http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9  

PETITIONER: RAMJI PATEL & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: NAGRIK UPBHOKTA MARG DARSHAK MANCH & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       17/02/2000

BENCH: Y.K.Sabharwal, R.C.Lahoti, S.S.Ahmad

JUDGMENT:

     S.SAGHIR AHMAD, J.

     The Madhya Pradesh High  Court,  in  a Public Interest  Litigation,  instituted under  Article 226 of the Constitution, has directed, by the impugned  judgment  dated  16.12.1996,   that  the  dairies, located  on  the outskirts of the Jabalpur City, be  shifted from  their present location to the alternative sites.  This judgment  was  passed  in  the Writ Petition  in  which  the following   reliefs  were  claimed:-   "(a)  to  direct  the respondents  to  take appropriate, effective  and  immediate steps  to  remove the Cow/Buffalow dung and urine  from  the pipe  line of water filteration plant at Lalpur,  Gwarighat. (b)  direct the respondents to ensure that in future also no storage  of  Cow/Buffalow dung and urine of animals  may  be done  on the water supply pipe line of Lalpur, Gwarighat  as stated  in  the  body  of  the  petition;   (c)  direct  the respondents  to  take appropriate steps against the  persons who  have  stored  these hazardous materials  on  the  water supply  pipe lines;  (d) Any other order/orders,  writ/writs or direction/directions that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and  proper, may also kindly be given." The principal ground on  which  the petition was founded was that the main  water pipelines,  which  supplied water, after its  filtration  at Lalpur  Filtration  Plant,  to  the  Jabalpur  City,  passed through  the  place  where  a number  of  dairy-owners,  had started storing the cow/buffalow dung and waste of the dairy products,  and that too, near the pipelines which was likely to  contaminate the pure water supplied to the residents  of the  City  for home consumption.  On this aspect,  the  High Court  recorded  the  following findings:-  "We  called  the Public  Health  Engineering  persons   and  the  Corporation Authorities.   The Corporation Authorities informed us  that proceedings  under  Sec.   133  of   the  Code  of  Criminal Procedure  were taken against these persons and against Shri Manohar  Singh Marwaha.  Against Marwaha dairy, final  order has been passed which is also the subject of revision before the Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in which interim order has been passed   by   the  Sessions   Judge  restraining  the   M.P. Electricity  Board from disconnection of their power supply. We  also  sought reports from the Public Health  Engineering Department,  Revenue Authorities and Corporation Authorities and  after considering the matter, we find that keeping  all these  dairies  around these water supply lines is  a  great hazard  to the lives of the people of Jabalpur, because most of them get water from these pipelines on which cow/buffalow

