COMDR SURESHWAR D SINGHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue notice returnable on 21-8-2000 in Indian Administrative Service Nos. 17, 18 and 19. Adjourned to 21-8-2000.

(2.) In the affidavit of Mr Bhag Singh, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forest, it is stated that a Committee has reiterated that 2005 may be treated as the cut-off point for cleaning of Yamuna in Delhi. The Additional Solicitor General will on the next date of hearing explain as to why despite orders having been passed regarding the cleaning of Yamuna since a number of years the said river, regarded as holy by many, will continue to be polluted at least till 2005. What steps if any, the Government proposes to take, dehors the orders of the Court should also be indicated. As far as this affidavit is concerned nothing has been stated in this regard. For further orders of the Court this aspect will be taken up on 21-8-2000. A fresh affidavit be filed by the Ministry by 18-8-2000.

(3.) Interim report filed by the Committee constituted by this Court for water harvesting in Court on 16-6-2000 indicates that water harvesting is under way. Additional Solicitor General informs us that check dams have been constructed and as a result thereof there has been a positive impact and the water table at some places has gone up by 2m. He submits that with regard, to the water harvesting in Blocks B-1, D-3 and D-4 of Vasant Kunj the proposal of the Committee was that there should be an active participation of, the residents and with this aim if view it was proposed that 50 per cent of the expenses to be incurred in water harvesting in those blocks should be contributed by the owners of each of the flats. The amount involved would come to approximately Rs 1000 per flat. It is this Court which had suggested that there should be active participation of the Resident Welfare Association in this regard and the objective of participation would, according to the Additional Solicitor-General be achieved if a nominal contribution of Rs 1000 per flat is made by the flat-owner. It appears to us that if is very reasonable. Issue notice to the Presidents of the respective Welfare Associations to show cause why the Court should not direct payment of the said amount, by the flat-owners. The notice be taken dasti by DDA. In the meantime DDA under the guidance of this Committee should go ahead with the water; harvesting project in these blocks and if need be incur the entire expenditure, which, subject to further order being passed will be partly reimbursed.