<p>Order of the Gauhati High Court in the matter of Hasibur Rahman Vs State of Assam & Others dated 19/04/2024.</p> <p>The state of Assam vide Notification, January 20, 2024 has published a Standard
The state government has imposed curbs on "sale, purchase and change of character' of plots within the East Calcutta Wetlands, off EM Bypass, to prevent unauthorised construction and other activities that are harmful for its ecology. The order specifying the curbs was issued on February 29 by M.L.Meena, the principal secretary in the state environment department and member-secretary of East Calcutta Wetlands Authority. It came into force immediately. The wetlands, spread across 12,500 hectares, have been declared a "no-development' zone by Calcutta High Court. But there are often complaints of violation of the ruling. "A large number of unauthorised structures are coming up in the wetlands, violating environment norms and creating ecological imbalance. There are also reports of other unlawful commercial activities in the zone,' said Meena, explaining the rationale for issuing the order. The order bars "transfer (of) land to any person or persons in any manner through deed of sale or providing lease or tenancy right' without "prior clearance of East Calcutta Wetlands Authority'. The authority was set up under the chairmanship of the chief secretary in 2006 to preserve the character of the wetlands. The land and land reforms department has been asked "not to issue any certificate for the change of the character of land', while those dealing with registration have been been directed "not to allow registration of any land, house or pond' without the authority's consent. Similarly, the municipal or panchayat bodies have been debarred from sanctioning plans of buildings to be used for commercial purposes, keeping the authority in the dark. "If anyone wants to transfer plots within the East Calcutta Wetlands, he/she has to approach the member-secretary of the authority, who will decide on the applications within two months,' said Biswajit Mukherjee, a senior law officer in the state environment department. Environmentalists, however, are sceptical about implementation of the order. "The idea is good but will it work?' wondered Dhrubojyoti Ghosh, who was the first to document the ecological role of the wetlands. "There are numerous instances of landfill in the Ramsar zone but the violators have all gone scot-free, despite the high court ruling. Any day, you can find middlemen involved in land transfer in the wetlands,' he pointed out. "A number of big housing estates and a college have come up within the wetlands. And there are quite a few smaller violations. But the government has done nothing to honour the judicial verdict,' said another green activist.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at Goa in Writ Petition no.41/93 filed by the respondents. The writ petition no.41/93 was filed seeking quashing of the orders dated 3rd January, 1991 passed by the Directorate of Mines and Labour and dated 22nd March, 1999 passed by the Secretary, Mines, Government of Goa.
The Sholinganallur Phase I and Phase II TNHB Affected Residents Welfare Association has filed a public interest litigation in the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the respondents, who included the Tamil Nadu Housing Board to protect the waterbodies in various survey numbers at Sholinganallur. The association, represented by its secretary, K.Appadurai, submitted that the TNHB while promoting a satellite township at Sholinganallur had encroached upon several waterbodies by land filling and developing housing plots on them also. This resulted in deprivation of water sources due to disappearance of waterbodies in the locality. Such unplanned development of plots would lead to reduced ground water table and salination of the existing good quality of ground water. Unless the existing water bodies were protected, the locality would face an environmental disaster. The petitioner sought an ad-interim injunction restraining the board from acquiring the waterbodies in survey numbers 290, 292, 393 and 315. In its order, the First Bench comprising the Chief Justice A. P. Shah and Justice F. M. Ibrahim Kalifulla directed the TNHB to maintain status quo in respect of the four survey numbers. The matter was adjourned to March 10.
The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB) to maintain statusquo in respect of the waterbodies in survey Nos. 290, 292, 315 and 393 in Sholinganallur in Kancheepuram district. The First Bench comprising Chief Justice AP Shah and Justice FM Ibrahim Kalifulla granted the injunction on Tuesday while passing interim orders on a public interest writ petition from the Sholinganallur Phase I and Phase II TNHB Affected Residents Welfare Association, by its secretary K Appadurai, for a direction to the authorities con cerned to protect the water-bodies.
The Madras High Court has directed the authorities concerned not to fell trees or alienate any land, particularly from sanctuaries, national parks, bio-spheres (reserved area) by issuing pattas or by any other means of alienation. The First Bench comprising Chief Justice AP Shah and Justice FM Ibrahim Kalifulla gave the direction on Thursday while admitting and passing interim orders on a public interest writ petition seeking to declare the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, more particularly, chapter II, III and IV of the Act, as illegal, unconstitutional and null and void. The interim prayer was to restrain the authorities from giving effect to the provisions of the Act, which was notified on January 2, 2008. In his public interest writ petition, V Sambasivam, who retired as the Deputy Conservator of Forests, contended that the provisions in chapter II enabled the Central Government to provide for diversion of forest land for certain facilities provided by the Government, which involved felling of trees not exceeding 75 per hectare. This provision was repugnant to those in the Indian Forest Act, Forest Conservation Act and Wildlife (Protection) Act, the petitioner said.
The Azadpur Gaon Welfare Association has urged the Delhi High Court to halt the project of building a mall-cum-Metro station by Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) at Ring Road Azadpur as it is being built at the reserved green area. Puneet Mittal, counsel for the petitioner Rai Singh Rana said according to the master plan, the area where the DMRC is building its station is earmarked for the green belt and the private builders and public authorities have connived to violate all norms to obtain prior sanction before the construction.
The Delhi High Court today reserved its order on the ongoing construction of the Commonwealth Games Village that has been challenged on the grounds that it could harm the ecological system of the Yamuna riverbed. A division bench headed by Justices A.K. Sikri and Rekha Sharma reserved the order after hearing the arguments from the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) and environmentalists. "We are giving one week's time to all parties in the case to file their affidavits if they want to say anything else in the case,' said the bench.
The Delhi High Court today reserved its orders on a bunch of petitions filed by environmentalists challenging the construction of the 2010 Commonwealth Games village site on the banks of river Yamuna. The court reserved its order after hearing the petitioners' ecological concerns over the construction of the Games village for the international sports event and a Metro corridor on the river banks.
Following unearthing of the kidney transplant racket in neighbouring Gurgaon, a Delhi-based social activist has filed a public interest litigation in the Delhi High Court seeking directions for, among other things, a review of the Human Organ Transplant Act, 1994, to enlarge the scope of prospective kidney donors to check illegal transplants and make the treatment accessible to poor patients as well.
The Bombay High Court has granted additional time to government authorities to ensure implementation of the policy decision taken by government for appropriate cleanliness in the city and more particularly on the beaches of Goa. The collectors of both the districts and the director tourism as also the director of municipal administration have been asked to file detailed affidavits by March 5, 2008.
