Important Case Laws PDF

the ant the action northeast trust Powered by lawskills.in and justiceadda.com ABOUTTHEPROJ ECT TheSupremeCourtofIndiahaspi oneeredsomelandmar kjud...

the ant the action northeast trust Powered by lawskills.in and justiceadda.com ABOUTTHEPROJ ECT TheSupremeCourtofIndiahaspi oneeredsomelandmar kjudgment sintheareaof cons t u onall aw,envir onmentall aw,labourr efor m,genderandsex ual it y,i ssuesof publ icduty ,chi l dright sa ndmanyother s. Thesej udgmentshavei nfluencedthepubl icdi scour se,ha vei ns pir edgenera onsof l awyers ,ref ormer sandac vi stsandhavecont ri butedtoacces stojus c ef ort hel a st pers on. Thepurposeofthi sproj ecti stotr ansl ateandproduc ecasess ummar iest hatsuppor t andexplai niss uesthatimpa cttheeveryda yli feofc iz enswhent heyresol vethei r commonjus ceprobl ems. Throught hisc ol lec on, Jus ceAddawiththesuppor tofMa nupatr aha vea empt edto highl ightthek eyiss uesats t akethr oughas eri esofsi mpl ifiedt ext sa ndill ust ra onsin thehopet ha tthelanguageoftheCourtc oul dbetrans formedi ntoonet hatcanbe understanda blea ndusefulforcizensint erestedi nlear ninga boutt hei rright sa nd en tl ement s ABOUT J USTI CEADDA Jus ceAddai sas ocialventur et hatseeksto provi deas pa cewher edes ign a nd tec hnologyena bl ethedevelopmentofc ont entthathel pst oimpr oveaccesstojus ce i nI ndi a.Jus ceAddawa sincubatedattheCambr i dgeSoc ialVenturesProgr ammea t CambridgeJudgeBusinessSchoolfr om 2016-17. ABOUT MANUPATRA Ma nupat raisIndi a’ slea dingonlinelega lresea rchpla or mt hathasrei nvent edl egal res ea r chbyprovidi ngint uivea nds mart erl egalana lysi stool sa l ongwit ha cc esst oa comprehensi velegali nforma ona ggr egat or. Itai mstoma keopport uniesforres ea r ch effic i entandaccess ibl ef oreveryone. TEAM Thisseri esofc as esha vebeenedit edandil lus tra tedbySiddhar thPet erdeSouz a, Shefa liCordei ro, RheaLopez, Apa rnaMehr otr aandVats alaPandey. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Speci alt hankst oPr iya nka ,Chi tes hBha tandt heMa nupa trat eamf ort hei runwa ver ing suppor t. I NDEXOFCASES A. K.Gopal anvs.St ateofMadr as...........................................................................................5 I.C.Gol aknat hvs.St ateofPunj ab...........................................................................................9 H. H.Mahar ajadhi raj aMadhavRaovs.Uni onofI ndi a....................................................13 Kes avanandaBhar a vs.St ateofKer ala.............................................................................17 Edi gaAnammavs.St ateofAndhr aPr ades h......................................................................21 Smt.Indi raNehr uGandhi vs.Sr iRajNar ain&Anr..........................................................25 ManekaGandhi vs.Uni onofI ndi a........................................................................................29 Nandi niSat hpat hyvs.P. L.Dani.............................................................................................33 Hus sai nar aKhat oonvs.HomeSecr etar y,St ateofBi har.................................................35 Suni lBat ravs.Del hiAdmi nis tra on......................................................................................39 Mi ner vaMi ll svs.Uni onofI ndi a.............................................................................................43 BachanSi nghvs.St ateofPunj ab..........................................................................................46 S. P.Gupt avs.Uni onofI ndi a.................................................................................................50 Bandhuamuk Mor chavs.Uni onofI ndi a.........................................................................53 Sheel aBar sevs.St ateofMahar asht ra...............................................................................57 Ol gaTel l is&Or svs.BombayMuni ci palCor por a on......................................................60 Mohd. AhmedKhanvs.ShahBanoBegum andOr s.........................................................63 Rur alLiga onandEn t lementKendr avs.St ateofU. P...............................................65 Mar yRoyvs.St ateofKer ala.................................................................................................67 I ndr aSawhneyvs.Uni onofI ndi a........................................................................................71 Unni kri shnanvs.St ateofAndhr aPr ades h.........................................................................75 S. R.Bommai vs.Uni onofI ndi a.............................................................................................77 Sar laMudgal vs.Uni onofI ndi a.............................................................................................81 Sr iBodhi sa waGaut am vs.Mi ssSubhr aChakr abor ty...................................................83 D. K.Bas uvs.St ateofWes tBengal....................................................................................87 I NDEXOFCASES L.Chandr aKumarvs.Uni onofI ndi a....................................................................................92 Vi shakavs.St ateofRaj ast han...............................................................................................96 Samat havs.St ateofAndhr aPr