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9  

dungs  are  being stored by the dairy owners as a result  of which  there is every likelihood of pollution in the town by the  supply of polluted water." The High Court,  thereafter, considered  the question of rehabilitating the  dairy-owners at  some  other  place and passed the following order  on  a consideration  of the case of each dairy-owner individually: "5.    We,   therefore,   explored    the   possibility   of rehabilitating  these dairy owners from the present location so  that cow\buffalow dungs may not pollute the water supply lines.   We  have been informed that so far as  dairy  owner Ramji  Patil is concerned, his present dairy is situated  on Khasra No.  15/3 at Gwarighat.  He has 107 cattle heads.  He has  other  lands  in village Lalpur, i.e.   Settlement  No. 641,  bearing Kh.  Nos.  134, 154/2, 135 and 136/3.  It  is, therefore,  directed  that  since  Ramji Patel  has  a  site available on the lands bearing the aforesaid Khasra numbers, he  should  shift his dairy from the present site to any  of the  above  mentioned sites of Kh.  No.  15/3  at  Gwarighat within  two months from today.  6.  Shiv Kumar Patel has got his  dairy  at  Gwarighat on Khasra No.  15/2.   He  has  18 cattle  heads.  He has also a land in Khasra Nos.  4 and 5/2 at  Gwarighat  which  site  is sufficiently  away  from  the present  site.   He is also directed to remove his dairy  to any  of  the  above mentioned places from  the  present  one within  two  months from today.  7.  Hariram Rajak  has  his dairy  at Gwarighat.  He does not have any land of his  own. He  has  30 cattle heads.  He does not have any  alternative land.   Therefore, we asked the S.D.M.  Jabalpur that he may be  provided a site for his dairy.  He has pointed out  that there  is  a land available at village Tilhari, bearing  Kh. No.   200/1  of Patwari Circle No.  23/27,  measuring  about 30.106  hectares.   We asked the Public  Health  Engineering Department authorities also to go and find out whether there is  water available in that area or not.  Shri A.K.  Tiwari, Chief   Engineer,  Public   Health  Engineering   Department Jabalpur  and his Executive Engineer both have inspected the area  and  also conducted hydrological tests.  According  to their  report,  there  is  plenty of  water  in  that  area. Therefore,  there will be no difficulty so far as supply  of water  to  this  dairy is concerned.  It  is  directed  that Hariram  Rajak  shall make a proper application  before  the Nazul  Officer,  Jabalpur and the Collector, Jabalpur  shall forward  the same to the State Government for allotting 0.50 hectares  of  land to him for running his dairy.  The  State Government  is directed that 0.50 hectares of land shall  be allotted  to  Hariram Rajak on usual charges within a  month from  today.  The Public Health Engineering Department shall dig  a  tubewell  for him at that place at the cost  of  the State  Exechequer  within  another   period  of  one  month. Hariram Rajak shall be removed from the present place within a period of two months to the newly allotted site.  All this exercise  should  be  done by the State Government  and  the Public  Health Engineering Department within a period of two months  from  today.  It will be the responsibility  of  the Corporation  to  see  that  the dairy of  Hariram  Rajak  is removed  within  two months from today and  all  formalities shall  also be completed by the State Government within this period.   8.   Another  dairy owner is  Shri  Manohar  Singh Marwaha.  He shall also be allotted land at Tilhari.  He has his  dairy  on 0.148 hectares of land at Gwarighat.  He  has 150  cattle heads.  He shall be allotted land at Tilhari out of  Kh.   No.  200/1, Patwari Circle No.   23/27,  measuring 30.10  hectares.  Out of this Khasra, he will be given  0.50 hectares  of  land  on  usual charges.   He  shall  make  an application  before  the  Nazul Officer,  Jabalpur  and  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9  

