The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking direction that operation of the limestone mines owned by the private respondent situated at the village Ghorda Tehsil Dogargaon District Rajnandgaon must be stopped to prevent further pollution and hardship caused to local residents.
The PIL filed by Komal Lal Sahu further seeks direction to the private respondent to pay compensation to all the local residents whose houses have been damaged due to operation of the mine owned by him.
Anmol Sharmam, counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition has been filed by the petitioner wherein the petitioner is seeking direction of the Court against the illegal mining of the limestone by the crusher owned by the private respondent .
The mining has been done in the area in utter violation of the environmental norms which is causing hazardous results for the local residents of the nearby area.
On the other hand, Chandresh Shrivastava, Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents/State submits that on the same subject matter, the petition being of 2023 is pending before the Court, therefore, the present Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi noted from the pleadings that the petitioner himself has mentioned that a petition, being of 2023 has been filed by the private respondent herein against the order dated 03.05.2023, whereby the mining activities carried on by the private respondent has been stopped by the Deputy Director Minerals Administration, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) and the same was under challenge in the said petition, wherein the private respondent has obtained the stay order in his favour which stayed the effect and operation of the order dated 03.05.2023.
The petitioner submits that he has put in appearance in the petition,but he has not filed any application for vacating stay along with a return.
Considering the fact that a petition is already pending before the Court, on the same subject matter, the Court do not find any good ground for interference in the petition and accordingly, the present Public Interest Litigation is dismissed imposing Rs. 5000/- as cost on the petitioner to which the counsel for the petitioner submits that the cost may be exempted because under his legal advice the present Public Interest Litigation has been filed.
In view of the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner, the cost of Rs. 5000/- is exempted by the High Court with a caution to the counsel to be remained cautious in future.