1

ITEM NO.23

COURT NO.1

SECTION PIL

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)

NO.154 OF 2012

KARUNA SOCIETY FOR ANIMALS & NATURE & ORS

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Respondent(s)

(with appln. (s) for impleadment and interim relief and office
report)
WITH
W.P.(C) No. 19/2014
(With appln.(s) for permission to appear and argue in person
and seeking permission to file additional documents)
Date: 18/11/2014 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
For Petitioner(s) Attorney General For India (Not Present)
W.P.(C)154/2012

Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Ms.
Ms.
For

Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.

Pratap Venugopal, Adv.
Surekha Raman, Adv.
Supriya Jain, Adv.
Niharika, Adv.
M/s. K. J. John & Co.

W.P.(C) No.19/2014 Mr. S.N. Bhardwaj, In-person

For Respondent(s)
NDMC
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Surya Kant, Adv.

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2014.11.19
14:36:57 IST
Reason:

CPCB

Mr. Vijay Panjwani, Adv.

Mr. Madhur Panjwani, Adv.

UOI

Ms. S.K. Bajwa, Adv.

Ms. Abhinav Mukherjee, Adv.
Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv.

Andhra Pradesh

Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, Adv.

Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv.

Himachal Pradesh

Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Adv.

Haryana

Mr.
Ms.
Ms.
Mr.
For

Karnataka

Mr. V. N. Raghupathy,Adv.

Gujarat

Ms.
Ms.
Ms.
Ms.
For

AIPMA

Mr. Kundan Kr. Mishra, Adv.

Mr. K.V. Muthu Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Deepak Kr. Mishra, Adv.

NDTV

Mr. D.K. Singh, Adv.

Mr. Pradeep Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Abhijit Sengupta,Adv.

West Bengal

Mr. G. Choudhary, Adv.

Mr. Anip Sachthey,Adv.

Kerala

Ms. Bina Madhavan, Adv.

Madhya Pradesh

Mr. Ankit Kr. Lal, Adv.

Mr. Mishra Saurabh, Adv.
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Adv.

Jharkhand

Mr. Gopal Prasad, Adv.

Mr. Jayesh Gaurav, Adv.

Manjit Singh, AAG

Nupur Choudhary, Adv.
Vivekta Singh, Adv.
Sanjay Rathee, Adv.
Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Adv.

Jesal, Adv.
Preeti Bhardwaj, Adv.
Giss Antony, Adv.
Puja Singh, Adv.
Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Adv.

Rajasthan

Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, AAG

Ms. Anjali Chauhan, Adv.

Assam

Mr. Riku Sarma, Adv.

Mr. Navnit Kumar, Adv.
For M/s. Corporate Law Group

Punjab

Mr. Ajay Bansal, AAG

Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Yadav, Adv.
Mr. B. S. Banthia,Adv.
Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv.
Mr. P. Parmeswaran,Adv.
Ms. C. K. Sucharita,Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R
W.P.(C) No.154 of 2012
The

present

writ

petition

is

filed

under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1950. The

petitioners

are

seeking

the

following

directions,

which are as under:(a)(i) the Respondent No.1 to issue appropriate

directions
under
Section
5
of
the
Environment
(Protection)
Act,
1986
prohibiting the use, sale and disposal of
plastic bags in all municipalities and
municipal corporations;
(ii)

the Respondent No.1 to issue appropriate

directions to all State Governments and
municipalities/ municipal corporations to
forthwith prohibit and/or to phase out in
a time bound manner the open garbage

disposal system and

garbage receptacles;

to

remove

open

(iii)

the Respondent No.1 to issue appropriate

directions to State Governments, municipal
corporations and municipalities requiring
them to implement door to door garbage
collection and to ensure that waste
storage facilities are built and managed
such that animals are not allowed to move
around in the vicinity of such facilities;

(iv)

the Respondent No.1 issue appropriate

directions to State Government/Municipal
Corporation and municipalities to require
segregation of all plastic waste across
the municipal solid waste collection and
disposal chain/systems; and

(v)

the Respondent State Governments to issue

appropriate directions prohibiting the
use, sale and disposal of plastic bags in
all
municipalities
and
municipal
corporations within their territory.