Collector  shall  forward  his   application  to  the  State Government.   The State Government is directed to allot this piece  of  land to Shri Manohar Singh Marwaha.   The  Public Health  Engineering Department shall also dig a tubewell  on this  land  at  the cost of the State.   All  this  exercise should be done within a period of two months from today.  It will  be  responsibility  of the State  Government  and  the Public  Health  Engineering  Authorities   that  all   these facilities are made available to the aforesaid dairy owners. It  will  also  be  the   responsibility  of  the   Jabalpur Corporation  to remove all the aforesaid dairies within  two months  from today to the locations mentioned above." On the Special  Leave  Petitions  being filed in  this  Court,  the following  order was passed on 3.2.1997:  "I.A.  is allowed. Permission  to file S.L.P.  is granted in both the  matters. Issue  notice on Special Leave Petitions as well as on  stay application  returnable  on  3.3.1997.    Dasti  service  in addition.   Notice  may  also be issued  to  the  Divisional Manager,  Railway,  Jabalpur.  The learned counsel  for  the petitioners  state  that  the petitioners  would  not  allow cowdung  or  urine to accumulate within 20 feet of the  pipe line in question on both sides.  There shall be interim stay of  the impugned direction regarding shifting of the dairies of  the  petitioners  for  6 weeks." On  5.9.1997,  a  Bench comprising Hon.  S.C.Agrawal and G.T.  Nanavati, JJ., passed the  following  order :  "The learned counsel appearing  for the  Jabalpur Municipal Corporation and the State of  Madhya Pradesh  prays  for eight weeks‘ time to file an  additional affidavit  indicating the response of the authorities to the proposal of the petitioners to construct a wall around their dairies  so  as to prevent the cow-dung spreading  near  the pipe line.  They will also show the plan of the pipe line as it  passes  from near the dairies of the petitioners.   Time prayed  for  is  allowed.  Put up after  eight  weeks."  The following  order was passed by the same Bench on  7.11.1997: "One  of  the  questions that arises in these  petitions  is whether  the cowdung and urine from the cattle maintained by the petitioners in their dairy farms can be dealt with so as to  prevent contamination of the water being carried through the  pipeline as well as the soil surrounding the  pipeline. Since  there  is  no material on record on this  aspect,  we consider   it  appropriate  to   direct  the  Central  Water Pollution  Control  Board  to depute a specialist  who  may, after  inspecting  the site, suggest measures which  can  be taken  for treatment of cowdung and the urine of the  cattle to  prevent  it from flowing above the pipeline and  exclude the  possibility  of  contamination  of  the  water  passing through  the pipeline.  The Central Water Pollution  Control Board  shall  submit the said report within a period of  two months.   The  petitioners will jointly pay the charges  for such inspection and the report.  A copy of this order may be sent  to  the  Secretary, Central  Water  Pollution  Control Board."  On 16.1.1998, a notice was directed to be issued to the   State  Pollution  Control   Board.    Thereafter,   on 20.2.1998,  the  following  order was passed :   "Notice  on Central  Pollution Control Board has been served but  nobody enters  appearance  on behalf of Central  Pollution  Control Board  and, therefore, we do not know as to what steps  have been  taken  by  the  Central  Pollution  Control  Board  in pursuance  of  the directions contained in our  order  dated November  7,  1997.   Put  up on March  27,  1998.   In  the meanwhile  a communication be sent to the Secretary, Central Pollution Control Board to be personally present before this Court  on March 27, 1998." The order passed by this Court on 27.3.1998  is  as  follows  :  "An affidavit  of  Dr.   S.P.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9  

Chakrabarti,  Member-  Secretary, Central Pollution  Control Board, has been filed in response to the directions given by this Court in the Order dated November 7, 1997.  In the said affidavit  measures  have  been suggested for  treatment  of cowdung  and  the urine of the cattle and other waste  water from  the  dairies  so  as to  exclude  the  possibility  of contamination of the water flowing through the pipeline.  An affidavit  has  also  been  filed by  Dr.S.N.   Nema,  Zonal Officer,  M.P.   Pollution Control Board agreeing  with  the said affidavit of Shri Chakrabarty.  In these circumstances, the Central Pollution Control Board is directed to prepare a project report in respect of the measures which are required to  be taken as per the affidavit of Shri Chakrabarty.   The petitioners  will  bear the cost of the preparation  of  the said  project  report.  The learned counsel for the  Central Pollution  Control Board prays for four weeks time to submit the  project report.  Put up in the 1st week of May,  1998." On 31.8.1998, Shri Vijay Panjwani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Central Pollution Control Board stated that the  Project Report would be submitted within two weeks.  On the  submission  of  the  Project   Report  of  the  Central Pollution  Control  Board, it was stated by learned  counsel appearing   on   behalf   of   the  petitioners   that   the recommendations  made by the Central Pollution Control Board and  the measures suggested by them would be implemented and carried  out.   The Court, therefore, passed  the  following order  on  6.10.1998 :  "It has been stated by  the  learned counsel for the parties that the recommendations made by the Central  Pollution Control Board and the measures  suggested shall be implemented and carried out.  The cost amounting to Rs.93,000/-  incurred by the CPCB shall be paid to the  CPCB by  the  Marwah  Dairy,  Ramji   Dairy,  Hariram  Rajak  and Shivprasad Patel in equal shares within 6 weeks.  List after 3  months."  When the matter was taken up on  8.1.1999,  the Court passed the following order :  "The cost of Rs.93,000/- (Rupees  Ninety three thousand) has been deposited with  the Central Pollution Control Board.  In the affidavit dated 3rd January,  1999  of  Sri Ramji Patel filed on behalf  of  the petitioners,  it has been stated that they have entered into an  agreement  with the Sunraj Construction Company for  the construction of the bio-gas plant of 45 cubic meter capacity and that the Executive Engineer of Madhya Pradesh Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd.  has also been informed.  The petitioner has also applied  for the subsidy for the construction of the bio-gas plant.   The  Madhya  Pradesh Urja Vikas Nigam  Ltd.   shall monitor  the  construction of the bio-gas plant on the  spot and submit a report to this Court after 2 months.  The other recommendations  of  the  Central  Pollution  Control  Board contained in its report dated 27th March, 1998 shall also be complied  with  by the petitioners.  List after  2  months." Thereafter,   time   for  completing   the  work   for   the construction  of Bio Gas Plant etc.  was extended from  time to  time  and  the Union of India, through the  Ministry  of Agriculture, was also directed to release the subsidy amount of  Rs.64,000/-  for the Bio Gas Plant, to the  petitioners. In  the meantime, an affidavit of Dr.  M.R.  Tiwari,  Health Officer,  Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, dated  25.3.1998, was  filed  in which it was, inter alia, stated as  under  : "4.   That  a  meeting was held on  21/10/97  and  following decision  has  been  taken :  ‘This is  determined  by  full majority that to keep environment of the city neat and clean due  to  earthquake and from the point of view of  pollution all  dairies within the Municipal Corporation limits must be removed  from  the  city  limits upto  end  of  Nov.,  1997. Simultaneously  dairies  which are running in Lalpur  nearby

