Disposed

Jitendra Singh Bhatiya and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh

NGT3 Apr 2024Original Application No. 17/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal examined a grievance regarding tree cutting and damage to fencing in a garden in Indore. Based on a committee report finding one damaged tree but no evidence of major destruction, and noting a Municipal Corporation development proposal, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant's grievances, allowing continued public use of the garden.

What the court decided

AI extract

Jitendra Singh Bhatiya and Others vs State of Madhya… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No. 03

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (Through Video Conferencing) Original Application No. 17/2024(CZ)

¶3

Jitender Singh Bhatia & Ors. Applicant(s)

¶4

¶5

State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. Respondent(s)

¶6

Date of Hearing: 03.04.2024

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶8

For Applicant (s): Mr. Jitender Singh Bhatia (Applicant in Person) Mr. Manoj Sahu (Applicant in Person) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mehul Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Parul Bhadoria, Adv. Mr. Hitesh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Akshay Sharma, Adv.

¶9

ORDER

¶10

The grievance of the applicant is cutting of the trees and damaging the green belt in the Shri Krishn Avenue, Phase-1, Limbodi, Indore (Ward No. 77) by the respondents and damaging the fencing and cement poles illegally in violation of environmental rules with intention to use the green belt.

¶11

The matter was taken up by this Tribunal on 06.02.2024 and a committee consisting the Collector, Indore, one representative of the Municipal Commissioner, Indore and one representative of State Pollution Control Board, (M.P.) was constituted with direction to submit the factual and action taken report.

¶12

¶13

In compliance thereof, the members of the committee visited the site and submitted the report as follows :-

¶14

“Observations :

¶15

1. The applicant Shri Jitendra Singh Bhatia resides at in front of garden, located at Shri Krishan Avenue, Phase-I, Limbodi, Ward No. 77, Indore (M.P.). As per document submitted by Applicant, the total area of garden is 3140 Sqm. Other houses are also in front of garden. The road between garden and houses is about 7.5 meters wide.

¶16

2. For better understanding of the area, a google map showing garden, Shri Jitendra Bhatia house and nearby area is enclosed.

¶17

3. During visit it is found that the boundary of garden has been demarcated by using cement poles and fenced with barbed wire towards road side i.e. towards Applicant Shri Bhatia house. Houses of Limbodi Villagers are located on other side of the garden.

¶18

4. About 100 small and large trees were observed in the garden, mostly along with boundary of garden.

¶19

5. No cutting of trees was observed except one tree, whose stem cut above the ground upto 01 meter was observed.

¶20

6. A pucca house is located at left side of the garden, which is used as milk booth for residents of the colony and it has been told during visit that this milk booth has been constructed from MLA Fund. A temporary tin shed at one corner of this house (milk booth) boundary has also been found, which is used for community programs by the colony residents.

¶21

7. The Applicant Shri Jitendra Bhatia has told that cement pole of fencing along the boundary of garden have been damaged/ removed and cement chairs have also been broken by non Applicant. He also told that boundary of garden should be constructed and gardens should be developed by Indore Municipal Corporation (IMC).

¶22

8. Local resident of Colony were present during inspection in 8 to 10 numbers and have told that they had placed cement chairs in

¶23

¶24

memory of their ancestors and also planted the trees in the garden. None had removed or damaged the chairs but some chairs become damaged due to use for long time. They told that the Applicant Shri Jitendra Bhatia is a Journalist and wants that other persons from the colony should not come to garden because the garden is located in front of his house; however Applicant Shri Bhatia had denied from this statement during inspection.

¶25

9. During visit no cement chair seen in garden but cement poles were seen in along the boundary of garden and garden area was fenced with barbed wire.

¶26

10. Commissioner Indore Municipal Corporation has constituted a Committee under Shri Divyank Singh, Additional Commissioner, Horticulture Department of Municipal Corporation vide their Order no. 35/MC/2024 dated 07/03/2024. The Officers of Municipal Corporation were part of inspection team on inspected dated 15/03/2024. Horticulture Department Municipal Corporation Indore has submitted a report, which is enclosed. As per report Municipal Corporation (Horticulture Civil Department) has prepared a proposal of Rs. 30,75,478/- (Rupees Thirty Lack Seventy Five Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Eight Only) for development of the garden. Therefore, It is submitted that action is being taken by Municipal Corporation Indore.

¶27

Conclusion :

¶28

1. There is dispute between both the Applicant Shri Jitendra Singh Bhatia and Non Applicant's Shri Ravi Dangi, Shri Ajit Manuja, and other residents of Shri Krishan Avenue, Phase-I, Limbodi, Ward No. 77, Indore (M.P.) regarding use of garden area because that is located in front of Applicant Shri Bhatia's house and due to disturbances take place by movement of people in the garden and vehicle on the road.

¶29

2. Both Applicant & Non Applicants were shown need of development of the garden during inspection, so it can be useful to the Resident's of colony.

¶30

¶31

3. The trees are already in existence in garden only one tree was seen fell down whose one meter stem was observed remains on the site.

