N.D. JAYAL AND ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 152 · Decided: 01-09-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RAJENDRA BABU · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
N.D. JA YAL AND ANR. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER I, 2003 
[S. RAJENDRA BABU, D.M. DHARMADHIKARI 
AND G.P. MA THUR, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, Article 32-Public Interest Litigation-PIL 
seeking directions for conducting tests to ensure safety for Tehri Dam and 
stoppage of project till conditions attached to environmental clearance 
C complied with-Held, the conception and decision to undertake a project 
is a policy decision and the only role the court has to play is to ensure 
that the system works in the manner envisaged: courts are ill-equipped to 
adjudicate on a policy decision. 
D 
Constitution of India, Articles 21, 32-PIL seeking court's direction 
on the environmental aspects of the Tehri Dam-High Level Committee set 
up by Government concluding that dam design safe and all danger arising 
out of seisimicity taken note of-Matter referred to Seisimic Expert who 
concurred that over all factor of safety of the dam was high-Another 
Expert Group in 1991 recommending acceptance of report of High Level 
E Committee and Seisimic Expert-A farther Group of five Experts examining 
safety of dam and submitting report in February 1998 that present design 
was structurally safe but as a matter of abundant caution recommending 
conduct of two other studies-Government of India, in consultation with 
Central Water Commission and National Committee on Seisimic Design 
F Parameters deciding there was no necessity to undertake the two additional 
studies-Held (per majority), Court cannot advise Government to go for 
farther tests unless arbitrariness or irrationality is attributed to that decision; 
the consideration in such cases is in the process of decision and not its 
merits-Further held (per majority), when there is no difference of opinion 
G among experts as to safety of dam, Court cannot sit in judgment over such 
decision. 
Constitution of India, Articles 21, 32-Protection of Environment 
vis-a-vis sustainable deve/opment-P/L seeking directions regarding disaster 
management and rehabilitation of persons displaced by Tehri Dam 
H Project-Petitioner objecting to components of rehabilitation package as 
152 
-
.. 
N.D. JA YAL v. U.O.I. 
153 
being discriminatory and unreasonable-Government acting on A 
recommendations of the Hanumantha Rao Committee (HRC)-Held, these 
were matters of policy and Court cannot interfere with the same; components 
of rehabilitation package not unreasonable. 
Constitution of India, Articles 21 and 32-Protection of Environment B 
vis-ii-vis sustainable development-PIL alleging non-compliance with 
conditions attached to environmental clearance of Tehri Dam Project-
Government assuring the court that high level inter-ministerial review 
committee would be constituted to monitor various aspects-Held (per 
majority), no impoundmant to be allowed till all conditions of environmental 
clearance are complied-Further held (per majority) petitioners have not C 
established that Project is being carried on without complying with 
conditions of clearance. 
Constitution of India, Articles 142, 226-PIL seeking compliance 
with conditions of environmental clearance of Tehri Dam Project-Cases D 
transferred to High Court of Uttaranchal for monitoring by Division Bench 
to ensure conditions of environmental clearance are fulfil-Practice and 
Procedure. 
Words & Phrases : 
'Pari passu'-Meaning of-Explained. 
E 
Close to the Garhwal town of Tehri in the Himalayas, at the 
confluence of two rivers Bhagirathi and Bhilanganga, a three billion 
dollar clay-core rockfill dam is being constructed resulting in a water F 
spread over 42.5 sq.m. which will affect totally or partially nearly 100 
villages including Tehri town. As many as 90,000 families would be 
relocated as result of the dam project. The Government of India and 
State ofUttaranchal claimed that the dam project would generate 2400 
kw of electricity and create irrigation facilities for 2070 lakh hectares G 
of land. There were plans also to supply 500 cusecs of water to New 
Delhi. A PIL was filed in 1985 in this Court by the Tehri Bandh Virodh 
Sangharsh Samiti seeking to stop the construction of the dam on the 
ground that it posed a grave threat to t~e safety and lives of the people 
in the surrounding villages and downstream. 
H 
A 
154 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
As a result of public protest the then Prime Minister of India 
directed an in-depth review of the project by an expert group constituted 
by the 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.