Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home
Full Text

TATA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD vs. AALOK JAGGA AND OTHERS

SCR Citation: [2019] 13 S.C.R. 577
Year/Volume: 2019/ Volume 13
Date of Judgment: 05 November 2019
Petitioner: TATA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD
Disposal Nature: Appeal Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2019 INSC 1203
Judgment Delivered by: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra
Respondent: AALOK JAGGA AND OTHERS
Case Type: CIVIL APPEAL /8398/2019
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Environment Laws: Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 – Environment (Protection) Rules, 1996 – Housing project – Environment clearance – Housing project coming up within the catchment area of Sukhna Lake and at a short distance of 123 meters from Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary – Challenge to – Held: Considering the distance of 123 meters from the Northern side and 183 meters from the Eastern side of the project from wildlife sanctuary, such project cannot be allowed to come up in the area – Origination of the project indicates that State of Punjab failed to act in furtherance of Doctrine of Public Trust as 95 MLAs were to be the recipients of the flats – Government permitted setting up of high–rise buildings up to 92 meters in the area which was not at all permissible – Moreso, in view of the Notification issued with respect to the Sukhna wildlife sanctuary towards the side of Chandigarh Union Territory that no new commercial construction of any kind shall be permitted within 0.5 km from the boundary of protected area or up to the boundary of the eco–sensitive zone and also the fact that proposal made by the Punjab Government, confining the Buffer Zone to 100 meters, was rightly not accepted by MoEF, the Government of Punjab as well as MoEF, cannot be the final arbiter in the matter – Court has to perform its duty in such a scenario when the authorities have failed to protect the wildlife sanctuary eco–sensitive zone – Thus, the entire exercise of obtaining clearance relating to the project quashed – Doctrine of Public Trust. Environment: Environmental degradation and wildlife degeneration – Need for protection and preservation of environment, safeguarding forest and wildlife – Development and urbanization adversely affects our natural surroundings – Constitution of India – Arts. 48(A), 51(A). 

2. Case referred
3. Act
  • Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986)
4. Keyword
  • Environment (Protection) Act
  • 1986
  • Environment (Protection) Rules
  • 1996
  • Housing project
  • Environment clearance
5. Equivalent citation
    Citation(s) 2020 (15) SCC 784 = 2020 (15) Suppl. SCC 784 = 2019 (11) JT 1 = 2019 (11) Suppl. JT 1 = 2019 (14) SCALE 641