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9  

Public  Health Engineering Pipe Line should also be  removed because  some complaints regarding the pollution in drinking water pipe line are received.  This action is very necessary from  the  health point of view of the citizens.’ A copy  of Resolution  dated 21/10/97 is marked as Annexure R-4-1."  5. That  as per the resolution of Standing Committee, Municipal Corporation,  Jabalpur some of the dairies has been  removed and  the  proceeding  of removal of dairies is  still  under process."  The  proceedings of the meeting of the  Municipal Corporation  which  adopted a Resolution on 21.10.1997,  was also  annexed which indicated that the Municipal Corporation had  adopted  a  Resolution  that  all  dairies  within  the Municipal  limits must be removed from the city of  Jabalpur by  the  end of November, 1997.  It was also  resolved  that dairies  at  Lalpur  near   the  Public  Health  Engineering Pipeline  should  also  be  removed   because  a  number  of complaints  regarding pollution caused in the drinking water pipeline  were  received.   It  may be  stated  that  Madhya Pradesh  Cattle (Control) Act, 1978 was enforced within  the Municipal  limits of Jabalpur with effect from 27th January, 1978,  and  in the Notification issued by the  Commissioner, Municipal  Corporation, Jabalpur, on September 24, 1979,  it was  stated  that  the cattle could not be kept  within  the limits  of  Jabalpur  Municipal Corporation, except  in  the villages  which  were specified in the list set out  in  the Notification.   This  list  included  Gwarighat  and  Lalpur villages  also but in pursuance of the Resolution adopted by the  Municipal Corporation on 21.10.1997, both the villages, namely,  Gwarighat and Lalpur, were taken out of the list of "excepted villages" vide Notification published in the Govt. Gazette on 19.3.1999.  In view of the above Notification, by which  the  villages of Gwarighat and Lalpur  were  excluded from the "excepted villages", where cattle could be kept, it is  contended  by Mr.  Anoop G.  Choudhary,  learned  Senior Counsel  appearing on behalf of the State of Madhya Pradesh, that  the  petitioners have to shift outside  the  Municipal limits  of  Jabalpur city, if they, at all, intend  to  keep their  dairies, but the dairies, particularly at the spot at which  they  have  established   their  business  cannot  be permitted  to be run or maintained, not only for the  reason that  both  the villages, namely, Gwarighat and Lalpur  fall within  the limits of Municipal Corporation and have, in the meantime,  become densely populated, but also for the reason that  keeping  of cattle in the close proximity of the  main pipeline   which  supplies  drinking   water   from   Lalpur Filtration Plant to the city of Jabalpur, would be hazardous to the health of the people on account of the possibility of the  water carried through that pipeline being  contaminated by  the Gobar (cowdung) as also the urine of the hundreds of cattle  kept  there  by the petitioners.  This is  also  the stand  of  the  Municipal Corporation,  Jabalpur,  on  whose behalf   Mr.   Ranjan  Mukherjee,   learned   counsel   made submissions,  that in the face of the exercise of  statutory power  by the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, by which  the establishment of dairies or the keeping of cattle within the limits   of   Municipal  Corporation,   has   been   totally prohibited,  the  petitioners cannot contend that  they  are still  entitled  to  retain their dairies  at  the  disputed sites.  Dr.  Rajeev Dhawan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on  behalf  of  the  petitioners has,  on  the  other  hand, contended  that  the Resolution dated 31.10.1997, which  was adopted by Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, was a colourable exercise  of  power, inasmuch as the exclusion of  Gwarighat and  Lalpur from the "excepted villages" as detailed in  the Notification  issued in 1978, has been done only during  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9  