ades h....................................................................................98 Vi neetNar ainvs.Uni onofI ndi a.........................................................................................101 Chai rmanRai lwayBoar dvs.Chandr imaDas...................................................................104 Nar madaBachaoAndol anvs.Uni onofI ndi aandOr s...................................................108 M. C.Meht avs.KamalNat h.................................................................................................112 Uni onofI ndi avs.As soci a onf orDemocr a cRef orms..............................................116 ExCapt.Har ishUppal vs.Uni onofI ndi a&Anr.............................................................118 PUCLvs.Uni onofI ndi a&Anr.............................................................................................122 Rames hwarPr asad&Or svs.Uni onofI ndi a&Anr........................................................124 SwamiShr addhanandavs.St ateofMahar asht ra............................................................126 Sel vivs.St ateofKar nat aka..................................................................................................128 Ar unaRamachandr aShanbaugvs.Uni onofI ndi a...........................................................128 Soci etyf orUnai dedPr ivat eSchool sofRaj ast hanvs.Uni onofI ndi a.........................134 NovarsAgvs.Uni onofI ndi a&Ot her s............................................................................136 Li lyThomasvs.Uni onofI ndi a.............................................................................................138 St ateofMahar asht ra&Anrvs.Indi anHot elandRes taur ant sAs soci a on.............142 Peopl e’ sUni onf orCi vilLi beresandAnrvs.Uni onofI ndi aandAnr......................144 AbhaySi nghvs.St ateofU arPr ades handOr s.............................................................147 Shat ruganChauhan&Anrvs.Uni onofI ndi a150............................................................150 Na onalLegalSer vic esAut hor it yvs.Uni onofI ndi aandOr s.....................................152 CommonCaus evs.Uni onofI ndi a....................................................................................155 Shr eyaSi nghal vs.Uni onofI ndi a......................................................................................158 Supr emeCour tAdvocat esonRec ordvs.Uni onofI ndi a............................................162  Narmada Bachao Andolan vs. Union of India and Ors MANU/SC/0640/2000 FACTS In the year 1994, the petitioner, an anti-dam organization, filed a writ petition opposing the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam undertaken for the optimal utilization of the water resources of the Narmada river system. Lack of environmental clearances, extensive dislocation and inadequate rehabilitation plan were grounds on which it sought the construction of the dam to be stopped. held At the very outset the Court highlighted the advantages of the project. The contention raised by the petitioner that the project was averse to national interest was brushed aside by relying upon a 1990 World Bank report, which analyzed the cost and benefit of the project which basically said that the benefits of building the Sardar Sarovar Dam were so large that they outweighed the costs to human and environment disruption. The project was not carried out without necessary environmental clearances. Ministry of Water Resources, Ministry of Environment and Forest and Government of Gujarat submitted detailed reports of investigations assessing the environmental impact of the project among others. Recognizing this, the Court said that it was evident that the Government was, in fact, deeply concerned with the environmental aspects of the project. Contrary to the petitioner’s claim that the project is likely to result in environmental degradation the Court observed that the project would make positive contribution for the preservation of environment in many ways such as, carrying water to drought prone areas and the ecology of water scarcity in the country being under stress, needed the benefits of this project to help sustain agriculture and spread green cover. With respect to the question of rehabilitation of displaced tribal and non-tribal families, the Court noted the existence of an adequate re-settlement plan. As early as in 1979, the awards given by a Tribunal headed by Justice V.Ramswamy outlined a resettlement plan. It held:  That those families who have had more than 25% of agricultural land acquired be entitled to irrigable land of choice to the extent of land acquired.Additionally, every project-affected person will be allotted a house plot free of cost and a re-settlement and rehabilitation grant.  