[Assam] [WaterWatch] Justice Pasayat says environmental laws are "draconian"

[mc mahant]

Pasayat may be deviating from a tacit understanding between Law_makers(or Brit hackneyed Law maintainers),Executive ,Judiciary. Each is supposed to live in water-tight and isolated No-Comments zones.
But  if you follow the logo "SATYAM eBA JAYATE" he is Telling the truth,all the truth and Nothing but the truth.So?What now?
Naxalism, Total Disintegration?
As they say--"Change--or  Die"
Again--Which?
MM


To: waterwatch at yahoogroups.com; mediavigil at yahoogroups.com; msarin at satyam.net.inFrom: krishnagreen at gmail.comDate: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:40:26 +0530Subject: [WaterWatch] Justice Pasayat says environmental laws are "draconian"




Isn't Justice Pasayat pre-judging the cases that are before him against all canons of natural justice?Is our environmental laws really "draconian" as he is reported to have said. Did the rivers got heavily polluted even as these draconian laws were in place. These laws are draconian for whom. "Development at any cost" fundamentalists are on the prowl and newspapers like Indian Express are quite supportive of them. (Can't have draconian environment laws, says Supreme Court's 'green' judge, www.indianexpress.com/story/252765.html)The Courts and Judges are being misled by them. Is calling Hazardous waste as waste "too much protection", there is no rationale to redefine waste as material court as is being done by environment ministry. There is an emerging tendency to define forest as non-forest, river as non-river, waste as non-waste and agricultural land as non-agricultural land. There is no justification to take over agricultural land and turn it into a hazardous waste landfill in Najafgarh, Delhi for instance. The Central Ground Water Board study indicates that there massive danger of contamination of water in the area. More than 300 villages are out to turn their battle against the proposed landfill into another Nandigram. The hazardous waste case is before the Justice Pasayat bench. The bench in its order in the Blue Lady/Hazardous Waste case dated September 11, 2007 had this to say citing its order in the forest case:The concept of "balance" under the principle of proportionality applicable in the case of sustainable development is lucidly explained by Pasayat, J. in the judgment of this Court in the case of T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad v. Union of India and Ors. reported in (2002) 10 SCC 606 vide para 35 which reads as under:"35. It cannot be disputed that no development is possible without some adverse effect on the ecology and environment, and the projects of public utility cannot be abandoned and it is necessary to adjust the interest of the people as well as the necessity to maintain the environment. A balance has to be struck between the two interests. Where the commercial venture or enterprise would bring in results which are far more useful for the people, difficulty of a small number of people has to be bypassed. The comparative hardships have to be balanced and the convenience and benefit to a larger section of the people has to get primacy over comparatively lesser hardship."The above paragraphs indicate that while applying the concept of "sustainable development" one has to keep in mind the "principle of proportionality" based on the concept of balance. It is an exercise in which we have to balance the priorities of development on one hand and environmental protection on the other hand. The order that was ridden with incorrect citation and irrelevant quotations then goes on to say:India after globalization is an emergent economy along with Brazil, Russia and China. India has economic growth of above 9%. However, that growth is lop-sided. A large section of the population lives below poverty line. India has largest number of youth in the world. Unemployment is endemic. Article 21/14 is the heart of the Chapter of fundamental rights. Equality of opportunity is the basic theme of Article 14. In an emergent economy, the principle of proportionality based on the concept of balance is important. It provides level playing field to different stakeholders. ... When we apply the principle of sustainable development, we need to keep in mind the concept of development on one hand and the concepts like generation of revenue, employment and public interest on the other hand. This is where the principle of proportionality comes in. The order rationalises without correct citation by saying "This concept of balancing is given importance by Dr. Amartya Sen in his book"Development as Freedom"." Did any one find Dr. Amartya Sen arguing for such concept of balancing as we are being made to believe. The clarification application and the Najafgarh case is pending before the bench. 
---------- Forwarded message ----------From: Madhu Sarin <msarin at satyam.net.in>Date: Dec 20, 2007 9:38 PM Subject: PTI release on Justice PasayatTo: nathistory-india at princeton.edu

Forwarding another press release on what Justice Pasayat said at the seminar in Bhubaneswar - the fact that even this release mentions '300 reserve forests' and not protected areas reveals the frightening illiteracy about the country's forests and protected areas of a judge who is a member of the 'forest bench' in the highest court of the land!
Madhu




PTI/ESP NAT CES12-PASAYAT

12/20/2007 16:24:06

PASAYAT


Judge wants balance between green cover and currency 

Bhubaneswar, Dec 20 (PTI) Advocating a balance between the 'green cover' and 'green currency,' Justice Arijit Pasayat of the Supreme Court came down heavily on those who focus "too much" on protection of forest and wildlife and in the process harm the society at large. 
Justice Pasayat, also a member of the apex court's environment and forest bench, said "two weeks back we were told there are more than 300 reserve forests in the country, but of them hardly 20 or 25 deserve to be called as reserve forests." 
"In more than one hundred of them (reserve forest), the only animal to be protected are probably a few stray cattle and a few dogs," he said, adding the money that the Centre provides for protection were used elsewhere. 
Justice Pasayat cited the case of Bhitarkanika Wildlife Sanctuary where he had put a stay on the construction of a bridge as an Orissa High Court judge. He was told that construction of roads and bridges inside the protected area would adversely affect the ecology of the place. 
When he later visited Bhitarkanika area, Justice Pasayat found children playing football in places which were said to be dense mangrove forest cover. "People were dying there due to snake bite as they failed to reach hospital in time owing to lack of proper roads and bridges," he said. 
Pasayat was speaking at a seminar on Tuesday. 
__._,_.___ 
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic 
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Calendar 

MARKETPLACE



Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net. 
 Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe 


Recent Activity


 5
New Members

 1
New FilesVisit Your Group 


Yahoo! Finance
It's Now Personal
Guides, news,
advice & more.

Y! Messenger
PC-to-PC calls
Call your friends
worldwide - free!

Food Lovers
Real Food Group
on Yahoo! Groups
find out more.
. __,_._,___ 






_________________________________________________________________
Post free property ads on Yello Classifieds now! www.yello.in
http://ss1.richmedia.in/recurl.asp?pid=219