Disposed

C Rajaram Iyer v. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

NGT1 Aug 2024Original Application No. 152/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant challenged the illegal use of Budha Park for weddings and functions causing noise pollution. The NGT relied on Supreme Court orders permitting limited park usage, observed that no current violations of those orders exist, and directed the MCD to maintain parks effectively without flora and fauna damage.

What did the court decide?

Directed MCD to take all effective steps for maintenance of parks in good condition and ensure no damage to flora and fauna.

C Rajaram Iyer vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.08

¶2

Court No. 2

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No.152/2023 (I.A. No. 73/2023)

¶5

C. Rajaram Iyer Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Govt. of NCT of Delhi Respondent

¶8

Date of hearing: 01.08.2024

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶10

Applicant(s): Mr. Pranchal Panwar, Advocate for Applicant (through VC)

¶11

Respondent(s): Mr. Narender Pal, Advocate for DPCC Ms. Puja Kalra and Mr. Virendra Singh Counsel for MCD with Mr. Rajit Kumar Gangwar, ADH, Horticulture, SSZ, MCD Ms. Kritika Gupta and Ms. Latika Malhotra, Advocates for DDA (through VC)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Heard Counsel for the parties and perused record.

¶14

Applicant Raja Ram C. Iyer brought this Original Application under Sections 14 and 15 of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ NGT Act, 2010 ’), complaining that Budha Park adjoining Pocket-1 Metro Station (Pink-line) is being illegally used for organizing various social events, functions and weddings in connivance with officials of Municipal Corporation of Delhi and tent mafias. Organizers used Diesel Generators for supplying electricity and play loud music for entertainment causing noise pollution beyond permissible limits

¶15

¶16

disturbing and adversely effecting residents particularly infants and aged people living in area.

¶17

Tribunal initially considered the matter on 24.03.2023 and after being satisfied that a substantial question relating to environment has arisen out of implementation of enactments specified in Schedule I to NGT Act, 2010, issued notices to the respondents 1, 2 and 3 i.e., National Capital Territory of Delhi, Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as ‘ DDA ’) and Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ MCD ’).

¶18

Pursuant thereto, DDA filed its Status Report dated 25.07.2023 stating that it has handed over two parks being Park 5 near Ram Mandir, Pocket-1, Phase-1, Mayur Vihar and Park-6 near Kali Bari Temple, Pocket-1, Phase-1, Mayur Vihar to East Delhi Municipal Corporation on 11.08.2021. Presently no green area is under the control of DDA in Mayur Vihar, Phase-1, Pocket-1.

¶19

Another Status Report was filed by email dated 06.07.2023 by MCD. It is said that total number of parks within jurisdiction of Shahdra (South Zone) are approximately 1423 having an area approximately 426.487 acres. Only 13 are available for booking and from that also two parks are available for booking for marriage purpose and 10 parks are used for religious functions and Ramlila, Durgapuja etc.,

¶20

The park in question was booked for marriage and party purposes on few occasions as per the terms and conditions and policy of Municipal Corporation dated 15.09.2021.

¶21

It is also pointed out that earlier this Tribunal in President, Budhela Welfare Association Versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi in O.A.

¶22

¶23

515 of 2019 , vide judgment dated 04.02.2021 restrained use of park for social and marriage functions. Relevant extract of judgment reads as under:

¶24

„‟In view of the order of the Delhi High Court prohibiting use of parks for social, cultural, commercial, marriage or other functions and the directions of DPCC dated 13.12.2019 under the Water, Air and EP Acts that no park can be used for social, cultural, commercial, marriage or other functions and the Executive Engineer (Horticulture) of DDA and the MCD will be accountable for the violations, further direction of installing ETP is contradictory as such question does not arise if no such social, cultural, commercial or marriage function is to be held in the parks. This needs to be strictly enforced by the Horticulture Department of DDA and MCD. The DPCC may also modify its directions accordingly and strictly enforce 8 the prohibitions as per orders of Delhi High Court. Similarly, plea of DPCC to depend on amendment by DDA is an attempt to avoid responsibility as even without such amendment powers under the EP Act and the Water Act override any other statute which cannot stand in the way of enforcement of environmental norms particularly in view of orders of Delhi High Court, prohibiting use of parks for such functions.

