News Item "Hindustan Times" A.Q.F.M. Yamuna v. Central Pollution Control Board (SC) BS192517
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- B.N. Kirpal and Ruma Pal, JJ.

I.A. Nos. 5-10 in W.P. (C) No. 725 of 1994. D/d. 11.5.2000.

News Item "Hindustan Times" A.Q.F.M. Yamuna - Petitioner

Versus

Central Pollution Control Board and Anr. - Respondents

Interlocutory Application - Pollution in River Yamuna - Non Compliance of Orders to improve quality of water - Mere promises to improve quality of water is not enough - Government must govern and implement and enforce its own rules and regulations - How implementation is to be done depends upon policy decision taken by administration and it is not for this Court to give advice as to what such decision should be - All that is required is as already stated that river water must become potable after treatment and which is worse than a drain with no dissolved oxygen in it - Renewed efforts are now being made and new Chief Secretary who has recently taken over is monitoring performance and some more time be given to show improvement in water quality - Matter is adjournt but we cannot overlook the fact that earlier order of this Court have not been complied with - Impose a nominal fine on Delhi Administration of Rs. 10,000/- but realisation of fine is suspended.

[Para 2]

JUDGMENT

1. Pursuant to the notice to show cause as to why the fine should not be imposed for the non-compliance of the earlier orders passed by this Court with regard to the quality of water in the river Yamuna being completely unpotable, an affidavit of the Chief Secretary has been filed. It is stated therein that all efforts are being made by using the entire machinery to save the river Yamuna. It is stated that according to the report received from the Shriram Institute on the 3rd of May, 2000 there is an improvement in the river water quality even though we find that the figures indicated do not tally with the figures of the Central Pollution Control Board which has also filed its report indicating the quality of water as on the 3rd of May, 2000. Be that as it may, even the report of Shriram Institute shows that quality of water is far below the acceptable limits. The latest report of the C.P.C.B. that the dissolved oxygen at Okhla on 29th April, 2000, 1st May, 2000 and 3rd May, 2000 was nil on each of these days is not controverted by the Shriram Institute report. In fact with regard to this parameter the affidavit has not disclosed whether Shriram Institute gave any report.

2. Be that as it may, the fact remains that since the Court first ordered in 1995 for the setting up of various types of treatment plants which alone can improve the water quality which is being discharged into the river, it is not in dispute that majority of them have not been established. Clearly therefore, successive orders which have been passed by this Court from time to time have not been complied with. All that we have got are excuses and unimplemented decisions. Even the latest affidavit which has been filed by the Chief Secretary does not indicate as to when the treatment plants would be ready and operational. There is no undertaking that the said 16 Sewage Treatment Plants which had to be constructed will be ready within a particular time frame. On a querry raised by us we were informed that the construction of the plant at Mehrauli could not take place earlier because the land was not made available, so much for the compliance of the Court's order. The office report also indicates that reports have been received to the effect that some other units which have been sealed and had been polluting had been operating on the sly. Newspaper reports of the two dailies namely "Times of India" and "The Hindu a are mentioned. If the said reports are true it is quite obvious that the units could not have begun operation if the sealing had been effected and properly monitored. Mere promises to improve the quality of water is not enough. The Government must govern and implement and enforce its own rules and regulations. How the implementation is to be done depends upon the policy decision taken by the administration and it is not for this Court to give advice as to what such decision should be. All that is required is as already stated that the river water must become potable after treatment. Today, it is worse than a drain with no dissolved oxygen in it. We were informed that renewed efforts are now being made and the new Chief Secretary who has recently taken over is monitoring the performance and some more time be given to show improvement in the water quality. With this assurance we adjourn this case to 11th July, 2000 but we cannot overlook the fact that the earlier order of this Court have not been complied with. Taking a lenient view, however, we impose a nominal fine on the Delhi Administration of Rs. 10,000/- but the realisation of the fine is suspended.

3. The C.P.C.B. will continue to monitor as has been done earlier. The CPCB will also do the monitoring and give the parameters of the river just before the Shahdara drain joins the river and also of Shahdara drain in particular. This monitoring should be done at the interval of every 15 days.

I.A. No. 12

4. Notice returnable on 11th July, 2000.

I.A. No. 6

5. List on 11th July, 2000.

.