STATE OF WEST BENGALversusHOWRAH GANATANTRIK NAGARIK SAMITY & ORS.

                    [2011] 10 S.C.R. 871


                 STATE OF WEST BENGAL                           A
                              v.
    HOWRAH GANATANTRIK NAGARIK SAMITY & ORS.
           (Civil Appeal No. 7785 of 2011)
                   SEPTEMBER 12, 2011
                                                                B
       [R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.]

     Environment Laws:

        Public Interest Litigation - To protect and preserve C
   Victoria Memorial Hall and its green surroundings - Bus
   terminus situated at Esplanade at the end of about 2 kms.
   of the green surroundings - Re-location of bus terminus -
   On recommendations of expert bodies including the National
  Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEER/), D
   direction by the High Court 'that the bus terminus at
   Esplanade be shifted to a distant place within six months -
 . On· appeal held: Shifting of the bus terminus at Esplanade
· area was suggested by NEER/ as a long.;term measure and
   not as an immediate measure - Bus terminus, where /akhs E
   of people arrive and depart through different buses, if shifted
   immediately, would cause a lot of inconvenience to the
   traveling public - Moreover, before the bus terminus is
   shifted from Esplanade, another suitable place has to be
   found out to which the bus terminus, which can be shifted . F
   and various conveniences have to be provided for the
   traveling public at the new bus terminus - All this cannot be
   done within a peri9d of six months - Thus, the direction
   passed by the High Court not justified - Recommendation
   of the NEER/ that auto exhaust is the most important
   causative factor polluting the atmospheric environment G
   around Victoria Memorial Hall is emphatic - Thus, the
   recommendation by NEER/ that the bus terminus should be
   shifted from Esplanade area as a long-term measure to
                             871                                H
    872      SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2011] 10 S.C.R.

A protect and preserve the Victoria Memorial Hall deserves
  serious consideration, not only to preserve the monument
  but to de-congest the city - The impugned order of the High
  Court is modified and the State Government is directed to
  consider and take appropriate action on the NEER/ report
B recommending relocation of the bus terminus away from the
  Esplanade.

        M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Ors. (1997) 2 SCC
    353: 1996 (10) Suppl. SCR 973 - referred to.
c                        Case Law Reference:

          1996 (10) Suppl. SCR 973       Referred to      Para 9

D       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
    7785 of 2011.

        From the Judgment & Order dated 28.09.2007 of the
    Calcutta High Court in W.P. No. 7987 (W) of 2002.

E                               WITH

    SLP (C) No. 1135-1136 of 2009.

       Avijit Bhattacharjee, Sarbani Kar, Debnjani Das
F Purkayastha, Bidyabrata Acharya, Pranab Kumar Mullick for
  the Appellants.

        Respondent-In-Person Dharam Bir Raj Vohra for the
    Respondents.
G
          The Order of the Court was delivered by

          A. K. PATNAIK, J. 1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.

H         2. This is an appeal against the order dated 28.09.2007
     STATE OF WEST BENGAL v. HOWRAH            873
 GANATANTRIK NAGARIK SAMITY [A.K. PATNAIK, J.]

:of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Writ          A
 Petition No. 7987 (W) of 2002.

       3. The facts very briefly are that during the British rule,
  Victoria Memorial Hall was built in the memory of Queen
  Victoria in Central Kolkata. After independence, this 8
/monument continues to be known for its beautiful architecture
1
  and green surroundings. To the north of the Victoria Memorial
  Hall is a huge stretch of land known as 'the Maidan' which is
  covered by green grass and interspersed with a large number
  of trees, bushes and shrubs. At the end of about 2 kms. of C
  this greenery is the Esplanade where another monument
  known as the 'Sahid Minar' stands, and by the side of the
  Sahid Minar is a bus terminus. To protect and preserve the
 Victoria Memorial Hall and its green surroundings, a public
  interest litigation (Writ Petition No. 7987(W) of 2002) was filed
  in the Calcutta High Court by the respondent nos. 1 to 5.         0

     4. After hearing all concerned parties and considering the
concerned affidavits and counter-affidavits as well as
recommendations of expert bodies including the National
Environmental Engineering Research Institute (for short            E
'NEERI'), the High Court inter alia directed in the impugned
order that the bus terminus at Esplanade be shifted to a
distant place within six months. Aggrieved by this direction
in the impugned order, the State of West Bengal is in appeal
before us.                                                         F

