DEEPAK GRIT UDYOG Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the heap of corpses of the human society, the petitioners under the garb of this petition, have again made a venture to raise their wealthy glittering castles by continuing to crush stones and inflate their money bags. The present petition is an abortive attempt on the part of the wealthy section of the society, seeking the assistance of this Court to sacrifice the human health and welfare of thousands of masses, whose health, safety and life has continuously been endangered by the petitioners and the alike. Despite judgment of this Court in Ishwar Singh v. State of Haryana and others, Civil Writ Petition No. 7418/1994, decided on July 10, 1995, a prayer has been made in this writ petition for restraining the respondent/State and the authorities from closing down the stone crushers of the petitioners, situated around the city of Gurgaon, near the Capital of India.

(2.) It is submitted that as in the earlier litigation, this Court had not taken note of the study Report on Stone Crushers at National Level, conducted by the Central Pollution Control Board and National Productivity Counsel of India, the whole of the matter required reconsideration.In the aforesaid litigation, initiated in the public interest, this Court while allowing the writ petition filed against the owners of the stone crushers had directed :

(3.) Ishwar Singh, a public spirited person, had approached this Court on the basis of judgment of the Supreme Court in M. C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1992) 2 SCC 256 : (AIR 1992 SC 382) and subsequent notification of the Government of Haryana issued on 4-8-1992. The Government in the aforesaid notification had declared that the stone crusher units in the State of Haryana have been causing grave air pollution and hazards to traffic and human health, which necessitated that they be not located within the parameters as laid down in the Government notification dated 9-6-1992. The Government of Haryana on 18-12-1992 had issued a notification, amending its earlier notification, by providing new parameters. The petitioner in the earlier petition before this Court had alleged that despite judgment of the Supreme Court and the notifications issued in consequence thereof, as the stone crushers had not been shifted from Naurangpur district Gurgaon, appropriate directions be issued.