1 in the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 21 ST DAY OF MARCH 2013 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.D.H.WAGHELA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA WRIT PETITION Nos.5802-5803/2013(GM-MMS-PIL) BETWEEN : 1. SRI RUDRAPPA YARAGATTI S/O.PATHREPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/A.NO.33, CHANDARAGI ONI HOUSE NO.1 TO 110 ITNAL, SAVADATTI, BELGAUM. 2. SRI BHEEMAPPA RAMAPPA KOLAVI S/O.RAMAPPA KOLAVI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS NO.83, CHANDARAGI ONI HOUSE NO.1 TO 110 ITNAL, SAVADATTI, BELGAUM. 3. SRI BASAVANAGOUDA MAHADEVAPPA PATIL S/O.MAHADEVAPPA PATIL AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/A.NO.114, ITNAL BELGAUM DISTRICT. 4. SRI BIRAPPA JOTTAPPA PUJARA S/O.JOTTAPPA PUJARA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/A.NO.8, ITNAL BELGAUM DISTRICT. 5. SRI MARUTHI YELLAPPA KODLIWAD S/O.YELLAPPA KODLIWAD AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/A.NO.41, ITNAL BELGAUM DISTRICT. 2 6. SRI BASLINGAPPA RUDRAPPA YARAGATTI S/O.RUDRAPPA YARAGATTI AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/A.NO.40, ITNAL BELGAUM DISTRICT. 7. SRI ERAPPA BASAPPA SHIVABASAVANNANAVAR S/O.BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/A.NO.22, ITNAL BELGAUM DISTRICT. 8. SRI RAYAPPA CHANNAMALLAPPA KOLAVI S/O.CHANNAMALLAPPA KOLAVI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/A.ITNAL, SAVADATTI, BELGAUM. 9. SRI SANNASIDRAMAPPA SIDDAPPA SANNAKKI S/O.SIDDAPPA KOUJALAGI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/A.ITNAL, SAVADATTI TALUK BELGAUM DISTRICT. 10. SRI SHIVAPPA RAMAPPA KOLAVI S/O.RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/A.NO.83, CHANDARAGI ONI HOUSE NO.1 TO 110 ITNAL, SAVADATTI, BELGAUM. 11. SRI BANAVARAJA MAHADEVAGOUDA PATIL S/O.MAHADEVANAGOUDA PATIL AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS ITNAL, SAVADATTI, BELGAUM. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI VENKATESH P.DALWAI, ADV.FOR M/S.SRIVARU LAW FIRM) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIDHANA SOUDA, BANGALORE 1. 2. THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, NO.49, 1 ST TO 5 TH FLOOR CHURCH STREET, BANGALORE -1. BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY. 3 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BELGAUM-1. …RESPONDENTS (SRI BASAVARAJ KAREDDY, PRL.GA FOR R1 AND R3, SRI D.NAGARAJ, ADV. FOR R2) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DATED 25.10.2012 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-F (IN SO FAR AS ITEM NO.5 ITNAL VILLAGE IS CONCERNED), QUASH COMMUNICATION/CORRIGENDUM DATED 29.12.2012 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXURE-G. THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER 1. These Writ Petitions which are sought to be filed by way of public interest litigation assail notification dated 25.10.2012 issued by respondent no.3 (Annexure-F) and Corrigendum dated 29.12.2012 issued by respondent no.2 (Annexure-G). 2. The case of the petitioners is that, by virtue of notification at Annexure-F dated 25.12.2012 in so far as Itnal village is concerned which is at Saundatti Taluk, Belgaum District, certain areas totally measuring 142 acres have been notified as safer zone by the Deputy Commissioner. Thereafter, proposals were sent by the Deputy Commissioner to the second respondent- 4 Karnataka Pollution Control Board seeking certification of the said areas as safer zones by communication dated 24.08.2012, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-E. The Pollution Control Board certified the aforesaid area as a safer zone subject to certain terms and conditions which are stated in the said annexure. Thereafter, by corrigendum dated 29.12.2012 certain conditions were clarified. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that, with regard to condition nos. 1, 4 and 5, as stated in corrigendum dated 29.12.2012, there has been variation and relaxation of terms and conditions of establishment of safer zone and therefore the same has adversely affected the petitioners and other residents of Itnal village. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material on record. We find that the identification of the safer zones throughout the State of Karnataka as far as stone crusher units are concerned, is pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in Obayya Pujari vs. Member Secretary, KSPCB and others disposed of on 10.7.1998 which Judgment has 5 been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Thereafter several directions have been issued to the State Government to identify the safer zones. It is in that regard that Deputy Commissioners of each District has been made responsible to identify the safer zones in terms of the directions issued by this Court and as upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and thereafter to get the same certified by the Karnataka Pollution Control Board. Therefore, Annexure-E has been issued in the instant case as far as Saundatti Taluk is concerned. 5. The grievance of the petitioners that the relaxation of some of the conditions would result in adverse environmental impact, at present, cannot be considered for the simple reason that after the issuance of Annexures E and G, there has not yet been shifting of the Industries, as such we think that, at this stage, it is necessary for the stone crusher units to first shift to the safer zone and that if any grievance is ventilated by the public around the safer zones, they may be entertained. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the grievance ventilated in these writ petitions, we dispose of 6 the writ petitions reserving liberty to the petitioners to initially approach the concerned authorities in case they have any grievance with regard to the shifting of the stone crusher units to the safer zone and then to approach this Court. 6. The Writ Petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE Sk/- .

Load more