Jharkhand High Court
Amrit Majhi Aged About 48 Years S/O ... vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Chief ... on 20 February, 2025
Author: Deepak Roshan
Bench: Deepak Roshan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (PIL) No. 374 of 2025
Amrit Majhi aged about 48 years S/o Kandra Majhi, R/o Vill Edelbera, P.O.
Lotapahar, P.S.- Sonua, Dist-West Singhbhum ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary, government of
Jharkhand, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, Dist:
Ranchi.
2. Mining Director, Department of Mining, government of Jharkhand,
Nepal House, Doranda, P.O. & P.S. Doranda, Dist: Ranchi
3. Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, through its Chairman, H.E.C,
Ρ.Ο. &, P.S. Dhurwa, Dist: Ranchi.
4. Forest Department through its Secretary, government of Jharkhand,
Project Bhawan, P.O. Dhurwa, P.S. Jagannathpur, Dist: Ranchi.
5. Deputy Commissioner, Seraikella - Kharsawan, P.O. & P.S. Seraikella,
Dist: Seraikella - Kharsawan.
6. District Mining officer, Seraikella - Kharsawan, P.O. & P.S. Seraikella,
Dist :Seraikella - Kharsawan.
7. S.D.O. Seraikella, P.O. & P.S. Seraikella, Dist: Seraikella - Kharsawan.
8. Circle Officer, Rajnagar, P.O. & P.S. Rajnagar, Dist Seraikella
Kharsawan.
9. Plant Head/Manager, M/s Rungta Mines Limited, Chaliyama Steel
Plant, Village-Chaliyama, P.O.- Kesargariya, P.S.- Rajnagar, Dist:
Seraikella - Kharsawan. ... ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp. State : Mr. Piyush Chitresh, AC to AG
For the Resp. No.3 : Mrs. Richa Sanchita, Advocate
--------
JUDGMENT
C.A.V On 30/01/2025 Pronounced on 20/02/2025
Per Deepak Roshan, J.
1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the
petitioner for the following reliefs:
"a. For direction upon the respondents to take necessary steps to stop the
construction work of cement plant being constructed by respondent No. 9 in the
name of extension of steel plant at Mouza- Chaliyama, Post- Kesargariya, P.S.-
Rajnagar, Dist: Seraikella Kharsawan.
b. For direction upon the respondents to constitute an Enquiry Committee to
enquire into the matter to find out as to how cement plant is being constructed by
respondent No. 9 in the name of extension of steel plant at Mouza- Chaliyama,
Post- Kesargariya, P.S.- Rajnagar, Dist: Seraikella - Kharsawan without following
the due process of law.
c. For direction upon the respondents to take necessary steps against the persons
who are involved in obtaining fake consent of gram sabha for extension of steel
plant and why cement plant is being constructed without the prior meeting of gram
sabha and taking of resolution thereby.
d. For interim order/direction upon the respondents to stop the construction work
of cement plant during the pendency or disposal of this case by this Hon'ble
Court."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent
no.9 is running steel plant at village Chaliyama and in the notification
published by the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, Ranchi
(Annexure-1) for purpose of environment clearance, a public notice was
given for public hearing.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent no. 9 is
constructing a cement plant, the knowledge of which he acquired from
R.T.I. application, as such learned counsel contends that why construction
work of cement plant is being constructed by respondent no.9, in view of
the fact that the villagers / effected persons gave their consent for
extension of steel plant because the construction of steel plant will provide
employment to local people which will help to prevent displacement and
also the said construction will develop the said village as it will get clean
water, road and basic structure of the village will be developed. But the
cement plant will pollute the entire area and will lead to acute pollution
and different types of.
3. We have perused the entire documents available on record and
found that no individual person whose land have been acquired came to
the Court. Moreover, Annexure-4 which is an application given to the D.C
with regard to the alleged illegal construction of cement plant; none of the
person who have signed has moved before this Court. The petitioner
himself admits that construction of steel plant will provide employment to
local people and will help to prevent displacement and will develop the
said village by fund of CSR and there will be good development. We do
not find any reason as to why the said analogy will not work in the case of
cement plant, even admitting that the same plant is being constructed by
the respondent no.9.
Further it is pertinent to mention here that though primary
steps for steel making do not require cement, but a by-product of steel
making called steel slag can be used as component in cement production
creating a circular economy established between the two industries.
We further find that the grievance of the petitioner is with
respect to environment pollution. In this regard, the National Green
Tribunal (NGT) was established on 18th October, 2010 as a specialized
body for handling any environmental disputes that involve multi-
disciplinary issues.
4. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we do
not find any reason to entertain this public interest litigation.
5. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, there is no
order as to cost.
(M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J)
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Vedanti/-
N.A.F.R