¶32

Recommendations:

¶33

1. As per Town and Country Planning approved map, the area is designated as garden, which is public place and should not be prohibited for other persons of the colony to use. Hence Applicant may be directed to not to prohibit other persons for use of the garden area.

¶34

2. The road in front of the Applicant's house is also public property and therefore, Applicant cannot prohibit movement of vehicles on the road.

¶35

3. Residents of the colony via Rahwasi Sangh may be directed to use the garden area for community purpose but it should ensured that there should not any disturbance to residents living near the garden like Applicant and other houses' Parking of vehicles in front of Applicant's house by other persons should not be carried out' Noise level should be kept within prescribed limits during any function taking place in garden area or milk booth area' 4. Municipal Corporation Indore should be directed to develop and maintain the garden according.”

¶36

The reply on behalf of the rest of the respondents have been filed with the affidavit of more than 50 persons residing in the same colony.

¶37

The submission of the rest of the respondents are that :-

¶38

i. The fencing was constructed by the all the persons of entire colony and the bench which has been placed in the garden was placed in the memory of late father of Ajeet Manuja respondent No. 5 and Vishal Mahadware, who are also residents of same colony, where complainant resides and false averment has been made in respect of bench and fencing.

¶39

ii. Respondents are the persons who takes care of the garden and entire colony is being benefited by the garden and the

¶40

¶41

children of the vicinity uses the garden as play area and entire colony is taking care of the garden and the complainant No. 1 Jitendra Singh Bhatia has filed false complaint before the tribunal, because he is a blackmailer and also a reporter of an unknown newspaper and to counter the allegations, answering respondents are also filing the affidavits of the residents of the society, which are 50 in numbers and majority of the residents has stated in the affidavit claiming that no such activity is being done by any one as alleged in the complaint and the complaint is false.

¶42

iii. The garden is being used by all the residents of the society and the tin shade was build by the members of the society with the help of MLA fund for organizing Get-together of the colony members as the same place was already reserved for the said purpose.

¶43

iv. The contentions of para 6 are also false, because, it is the complainant No. 1 who wants to take possession of the garden and it is complainant No. 1 also obstruct the resident of the colony to enter garden when they visit garden for help purpose and as mentioned above majority of the society members of the same colony has filed their affidavits in support of the contentions raised by the answering respondents.

¶44

During the course of hearing the learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that there is no damage of any chairs and there is no damage of trees. Both the parties applicant as well as respondents are of the opinion that the parks should be maintained for that purpose. The Municipal Corporation, Indore, Department of Park has prepared a proposal of development of the parks amounting to Rs. 30,75,478/-. Now, the Municipal Corporation has taken care of the park thus nothing survives with regard to maintenance of the park.

¶45

So far as the personal grievances are concerned it is suggested that the members residing there may form a society and take a decision by majority

¶46

¶47

of opinions of the persons residing there for betterment and development of the park.

¶48

In view of the submissions made by the respondents and the joint committee report nothing survives. However, we direct the residents that the plants and trees should not be damaged, and the plants should be taken care by the residents.

¶49

With these observations Original Application No. 17/2024 stands disposed of.

¶50

Sheo Kumar Singh, JM

¶51

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶52

03^rd April, 2024 O.A No. 17/2024 (CZ) PN

¶53

Jitendra Singh Bhatiya and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Jitendra Singh Bhatiya and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Behru Lal Regar vs State of Rajasthan

News Item Titled "Baghpat News Katha Mei Mitti Khanan Ko Lekar Hungama" Appearing in Amar Ujala Dated 15.02.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Pune Residents of Bavdhan Budruk Suffer Due to Drainage Water Accumulation" Appearing in Pune Times Mirror Dated 15.02.2024 vs

Tribunal on Its Own Motion Based Upon the News Crz Violations in Coastal Area of Vishakapatnam by Eenadu Published on 03RD March 2024 vs the District Collector Visakhapatnam

V Rajagopalan vs Escapade Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.

New Paper Article Published in Dainik Bhaskar Dated 16TH Oct 2023 Regarding Dumping of Waste in River Area of Kaliyasot Madhya Pradesh vs State of Madhya Pradesh

News Item Titled "Begging for Breath: Trapped Between Industries Kochi Residents Gasp for Fresh Air" Appearing in the New Indian Express Dated 23.02.2024. vs

News Item Titled "Bermo Ke Mahuataand Mai Avaidh Balu Ke Khel Mai Saikaro Tractor Se Aam Log Ho Rahe Pareshaan" Appearing in News Wing Dated 19.12.2023 vs

Behru Lal Regar vs State of Rajasthan

Ajay Dubey vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Sitaram Jaat vs State of Rajasthan

Dayaraam Gurjar vs State of Rajasthan through Its Secretary Forest

New Paper Article Published in Dainik Bhaskar Dated 16TH Oct 2023 Regarding Dumping of Waste in River Area of Kaliyasot Madhya Pradesh vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 3/2024 in Original Application No. 64/2023 of Shambhu Goswami vs Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board