(vi)

the
Respondent
No.1
and
the
19th
Respondent to provide animal shelters,
rescue homes and veterinary services for
stray cattle to provide amelioration for
suffering animals;

(b)

award to the Petitioners cost of

relating to the present Petition.

and

The State of Rajasthan has filed its affidavit

and

they

have

made

certain

averments

which

are

contrary to the writ petition.

Further, in rejoinder to the counter affidavit
so

filed,

the

petitioners,

insofar

as

State

of

Rajasthan is concerned, have stated as under :State of Rajasthan

24.

I say that the situation in the State of

Rajasthan is also inexcusable. I say that
in the counter affidavit filed by the
State of Rajasthan, it has been stated
that the Rajasthan Municipality Act, 2009
imposes a ban on use of bags less than 20
microns.
It has also been stated that
successful steps have been taken for
implementation
of
Plastic
Wastes
(management and Handling) Rules 2011 and
that projects for dealing with solid waste
are underway.
I say that photographs
taken in various areas of Udaipur, Jodhpur
and Jaipur in the month of February
falsify
the
claim
of
the
State
of
Rajasthan.

25.

The photograph of Pula, near Celebration

Mall, Udaipur was taken by Neha Banyal on
12.02.2014.
The photograph for Devi
Nagar, Jaipur was taken by Joy Gardner on
16-2-2014. The photograph for Jodhpur was
taken by Rajni Ramchandran on 22-2-2014.
Photographs for these locations in State
of Rajasthan is annexed to the rejoinder
affidavit on behalf of the petitioners as
Annexure R/6 at pages 27 to 29. I say
that the striking feature about these
photographs is that apart from cattle,
these photographs reveal pigs feeding on
plastic in search of food. I submit that
health hazards of these animals remain
absolutely unnoticed to human eye and this
is extremely dangerous for animals.
Shri

Shyam

Divan,

learned

senior

counsel,

appearing for the petitioners, would inform us that

though

the

State

of

Rajasthan

has

issued

the

notification dated 21.07.2010, in exercise of its

power

under

Section

of

the

Environment

(Protection) Act, 1986 (for short, the Act) for

banning the manufacture, use, store, import sell or
transport plastic carry bags within its territory,
with effect from 01.08.2010, nothing seems to have
been done by the State in implementing the aforesaid
notification.
However,
General
would

for

submit

the

learned

Rajasthan,
that

the

Shri
State

Additional
Shiv
has

Advocate

Mangal
been

Sharma,

effectively

implementing the notification dated 21.07.2010, as

issued by them.
In order to ascertain the correct position in
this regard, we intend to constitute a Committee of
three learned counsel, who regularly appear before
this Court, to visit some of the important cities in
the

State

of

Rajasthan

and

submit

an

appropriate

report before us, inter alia, indicating whether the

State

of

Rajasthan

is

seriously

implementing

the

notification dated 21.07.2010 in their State.

For the above purpose, we constitute an expert

Committee of the following learned counsel who will

report the findings to this Court :Ms. Bina Madhavan, Advocate
Ms. Menaka Guruswamy, Advocate
Mr. D.V. Raghu Vamsy, Advocate
The State Government shall provide them with
the

necessary

facilities

transportation,

befitting

to

expenses

the

status

and

other

of

the

representatives of this Court.

For considering the issue in respect of the
State of Rajasthan, call this matter on 16.12.2014.
Insofar as State of Karnataka is concerned, in
the response affidavit filed by the petitioners at
paragraph 26, it is stated as under :
State of Karnataka
26.

