"THE GANGES AND THE YAMUNA A  LIVING PERSONALITY:                                  UNPRECEDENTED  JUDICIAL  ACTIVISM"

"All the rivers have the basic right to maintain their purity and to maintain free and natural flow. the river Ganga is flowing since time immemorial. "
                    In the history of the Indian judiciary, High Court of Uttrakhand at Nainital in the case Mohd. Salim versus State of Uttrakhand & others writ Petition (PIL) No.126 of 2014 granted the status as juristic/legal persons/living entities having the status of legal person with all corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of a living person in order to preserve and conserve river Ganga and Yamuna by declaring  in loco parentis Director NAMAMI Ganga, the Chief Secretary of the state of Uttrakhand and the Advocate General of the state of Uttrakhand as human face to protect, conserve and preserve River Ganga and Yamuna and their tributaries.
    
    Speaking for the Bench, Hon'ble  Rajiv Sharma, J. observed as:
                     "River Ganga and Yamuna are worshipped by Hindus. these rivers are very sacred and revered. the Hindus have deep spiritual connection with rivers Ganges  and Yamuna"
 
The extraordinary situation has arisen since Rivers Ganga and Yamuna are loosing their very existence. the situation requires extraordinary measures to be taken to preserve and conserve Rivers Ganga and Yamuna the Bench observed.
           In an earlier judgment of the high court of Uttrakhand in the case LALIT MIGLANI VS STATE OF UTTRAKHAND AND OTHERS Writ Petition  (PIL) No. 140 of 2015 (Per Hon'ble Justice Rajiv Sharma who headed the Bench along with Alok Singh, J.) issued the mandatory directions for the sake of protection and conservation of the River Gangas whereby number of industries had been ordered to be closed/shut down forthwith who did not comply with the statutory requirements.
              The ashrams at Haridwar have been put under the scanner whereby it has been ordered that these ashrams would be sealed and closed down by the district magistrate/SSP of the area, in case the untreated sewage is permitted by them to flow in the Ganga directly without treatment. in sequel to this, it has been directed that no person shall litter/defecate/urinate, in open, within a radius of 500 meters on both sides of river Ganga and penalty has also been prescribed to the tune of 5000/- in disobedience of  the directions ibid. 
        Sale, use and storage  of plastic carry bags throughout the state of Uttrakhand has been order to be banned w.e. f. 01.01.2017 for the protection of river Ganga. Haridwar is a place where the devotees take bath in river ganga. here, it has been directed that the people should not use soap, oil and shampoo while taking bath.
         Many others directions inter alie were also given by the court for the sake of protection of  River Ganga. the court in the very strict terms held that billions of rupees have been spent for restoration of quality of water of river ganga, but the fact of the matter is that the quality of water of river Ganga, instead of being restored as per norms, has further deteriorated. hence, the need was felt by the court to direct the Comptroller and Auditor General to conduct a special audit of all the centrally financed scheme launched to rejuvenate river Ganga as well as the amount spent by the state government for rejuvenation of river ganga.

    Quoting Hon'ble Justice Rajiv Sharma:
 
                                 "LET US SAVE GANGA TO SAVE CIVILIZATION"
  
                                                                            
           Hope these all mandatory directions passed by the Hon'ble High  Court  definitely  shall be complied in the letter and spirit in protection and rejuvenation of River Ganga and Yamuna in the interest of mankind.
                                                                  Kamlesh Saklani
                                                                 Law Officer, HPSEBL, Shimla-4

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Encroachers of the Government/forest land face strong verdict of HP High Court

  In a very landmark  judgment of the High  Court of Himachal Pradesh, the encroachers  on the government land and forest land have  been ordered to vacate the land and the improvements if any made over the land  such as houses etc shall become the property of the department of the government and same shall be utilised for its use.  the  Division Bench  comprised of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Bipen Chander Negi delivered this judgment on 31-07-2024  in Civil Writ  Petition 1093   of 2016 titled as Chatter Singh versus State of Himachal Pradesh. the Court directed to the government authorities to take immediate steps for the removal of the encroachments in the state of Himachal  Pradesh and file the compliance affidavit. 
Read more

"High Court Jurisdiction Over NCDRC Orders: Scope, Limitations, and Legal Precedents"

 Apex Court Decision on Jurisdiction of High Court  against the appellate/revisional  order of the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission: critical analysis  In M/S Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd versus Suresh Chander Jain and anr Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5263 of 2023, (2023 INSC 649) decided on July 26, 2023, the Supreme Court categorically held that   the order of the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in its appellate and revisional jurisdiction are liable to be challenged before the Jurisdictional  High Court under Article 226/ 227 of the Constitution of India. the appeal to the Supreme Court would lie only against the original jurisdiction.  the court expresses view as under:      " 38. in the aforesaid view of the matter, we have reached to the conclusion that we should not adjudicate this petition on merits. we must ask the petition herein to first go before the jurisdictional ...
Read more

"HP High Court Rejects Consumers' Claim of Vested Right Over Subsidy on Electricity Bills"

The High Court of HP in Kundlas Loh udyog  and others versus Himachal Pradesh Electricity Board Limited and another CWP No 12178 of 2024 a/w connected matters rejected the pleas of the  petitioners mainly industries were that when the government of HP had agreed  to provide subsidy to the consumer under section 65 of the Electricity Act, 2003 before the HP Electricity Regulatory Commission (HPERC) while issuing the  tariff order for Financial Year 2024-25, the government cannot take u turn and withdraw the subsidy  in the mid of the year. notably, the  GoHP has withdrawn the subsidy which was agreed  to be paid in the tariff i.e. ARR of the HP DISCOM, keeping in view the financial health of the state of economy of the HP, resultantly the tariff  of the  industrial consumers was increased by  Rs 1/per Unit of energy.  initially the court gave interim reliefs to the petitioners and stayed the operation of the order of the withdr...
Read more