The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Maharashtra government to set up a solid Waste Disposal Project at village Dandeadom, Taluka and District Ratnagiri, Maharashtra.
Acting upon the plea, the division bench comprising of Justice A.M. Khanwilkar & Justice Dinesh Maheshwari allowed the appeal of Ratnagiri Nagar Parishad and observed that the respondents had failed to establish jurisdictional facts regarding actionable nuisance and more so their suit was founded on mere apprehensions on the basis of their understanding of the situation of the possibility of nuisance or future nuisance.
Brief facts of the case is that the appellant Ratnagiri Nagar Parishad intends to set up a Solid Waste Disposal Project (the Project) in the suit property at village Dandeadom, Taluka and District Ratnagiri bearing Gat No. 219 admeasuring 2H46 Aars.5,which land had been allotted to the appellant by the State Government. The suit land is located around 10 kms away from the limits of the Ratnagiri city at a hilly and sloppy area. The entire area is rocky and hard.
The respondents herein (Original Plaintiffs) reside at Village Mirzole and village Kele in the Taluka and District Ratnagiri filed a suit in the representative capacity under Order 1 Rule 8 of Code of Civil Procedure before the Ld. Trial Court and requested for perpetual injunction against the appellant herein. By the judgment and decree dated 31st January 2011, the learned trial judge dismissed the said Civil suit filed by the respondents. Thereafter the respondents filed an appeal before the District Judge, Ratnagiri, who set aside the judgment and decree dated 31st January 2011 and allowed the appeal by its the judgment dated 11th February, 2015 and granted injunction against the appellant from starting the proposed solid waste (Management and Handling) plant on the suit property.
Thereafter the appellants filed a second appeal before the High Court which was dismissed. The High Court observed that “the defendant (appellant herein) has failed to produce any competent witness before the learned trial judge to prove that if the project as proposed was allowed to be set up, it will not cause any health hazard or create any pollution problem and would not affect the villagers of the said village. In my view the appreciation of evidence by the appellate court is proper and does not warrant any interference.”
The appellant Ratnagiri Nagar Parishad challenged Bombay High Court judgment before the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition.
The Supreme Court said that “We have no hesitation in taking the view that the first appellate Court proceeded on a mere possibility of injury likely to be caused on account of setting up of the proposed Project. On the other hand, the defendants asserted that the Project has been conceived and the suit land has been identified for that purpose. The Project is at a nascent stage for which permissions would be obtained from the concerned authorities under the environment laws before implementing the same. At this initial stage itself, the civil Court was moved by the plaintiffs on the basis of their understanding of the situation.”
The Supreme Court further observed that “the dismissal of the suit would not come in the way of the plaintiffs or any other person affected by the proposed Project to make representation to the appropriate authority, considering the proposal for grant of statutory permissions under the concerned environment laws, and if that decision is not acceptable, to carry the matter further in appeal before the NGT or any other forum, as may be permissible by law. We leave all questions open in that regard.” Thus, the appeal was allowed by the Supreme Court.
-India Legal Bureau