The civic amenities required by the award to be provided at places of re-settlement include one primary school for every 100 families, one Panchayat Ghar, one dispensary, one seed store, one children’s park, one village pond and one religious place of worship for every 500 families; one drinking water well, approach road linking each colony to the main road, electrification, sanitary arrangement etc. The Court observed the presence of an elaborate network of agencies and mechanisms for monitoring and implementing the rehabilitation plans. Narmada Control Authority A BODY CONSTITUTED AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE TRIBUNAL AWARD OF 1979 CARRIED OUT THE FOLLOWING FUNCTIONS: “To monitor the progress of land acquisition in respect of submergence land of Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) and Indira (Narmada) Sagar Project (ISP). To monitor the progress of implementation of the action plan of rehabilitation of project affected families in the affected villages of SSP and ISP in concerned States. To review the rehabilitation and resettlement (R&R) action plan from time to time in the light of results of the implementation. To review the reports of the agencies entrusted by each of the States in respect of monitoring and evaluation of the progress in the matter of re- settlement and rehabilitation. To monitor and review implementation of re-settlement and rehabilitation programmes pari passu with the raising of the dam height, keeping in view the clearance granted to ISP and SSP from an environmental angle by the Government of India and the Ministry of Environment and Forests. To coordinate States/agencies involved in the R&R programmes of SSP and ISP. To undertake any or all activities in the matter of re- settlement and rehabilitation pertaining to SSP and ISP.” Grievance redressal mechanisms WERE INSTITUTED IN THE THREE STATES OF GUJARAT, MADHYA PRADESH AND RAJASTHAN TO ENABLE PROJECT-AFFECTED FAMILIES TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS.  BEFORE PARTING, THE COURT ISSUED THE FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS: 1. “Construction of the dam will continue as per the Award of the Tribunal.” 2. “As the Relief and Rehabilitation Sub-group has cleared the construction up to 90 meters, the same can be undertaken immediately. Further raising of the height will be only pari passu with the implementation of the relief and rehabilitation and on the clearance by the Relief and Rehabilitation Sub-group. The Relief and Rehabilitation Sub-Group will give clearance of further construction after consulting the three Grievances Redressal Authorities.” 3. “The Environment Sub-group under the Secretary, Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India will consider and give, at each stage of the construction of the dam, environment clearance before further construction beyond 90 meters can be undertaken.” 4. “The permission to raise the dam height beyond 90 meters will be given by the Narmada Control Authority, from time to time, after it obtains the above-mentioned clearances from the Relief and Rehabilitation Sub-group and the Environment Sub-group.” 5. “The reports of the Grievances Redressal Authorities, and of Madhya Pradesh in particular, shows that there is a considerable slackness in the work of identification of land, acquisition of suitable land and the consequent steps necessary to be taken to rehabilitate the project oustees. We direct the States of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat to implement the Award and give relief and rehabilitation to the oustees in terms of the packages offered by them and these States shall comply with any direction in this regard which is given either by the NCA or the Review Committee or the Grievances Redressal Authorities.” 6. “Even though there has been substantial compliance with the conditions imposed under the environment clearance the NCA and the Environment Sub-group will continue to monitor and ensure that all steps are taken not only to protect but to restore and improve the environment.” 7. “The NCA will within four weeks from today draw up an Action Plan in relation to further construction and the relief and rehabilitation work to be undertaken. Such an Action Plan will fix a time frame so as to ensure relief and rehabilitation pari passu with the increase in the height of the dam. Each State shall abide by the terms of the action plan so prepared by the NCA and in the event of any dispute or difficulty arising, representation may be made to the Review Committee. However, each State shall be bound to comply with the directions of the NCA with regard to the acquisition of land for the purpose of relief and rehabilitation to the extent and within the period specified by the NCA.” 8. “The Review Committee shall meet whenever required to do so in the event of there being any un- resolved dispute on an issue which is before the NCA. In any event the Review Committee shall meet at least once in three months so as to oversee the progress of construction of the dam and implementation of the R&R programmes. If for any reason serious differences in implementation of the Award arise and the same cannot be resolved in the Review Committee, the Committee may refer the same to the Prime Minister whose decision, in respect thereof, shall be final and binding on all concerned.” 9. “The Grievances Redressal Authorities will be at liberty, in case the need arises, to issue appropriate directions to the respective States for due implementation of the R&R programmes and in case of non- implementation of its directions, the GRAs will be at liberty to approach the Review Committee for appropriate orders.” 10. “Every endeavor shall be made to see that the project is completed as expeditiously as possible.”