RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCE versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Citation: [2007] 9 S.C.R. 749 · Decided: 06-09-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCE 
A 
\I. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
SEPTEMBER 6, 2007 
(DR.ARIJITPASAYAT ANDS.ff. KAPADIA,JJ.) 
B 
{ 
Ship Breaking-Hazards Associated with-On direction by Supreme 
~.-
Court, Union of India constituting a Committee of Technical Experts (TEC) 
to suggest infrastructural stability and adequacy of Ship Breaking at Alang C 
Ship Breaking Yard-Norms recommended by TEC....:_Approved by Court-
Held: It is desirable that the Government of India formulates a comprehensive 
Code incorporating the recommendations-Until the Code comes into play, 
the recommendations shall be operative by virtue of this order-Until further 
orders, the o«icials and Institutions mentioned in the order shall oversee the 
'JJ' 
D 
arrangements-Ecology-Disposal of hazardous waste-legislation-
Amendment in relevant statutes suggested 
Research Foundation for Science Technology National Resource Policy 
v. Union of India and Anr., (2005) 10 SCC 510, referred to. 
E 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No. 657 of l 995. 
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. 
WITH 
S.L.P. No. (c)l6175of1997 C.A. No. 7660of1997. 
F 
Suo moto Cont. Pet. (C) No. 155 of 2005 in W.P. (C) 657 of 1995. 
Gopal Subramanian, R. Mohan, ASGs, Manjit Singh, J.S. Attri, AAGs, 
Mukul Rohtagi, TS Doabia, Sanjay Parikh, A.N. Singh, Jitin Sahni, Ravinder G 
Reddy, S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Bina Madhavan, Mahesh Agarwal, Vinod 
Ravani, Gaurav Goel, Rishi Agrawala, E.C. Agrawala, Atul Y. Chitale, Suchitra 
A. Chitale, S. Srivastava, A.· Subba Rao, Satyakam, Ashok Bhan, Kiran 
749 
H 
750 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007) 9 S.C.R. 
A Bhardwaj, Rajni Ohri Lal, DS Mahra, Ajay Shanna, Vijay Panjwani, Manoj 
Saxena, Rajnish Kr. Singh, Rahul Shukla, TV George, KN Madhusoodhanan, 
R. Sathish, Minakshi Sarrna (for Mis Corporate Law Group) Anukul Raj, 
Rituraj Biswas, Gopal Singh, U. Hazarika, Satya Mitra, Sumita Hazarika, V.G. 
Pragasam, S. Joseph Aristotle, S. Prabu Ramasubramanian, JR Das, Swetaketu 
B Mishra, SR Mohanty (for Sinha & Das), Sanjay R. Hedge, Amit Kr. Chawla, 
Vikas Bansal, Anil Kr. Jha, Khwairakpam Nobin Singh, Hemantika Wahi, Pinky, 
Shivangi, Sangeeta Singh, Raj Panjwani, D.N. Goburdhan, Pinky Anand, 
Ramesh Singh, Nina Gupta, Neha Sharma, Swigin George, A. Subhashini. P. 
Parmeswaran, B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, Shomona Khanna, Gaurav Agrawal, 
A. Mariarputham, Aruna Mathur, Anil Katiyar, Ashok Mathur, Bina Gupta, B. 
C Krishna Prasad, Binu Tamta, D.N. Mishra, Ejaz Maqbool, K.B. Rohtagi, Manik 
Karanjwala, J.B. Dadachanji & Co. Pramod Swarup, Pradeep Misra, Riku Sarma 
(for Corporate Law Group) Sushma Suri, Urrnila Sirur, Shakil Ahmed Syed,1S. 
Janani, Ravindra Kumar, Rakesh K. Sharma, Radha Shyam Jena, Anitha Shenoy, 
BV Bairam, Jay Savla, Atishi Dipankar, V.N. Raghupathy, Jayshree. Wad (for 
D J.S. Wad & Co.), Nikhil Nayyar, Vibha Datta Makhija, Kamlendra Mishra, 
Yashraj Dingra, Ashwani Bhardwaj, Asha G·. Nair, K.K. Gupta, Anil Kumar Jha, 
Vijay Pratap Singh, Aruneshwar Gupta, Manish Kumar, K.B. Rohrtagi, A. 
Subhashini, Neha, Rakesh K. Shanna, Anil Shrivastav, Vikrant Singh Vais, 
Kamlendra Mishra, Mohanprasad Meharia, Ajay Sharma and Yashpal Dingra 
for the appearing parties. 
E 
F 
G 
H 
The Order of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASA YAT, J. I. By order dated 17.2.2006 in the.present 
W.P.(C) No.657/1995 this Court passed the following order: 
"It is brought to our notice that the ship Clemenceau has been 
directed to be taken back to France. Therefore, immediate controversy 
relating to Clemenceau ship seems to be over. But the problem is a 
recurring one. First and foremost requirement as of today is to find 
out the infrastructural stability and adequacy of the ship breaking 
yard at Alang. It has to be found out whether the same are operational/ 
operating in a way that environmental hazards and pollution are 
avoided and/or equipped to meet the requirements in that regard. For 
that purpose, it is necessary to constitute a Committee of technical 
experts who can, after obtaining views and inviting suggestions from 
those who would like to give them to find out whether the infrastructure 
as existing at Alang presently is adequate. If according to the 
"{ 
I 
'Y' 
RESEARCHFOUNDA TIONFORSCIENCEv. U.0.1. [PASAYAT,J.] 751 
Committee, it is not adequate it shall indicate the deficiencies, and A 
.~ 
shall also suggest remedial measures to upgrade the infrastructural 
facilities. For this purpose, Union of India shall,

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