pendency  of the present petitions in this Court in which an interim order was also granted that the judgment of the High Court  would  not be implemented.  It is contended that  the proceedings  in  this regard cannot be rendered nugatory  by adopting the Resolution that the dairies could not be run in Gwarighat  and Lalpur villages.  It is contended that  since the Resolution was adopted only to harm the interests of the petitioners  whose  rights were under adjudication  by  this Court  in the present proceedings, the same is liable to  be quashed and cannot be given effect to.  It is also contended that  the  list  of  "excepted  villages"  set  out  in  the Notification  of  1978  contained  many  villages,  but  the Resolution  was  adopted  only in respect of  Gwarighat  and Lalpur  villages  where the present petitioners are  running their  dairies.  No reason, it is contended, has been  shown by the Municipal Corporation why dairies are still permitted to  be run in other villages, although those other  villages also  fall  within  the Municipal limits  of  Jabalpur.   It appears  that there has been previous litigation between the parties with regard to the running of dairies which, at that time, were being run by the petitioners within the Municipal limits  of  Jabalpur.   In  1971, a writ  petition  for  the shifting  of  dairies was filed in the Madhya  Pradesh  High Court  which by its judgment dated 6.2.1976 framed a  scheme directing the Corporation to reserve three plots outside the Municipal  limits  of Jabalpur where the dairy-owners  would shift  their  dairies.   On account of  the  dispute  having arisen  between the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur and  the dairy-owners  with  regard to the developemnt charges  which the dairy-owners were required to pay, another writ petition was  filed  in  the Madhya Pradesh High Court  by  about  89 dairy-owners.   Since a choice was given to the dairy-owners to  make  their own arrangment for establishing and  running their  dairies outside the Municipal limits of Jabalpur, the writ  petition was dismissed by the High Court on  2.1.1976. It  was, thereafter that the dairy-owners purchased plots of land  outside  the  Municipal limits and  established  their dairies.    The  plots  of  land   were  purchased  by   the petitioners  in  villages Lalpur and Gwarighat in  1982  and they  shifted  their  dairies to those  villages  which  had already  been  excepted  from the operation  of  the  Madhya Pradesh  Cattle  (Control) Act, 1978.  The petitioners  have set  out  in  the  present  petitions  that  one  Shri  K.K. Nayakar,  a  Mimicry Artist of repute, purchased a  plot  of land  and  constructed a house at Gwarighat which was  at  a distance  of  about 500 meters from the dairy of one of  the petitioners and as Shri Nayakar did not like the presence of dairies  near his house, he filed a complaint under  Section 133   of  the  Code  of   Criminal  Procedure   before   the Sub-Divisional  Magistrate,  Jabalpur,  for the  removal  of nuisance  created by the petitioners.  While the proceedings were  pending  before  the Sub-Divisional  Magistrate  under Section  133  of  the  Code of Criminal  Procedure,  a  writ petition  was  filed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court  which ultimately  resulted in the judgment which is being impugned before  us.   From the facts set out above, it will be  seen that  when  the Special Leave Petitions were filed  in  this Court, the villages Lalpur and Gwarighat were in the list of "excepted  villages" where dairies could be established  and run  and  cattle could be kept.  Since it was stated in  the writ  petition  that  the  main   water  pipeline  from  the Filtration  Plant at Lalpur passed nearby the dairies set up by  the  petitioners on account of which the drinking  water was  likely  to be contaminated by the Gobar  (cowdung)  and urine  of  hundreds of cattle kept there, this Court,  while