¶25

The application is disposed of.‟‟

¶26

North Delhi Municipal Corporation filed Civil Appeal (Diary) No.15182 of 2021, North Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. President Budhela Welfare Association & Anr. and Supreme Court stayed the operation of judgment of NGT and directed that directions of Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India, (2009) 17 SCC 683 with regard to use of parks shall strictly be adhered to and in no circumstances shall use parks for purposes as mentioned in said judgment for more than 10 days in a month. Order of Supreme Court is on record at page 141 and reads as under:

¶27

“Appeals are admitted.

¶28

Issue notice to the respondents.

¶29

Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the

¶30

¶31

judgment and order under appeal has been passed without notice to the appellants. North Delhi Municipal Corporation (CA D. No. 15182 of 2021) and the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (CA D. No. 15754 of 2021). Accordingly, there will be stay of operation of the judgment and order under appeal. It is made clear that the directions of the Court in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India reported in (2009) 17 SCC 683 with regard to the use of parks shall strictly be adhered to, and in no circumstances, shall use of parks for the purposes as mentioned in the said judgment be permitted for more than 10 days in a month.”

¶32

Applicant filed reply dated 08.08.2023 stating that parks are not being properly maintained.

¶33

Another Status Report has been filed vide email dated 03.04.2024 by MCD and it is stated that MCD maintains all parks under its jurisdiction i.e., 15230 and information is available on public domain. It also maintains information of parks/open spaces available for booking for the purpose of social and religious functions.

¶34

Status Report dated 16.07.2024 has been filed by DPCC stating that park was inspected on 06.04.2023 by DPCC officials and during inspection, its observations are under:

¶35

“i. No social event, functions or wedding is observed. ii. The said park is maintained by MCD.

¶36

iii Sh. Devdutt, Park Caretaker informed that the park is being allotted for organizing the social events, functions or wedding events by MCD.”

¶37

Re-inspection was carried out on 02.04.2024 and observations are under:

¶38

“i. No social event, functions or wedding was observed during inspection.

¶39

ii. The said park is being maintained by MCD. iii. No concerned official is available.”

¶40

¶41

However, DPCC has issued a letter dated 15.07.2024 to MCD and Horticulture Department Division of DDA to adhere to environmental laws in respect of handling of municipal solid waste generation and pollution.

¶42

Having found a situation where parks can be utilized for marriage purposes for limited period under the orders of Supreme Court, applicant vide its response dated 26.07.2024 has made certain suggestions.

¶43

So long as the use of park is not shown as violating the orders of Supreme Court or any specific violation of environmental laws, we do not find that any interference is called for by this Tribunal.

¶44

In these facts and circumstances and discussion made above, we are of the view that this Original Application may be disposed of by observing that MCD shall take all effective steps for maintenance of parks in good condition, in a regular manner’ by taking all appropriate remedial steps as are necessary for maintenance of park and ensure that there is no damage to flora and fauna.

¶45

Sudhir Agarwal, JM

¶46

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶47

August 01, 2024 Original Application No.152/2023 M

¶48

C Rajaram Iyer v. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C Rajaram Iyer v. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rambharose Tomar vs

News Item Titled Umaria: Nahi Tham Raha Avaidh Ret Khanan Police Ne Phir Jabt Kia Ek Tractor Khanij Vibhag Ko Nahi Jaankari" Appearing in Amar Ujala Dated 03.02.2024 vs M.P Pollution Control Board

Satyam Shekhar vs Kamlesh Kumar

News Item Titled "Rajasthan Mein Avaidh Khanan Ka Mila Bada Khel 21 Crore Se Adhik Kee Shaasti Lagai" Appearing in Abhay India Dated 28.01.2024 vs Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board

Ashok Kumar Jain vs

News Item Titled "Chaibasa: Illegal Mining of Stones Is Going on in Saranda Forest" Appearing in Lagatar Dated 31.05.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Pavoor Uliya Kudru Shrinking Due to Illegal Sand Mining Locals Demand Justice" Appearing in Udayavani Dated 25.06.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Ri Bhoi Village Troubled by Stone Quarries" Appearing in Meghalaya Dated 05.07.2024 vs

Gourav Taneja vs Municipal Corporation

Pateshwari Prasad Singh vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 75/2022 in Original Application No. 400/2022 of Hirdey Kumar Goel & Ors. vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

C Rajaram Iyer vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Shrankhla Mittal vs Govt. of NCT Delhi

Deepti Gupta vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change