has related the factual and historical background of the matter giving rise to these appeals. In this context, it has been stated that the Mansagar Lake was a man-made lake on the northern fringe of Jaipur city. Within the lake a pleasure pavilion called Jal Mahal was constructed by the erstwhile rulers of Jaipur in the 18th century and this structure is still existing in the midst of the lake. Tracing out the historical background, it has been stated that in 1962, the two main sewerage drains of the walled city of Jaipur Nagtalai and Brahmapuri were diverted to empty into the water body which led to its degeneration, siltation and settled deposits and contaminations to such an extent that it could not support aquatic life nor support flora and fauna in the surrounding areas. The water body was covered with floating hyacinth and its aquatic life and there were large scale death of fish that had earlier survived and led to a drastic reduction in the fauna including the migratory birds that used to flock in the vicinity of the lake was on the verge of extinction. About 40% of the catchment area which covered approximately 23.5 Sq.Kms was dense urban population. Towards the south side of the lake, large amounts of unintended developments and encroachments had taken place thereby drastically increasing the quantity of effluents discharged into the lake and also put other pressures by unconditional grazing of cattle and urban development. Jal Mahal had also very substantially deteriorated over a period of time not only because of natural process of degeneration but also because of maintenance. The monument was in a dilapidated state and required massive restoration works.
7. The deteriorating condition of the Lake and the Monument compelled the Government to find ways and means to restore the two components to their original glory. Over a period of 30 years attempts were made by various government agencies and departments to restore the ecological and environment condition of the lake and its adjoining area. However, none of these attempts yielded very positive results because of paucity of resources to take up and sustain the restoration.
8. The Government of Rajasthan, therefore, decided to adopt an incentivized approach to restore the Lake and the Monument and develop the precinct area on a public private partnership format. To improve the condition of the lake, the State of Rajasthan, in consultation with experts and after detailed surveys and analysis, developed a holistic approach involving three components namely (i) restoration of Mansagar Lake, (ii) restoration of Jal Mahal and (iii) development of tourism/recreational components at the lake precincts. Thus, the third component visualized development of the precincts area of the lake which comprised of about 100 acres of land towards the south on a sustainable development model. It was, therefore, required that the lake and Jal Mahal be restored and the lake precinct be developed for limited eco friendly tourism facilities which would also provide funds for O & M of the lake on a continuous basis. The benefits of this project was that it...
To continue reading
Request your trial