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9  

entertaining  the  Special Leave Petitions,  considered  the possibility  of  a  project being devised so as  to  prevent altogether  the  possibility of  pollution/contamination  of water  carried through pipelines already embedded about four feet below the surface of the earth.  It was for this reason that  this  Court by its order dated 7.11.1997 directed  the Central  Pollution Control Board to consider this matter and to  report  whether  the  likelihood  of  pollution  to  the drinking  water carried by the pipeline in question could be ruled  out by any device suggested by it.  On the submission of  the Report of the Central Pollution Control Board, which was also supported by the State Pollution Control Board, the Court  directed  a project to be prepared for that  purpose. On  the submission of the Project Report, since it was given out by the petitioners that they would implement the project and  carry out all other recommendations made by the Central Pollution  Control Board, the Court directed the petitioners to  implement  the project which included, inter  alia,  the setting up of a Gobar Gas (Bio Gas) Plant.  The petitioners, apart  from  making a payment of Rs.93,000/- to the  Central Pollution  Control  Board towards its Inspection  Fee  etc., also  took  up  the construction of a Gobar  Gas  Plant  and entered into an agreement for purchase of certain additional land  as  suggested by the Central Pollution Control  Board. Time to complete the construction of the Gobar Gas Plant was extended  from time to time by this Court and ultimately  an affidavit  was  filed on behalf of the petitioners that  the Gobar  Gas Plant has been constructed and established.   The construction  was  carried out under the supervision of  the Madhya  Pradesh  Urja Vikas Nigam as directed by this  Court and  Madhya  Pradesh  Urja Vikas Nigam  also  submitted  its progress  report.  An affidavit to the effect that the Gobar Gas  Plant  had become functional was also filed before  the Court.   The  cost  of construction of the Gobar  Gas  Plant which  was  incurred by the petitioners is more than Rs.   5 lakhs.   While these proceedings were pending in this Court, the  Municipal  Corporation adopted a Resolution to  exclude from  the list of "excepted villages" the two villages where the  dairies  in  question are situate, namely,  Lalpur  and Gwarighat, so that the dairies may be shifted from these two villages  and  established elsewhere outside the  limits  of Municipal  Corporation,  Jabalpur.   An  affidavit  to  this effect  was,  for  the first time, filed on  behalf  of  the Municipal  Corporation,  Jabalpur, in March 1998.   But  the Notification  issued  on  the basis of that  Resolution  was still  not  filed before the Court and this has been  placed before  the Court during the course of the arguments.  While it  is  contended  on  behalf of the  petitioners  that  the Resolution  adopted by the Municipal Corporation,  Jabalpur, and  the consequent Gazette Notification issued on its basis were  liable to be quashed on account of the abuse of power, or  to put it differently, on account of colourable exercise of  power, it is maintained on behalf of the State Govt.  as also   the  Municipal  Corporation,   Jabalpur,   that   the Resolution  was adopted in the interest of public health and could  not  be  said to be a colourable  exercise  of  power merely  because the proceedings were pending in this  Court. Supply  of pure drinking water is the statutory duty of  the Municipal Corporation and the supply of such water has to be ensured  to  every  citizen.   In  a  situation,  where  the interest  of  the  community  is  involved,  the  individual interest  must yield to the interest of the community or the general  public.   Since the Cattle (Control) Act,  1978  is already  in  force within the Municipal limits  of  Jabalpur city, the dairies cannot be established and cattle cannot be

