05
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 672/2010
MALVIKA KAUL ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. K.K. Rai, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
S.K. Pandey, Adv.
versus
GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Najmi Waziri, Standing
Counsel.
Mr. Ajay Verma, Adv. for
DDA.
Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, Adv. for
DJB.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
ORDER
% 19.01.2011 In this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-
" (a) direct the Government of NCT of Delhi to come up with a well defined plan that clearly spells out the steps for the restoration and preservation of the Neela Hauz situated along the Aruna Asaf Ali Marg with a firm budgetary allocation;
(b) direct the respondents to take immediate measures to restore and preserve the Neela Hauz;
(c) direct the Delhi Jal Board to stop pollution of the water mass of Neela Hauz by sewage water;
(d) pass any other order that is deemed fit and W.P.(C) 672/2010 Page 1 of 4 proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. It is submitted by Mr. Najmi Waziri, learned standing counsel for the GNCTD that the grievances made in the writ petition has almost been mitigated. The same is controverted by Mr. K.K. Rai, learned senior counsel for the petitioner.
3. As far as the first grievance is concerned, the same relates to restoration and preservation of the Neela Hauz situated along the Aruna Asaf Ali Marg. It is submitted by Mr. Ajay Verma, learned counsel for the DDA that it is the duty of the DDA to restore and preserve Neela Hauz but the same has been taken over by PWD. Unless the area of Neela Hauz is been handed over and an amount for restoration is paid to the DDA, it will be difficult on its part to do so. Mr. Najmi Waziri, learned Standing Counsel for PWD has submitted that the area of Neela Hauz shall be handed over, if not already handed over, within four weeks from today. The amount, that would be required to be spent, shall be made available by the GNCTD. Be it noted, the prayer No. (b) is inherently covered by prayer No.(a). Thus, the directions given hereinabove shall apply to it in full force. As far as the third prayer is concerned, it relates to pollution of Neela Hauz by sewage water. Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, learned counsel for Delhi Jal W.P.(C) 672/2010 Page 2 of 4 Board submitted that no sewage water of Delhi Jal Board is entering into Neela Hauz. Quite apart from the said statement, Mr. Pushkarna, learned has invited out attention to paragraph 6 of the affidavit of Delhi Jal Board, which reads as follows:-
"6. That on the basis of survey of the site and response given by the above said bodies, a repair work was carried out by the officials of the answering respondent. It was observed that there were two RCC lines (One old & one new) emanating from the distribution chamber out side the boundary wall of the STP Vasant Kunj. It was found/noted that the old RCC/NP-II line is 600 mm dia and the new line is 450 dia. Both the above lines carry treated effluents. The new line is mainly carrying treated effluents to Sanjay Van from the STP Plant. The old RCC lines of 600 mm dia is not in use at present but was found leaking at its first man hole situated near the distribution chamber which is with the premises of IUAC Center. The man hole leakage on old lines has been removed by plugging the man hole on 17.2.2010 and as such there is no leakage in the old line. It is most respectfully submitted that there is no leakage at present from any DJB lines or discharge or sewage in to the Neela Hauz water body from the any lines being maintained by the DJB. It is further most respectfully submitted that the further remedial action to discard the old line in order to remove the possibility of any problem in future thus at present there is no problem which can be attributed to the DJB."
4. Be that at it may, without getting into niceties of the same we command all the authorities to work in harmony and to stop pollution and maintain Neela Hauz in an appropriate manner. W.P.(C) 672/2010 Page 3 of 4
5. Before parting with the case, we are inclined to grant liberty to the petitioner, in case in future the directions given in the order are not complied with by the respondents, it is open to him to file a fresh Public Interest Litigation. However, we hope and trust the respondents shall not create any kind of situation by which the petitioner would be compelled to visit this Court again. The aforesaid directions shall be complied with by end of May, 2011 positively. The writ petition and all pending applications are disposed of Order dasti.
CHIEF JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA, J.
JANUARY 19, 2011 NA W.P.(C) 672/2010 Page 4 of 4