I say that the situation in the State of

Karnataka shows an appalling state of
affairs.
I
submit
that
there
is
absolutely no effort to keep apart the
waste
to
eliminate
interaction
of
innocent cattle with plastic bags. I say
that photographs have been taken in
various parts of the State in February
2014 which establish that the reliefs
sought
in
this
writ
petition
are
absolutely
germane
for
State
of
Karnataka.
The areas where photographs
were taken include (i) Domlur village,
Bangalore, Karnataka (taken by Manvi Rao

on
22-2-2014)(ii)
Doddendekundi,
Bangalore, Karnataka (taken by Dr. Arun
Rangasamy on 6-2-2014) (iii) K Kamraj
Road, Opp Sriraj Lassi Bar, Bangalore
(taken by Poornmima Harish on 24-2-2014)
(iv) Sanjay Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka
(taken by Vaivaswatha N on 21-22014)
(vi) Kalyan Nagar, Bangalore (taken by
Vishal
Pradhan
on
21-02-2014).
Photographs taken at the above-mentioned
locations are annexed to the rejoinder
affidavit on behalf of the petitioners as
Annexure R/7 at pages 30 to 35. The
State of Karnataka has not filed a
counter affidavit.
Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, learned counsel appearing
for the State of Karnataka, has filed an additional
affidavit sworn in by the Secretary to Government,
Urban

Development

Department,

Government

of

Karnataka, on 27.03.2014.
In the said affidavit, it is stated that the
State

of

Karnataka

has

constituted

State

Level

Advisory Committee for monitoring and implementation

of

Plastic

Waste

Management

in

the

State

on

25.08.2011 and the Committee would consist of, apart

from the Chairman, eleven other members.
It is further stated by him that the Committee
had met on 12.12.2011, 24.02.2012 and 28.07.2012 to
discuss in detail regarding the implementation of

the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules,

2011. Thereafter, it was not clarified as to whether
the

Committee

had

at

least

met

once

between

28.07.2012 and till the date the State has filed an

affidavit before this Court. A mere constitution of
a Committee and the numerous meetings conducted by
the

Committee

to

discuss

the

various

means

for

implementation of the Rules will not alone solve the

problem.
The Committee should not only formulate ways
and
also

means
to

to

effectively

oversee

that

implement

these

Rules

the
are

Rules

but

implemented

with all seriousness by the respective stakeholders.

Since that has not been done in the instant case, we
now

direct

the

Principal

Secretary,

Urban

Development, Government of Karnataka to be present

before this Court on 09.12.2014 to facilitate us to
pass

appropriate

orders

insofar

as

State

of

Karnataka is concerned.
The

office

report

respondent

Nos.

(State

(State

Bihar),

of

would
of

(State

indicate

Andhra
of

that

Pradesh),

Maharashtra),

4
10

10

(State

of

Tamil

Nadu),

11

(State

of

Orissa),

12

(State of Gujarat), 14 (State of Uttar Pradesh), 16

(State

of

India),

20

Goa),

19

(The

(Anantpur

Animal

Municipal

Welfare

Board

of

Corporation),

21

(Municipal Corporation of Delhi) and 25 (NDTV Ltd.)

have not filed any reply to the prayers made by the
petitioners in the writ petition.
If for any reason, the aforesaid respondents
do not file any response within two weeks time from
today, we would direct the Chief Secretaries of each
State to be present before us to facilitate us to
pass appropriate orders in this regard. If, for any
reason, they are not present before this Court on
the date of next hearing, we will not hesitate to
grant the prayers sought by the petitioners in the
writ petition.
It is further directed that Union of India
shall file its appropriate response to the prayers
made in the writ petition within two weeks' time
finally.
Mr. Pratap Venugopal, learned counsel for the
petitioners is directed to amend the cause title of

11

the

petition

suitably

forthwith.

He

is

also

permitted to take out notice on the learned counsel

appearing for the respective States in dasti.
List on 09.12.2014. Writ Petition No.19/2014
shall

also

be

listed

on

the

said

date

for

consideration.

(Neetu Khajuria)
Sr.P.A.

(Vinod Kulvi)
Assistant Registrar