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9  

kept  so as to cause public nuisance in contravention of the statutory  provisions.   But the Court cannot also  overlook the fact that the petitioners, who had already been uprooted from  one  place,  and  that  too, at  the  dictate  of  the judiciary,  had established dairies at a place at which such activity  was  not  prohibited.   In the  list  of  villages appended  to  the  Notification   issued  under  the  Cattle (Control) Act, 1978, Lalpur and Gwarighat were the villages, besides other villages, where such activity could be legally carried  on.   These  villages were taken out of  that  list during  the pendency of the present proceedings by virtue of a  Resolution  adopted  by   the  Municipal  Corporation  on 21.10.1997.  The petitioners have already invested huge sums in  setting up a Gobar Gas Plant at an expense of more  than Rupees  Five  lakhs  and have also incurred  an  expense  of Rs.93,000/-  towards Inspection Fee of the Central Pollution Control  Board  in  pursuance of the order  passed  by  this Court.   The validity of the Resolution dated 21.10.1997  as reflected in the Gazette Notification dated 19.3.1999 cannot be legally adjudicated upon in these proceedings on the oral submissions  made  by  Dr.  Rajeev  Dhawan,  learned  Senior Counsel,  who also pointed out that although the  Resolution was  adopted  only  in  respect   of  Lalpur  village,   the Notification  published  in the Gazette  mentions  Gwarighat village  also.   If  the  Notification  is  intended  to  be challenged  by  the  petitioners,   they  have  to  initiate appropriate  proceedings  in which they have to set out  the foundation  for such challenge so that the State Govt.   or, for that matter, the Municipal Corporation may have adequate opportunity  of submitting their reply, particulary as  they have  also to explain why only these two villages were taken out  of  the  list  of "excepted villages" set  out  in  the Notification  of  1978 and why the activity of  establishing dairies in other villages was not prohibited, although those other  villages  were  also within the Municipal  limits  of Jabalpur city.  Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we dispose of these Special Leave Petitions by providing  as  under.   (a)  In  view  of  the  Notification published  in the Govt.  Gazette on 19.3.1999., milk dairies and  the keeping of cattle at the place in question, or  for that  matter,  in villages Lalpur and Gwarighat,  cannot  be permitted  to  continue  nor  can  anyone  be  permitted  to establish it in those villages specially in the proximity of the  main pipeline through which drinking water is  supplied to  the  city  of Jabalpur.  (b)  Whether  the  Notification published  in the Govt.  Gazette dated 19.3.1999 is valid or not  cannot  be decided in the present proceedings as  there are  no  pleadings in that regard.  It will be open  to  the petitioners  to  challenge the Notification  by  instituting appropriate  proceedings questioning its validity on all the grounds  which  have been orally urged before us,  including the  ground  that  the Notification reflected  a  colourable exercise of power in the hands of the Municipal Corporation, or  that  it  intended  to interfere  with  the  proceedings pending in this Court, but such proceedings shall have to be instituted  by the petitioners within three months from  the date  of  this judgment.  The interim orders passed by  this Court  in these petitions shall continue for another  period of  three  months  and two weeks thereafter, to  enable  the petitioners  to approach the High Court and make appropriate application  for interim relief.  (c) Since the Notification dated  19.3.1999  was  issued by the  Municipal  Corporation during  the  pendency of these proceedings at a  stage  when this  Court had already allowed the petitioner to set up the Bio  Gas  Plant and the petitioner in SLP(C) No.2927/97  has

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9  

incurred  an  expenditure  of Rs.5,86,000/-,  the  Municipal Corporation,  Jabalpur, shall, after deducting the amount of subsidy as may have already been paid by the Government, pay that  amount to the petitioner in the Special Leave Petition (C)  No.  2927 of 1997 at the time of their shifting to  the new  locations pursuant to the Notification dated  19.3.1999 and in the event of their challenge to the said Notification being turned down by the High Court.  He and petitioner No.1 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.  2926 of 1997 will also be entitled  to all the benefits indicated by the High Court in the  impugned  judgment  while dealing with  the  individual cases  of the petitioners.  (d) The petitioners, namely, Mr. Shiv  Kumar  Patel  and  Hari Ram  Rajak  in  S.L.P.(C)  No. 2926/97  have  indicated their willingness to shift  to  new locations in terms of the judgment passed by the High Court. Consequently,  the  Special Leave Petition on  their  behalf shall be treated to have been dismissed as not pressed.