M/S. GOEL GANGA DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS & ORS.CE F G H (I.A. NO.64665 OF 2019) IN

Citation: [2019] 12 S.C.R. 220 · Decided: 11-09-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DEEPAK GUPTA
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
220
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 12 S.C.R.
M/S. GOEL GANGA DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD.
v.
UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF
ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS & ORS.
(I.A. NO.64665 of 2019)
IN
(Civil Appeal No. 10854 of 2016)
SEPTEMBER 11, 2019
[DEEPAK GUPTA AND ANIRUDDHA BOSE, JJ.]
Environmental Laws: Environment Impact Assessment (EIA)
Notification dated 14.09.2006 – Schedule, Item No.8 – Interpretation
of ‘built up area’ – In the instant application, the issue involved
was whether non-consideration of judgment delivered by a three-
Judge Bench in *NOIDA Park case led to wrong conclusions by
this Court with regard to the interpretation of built up area in terms
of Item No. 8 of the Schedule of the Notification dated 14.09.2006
– The contention raised on behalf of the applicant was that since
the three-Judge Bench in Para 84 of the judgment in *NOIDA Park
case observed that EIA Notification dated 14.09.2006 called for a
closer second look by the authorities concerned especially in respect
of the projects/activities falling within the ambit of Items 8(a) and
8(b) of the Schedule to the Notification which needed description
with greater precision and clarity and the definition of built up area
with facilities open to the sky needed to be freed from its ambiguity
and vagueness, the two-Judge Bench in the instant case which
delivered the judgment was bound by the said judgment and could
not have held that Notification dated 14.09.2006 showed that all
constructed area which is covered and not open to the sky, has to
be treated as built up area – Held:*NOIDA Park case was
concerning a huge park – The main dispute in *NOIDA Park case
was whether the project was a building and construction project or
a township and area development project – It was held in*NOIDA
Park case that it was a township and area development project –
 [2019] 12 S.C.R. 220
220
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
221
While considering this dispute, the Court had felt that there was
some ambiguity –  However, this dispute did not arise in the case in
hand – The second point urged before the Court in *NOIDA Park
case was that the facilities open to the sky i.e. the activity area
should also be included in the built up area and it was this confusion
which the court wanted the Central Government to settle – No party
had raised any contention in *NOIDA Park case about the covered
area being built up area – All the parties were ad idem that covered
construction was built up area and the Court also held so – This
Court in this judgment has only held that all covered construction
shall be deemed to be built up area and that the municipal laws
regarding Floor Space Index (FSI) or Floor Area Ratio (FAR) have
no relevance – This issue did not arise in *NOIDA Park case –
Therefore, the earlier judgment will have no impact on the instant
case – Application dismissed.
*Re: Construction of Park at Noida Near Okhla Bird
Sanctuary & Ors. (2011) 1 SCC 744 : [2010]
15 SCR 783 – referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2010] 15 SCR 783
referred to
Para 1
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Interlocutory Application
No. 64665 of 2019 in Civil Appeal No. 10854 of 2016.
From the Judgment and Order dated  27.09.2016  of the  National
Green Tribunal (Western Zone) Bench, Pune in Application No. 184 of
2015.
A. N. S. Nadkarni, ASG, Mukul Rohatgi, Ranjit Kumar, Ms. Sonia
Mathur, Sr. Advs., Venkita Subramoniam T. R., Rahat Bansal, Mehul
Gupta, V. Mudgal, Rohit Raj, Shankey Agrawal, Mukesh Verma, Pawan
Kumar Shukla, Yash Pal Dhingra, Makarand D. Adkar, Vijay Kumar,
Ms. Aparna Jha, Nitin Lonkar, Ms. Sonali Suryawanshi, Shankey Agrawal,
D. L. Chidananda, Ms. Suhasini Sen, G. S. Makker, Dr. Nishesh Sharma,
Ranjan Kumar Chaurasia, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Nishant Sharma,
Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, Aman Varma, Advs. for the
appearing parties.
M/S. GOEL GANGA DEVELOPERS INDIA PVT. LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA
THR. SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
222
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 12 S.C.R.
The following Order of the Court was passed:
O R D E R
1. The only issue involved in this application is whether non-
consideration of a judgment delivered by a three-Judge Bench in Re:
Construction of Park at Noida Near Okhla Bird Sanctuary & Ors.1,
hereinafter referred to as ‘NOIDA Park case’, has led to wrong
conclusions by this Court with regard to the interpretation of built up
area in terms of Item No. 8 of the Schedule of the Environment Impact
Assessment (EIA) Notification dated 14.09
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.