     5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
High Court could not have issued directions to the State
Government to shift the bus terminus located at Esplanade,
which had been in existence for more than six decades only         G
on the recommendation of NEERI. He submitted that lakhs
of people every day arrive at and depart from the bus terminus
at Esplanade and this is because the bus terminus is located
in a central area of Kolkata. He submitted that shifting of the
                                                                   H
    874       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [2011] 10 S.C.R

A   bus terminus from Esplanade will thus cause immense
    inconvenience to the traveling public. He further submitted that
    the bus terminus is situated 2 kms. to the north of Victoria
    Memorial Hall and does not at all damage this historic
    monument. The High Court, therefore, was not right in thinking
8   that for preservation of the Victoria Memorial Hall, shifting of
    the bus terminus was necessary.

          6. The respondent no.2, who appeared in-person on
    behalf of respondent no. 1, on the other hand, relied on the
C   recommendation of NEERI that the bus terminus at Esplanade
    area should be shifted from the existing location. He submitted
    that the High Court was, therefore, right in directing the shifting
    of the bus terminus from Esplanade within six months. He
    submitted that this is not a fit case in which this Court should
    interfere with the impugned order of the High Court.
D
         .7. We have considered the submissions made on behalf
    Of the appellant and the respondents and we find that NEERI
    has suggested some long term measures for preservation of
    the Victoria Memorial Hall in Para 5.2 of its report. The
E   relevant portion of Para 5.2 of the report of NEERI is quoted
    hereinbelow:

          "5.2 LONG-TERM MEASURES

F         Diversion of Heavy Road Traffic on the Road
          Encircling the VM Monument.

          The pollution from auto exhaust is the most important
          causative factor when the Victoria Memorial protection
G         from atmospheric environment is considered. Therefore,
          the traffic on roads around the VM should be minimum
          particularly complete banning of heavy traffic. Bus
          terminus at Esplanade Area (Commercial) should also be
          shifted from the existing location."
H
     STATE OF WEST BENGAL v. HOWRAH            875
 GANATANTRIK NAGARIK SAMITY [A.K. PATNAIK, J.]

     8. It will be clear from the recommendation of NEERI,       A
quoted above, that shifting of the bus terminus at Esplanade
area has been suggested by NEERI as a long-term measure
and not as an immediate measure. A bus terminus, where
lakhs of people arrive and depart through different buses, if
shifted immediately, will cause a lot of inconvenience to the    B
traveling public. Moreover, before the bus terminus is shifted
from Esplanade, another suitable place has to be found out
to which the bus terminus can be shifted and various
conveniences have to be provided for the traveling public at
the new bus terminus. All this cannot be done within a period    c
of six months. The High Court, therefore, was not justified in
directing in the impugned order that the- bus terminus at
Esplanade be shifted within six months.

      9. The recommendation of the NEERI, quoted above,
  however, is emphatic that auto exhaust is the most important D
  causative factor.polluting the atmospheric environment around
  Victoria Memori~I Hall. For this reason, NEERI has
  recommended that the traffic on roads around the Victoria
  Memorial Hall should be minimum and the bus terminus at
  Esplanade area should be shifted from the existing location. E
  Hence, even though the bus terminus is located 2 kms. away
  from Victoria Memorial Hall the auto-exhaust from a large
  number of buses ·at the bus terminus would pollute the
  atmospheric environment around the Victoria Memorial Hall.
  In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors. [(1997) 2 SCC 353), F
  this Court has directed relocation industries from Taj
  Trapezium Zone (TIZ} for protection and preservation of the
  Taj Mahal in Agra. The recommendation by NEERI that the
  bus terminus should be shifted from Esplanade area as a
. long-term measure to protect and p1eserve the Victoria G
  Memorial Hall, deserves serious consideration, not only to
  preserve the monument but to de-congest the city.

     10. We accordingly modify the impugned order of the
                                                                 H
    876     SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2011) 10 S.C.R.


A   High Court and direct the State Government to consider and
    take appropriate action on the NEERI report recommending
    relocation of the bus terminus away from the Esplanade. The
    appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as
    to costs.
8
    N.J.                                       Appeal allowed.