RUSSEL JOY versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2018] 1 S.C.R. 206 · Decided: 11-01-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Disposed off
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
206
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 1 S.C.R.
RUSSEL JOY
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 878 of 2017)
JANUARY 11, 2018
[DIPAK MISRA, CJI, A. M. KHANWILKAR
AND DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.]
Constitution of India – Art. 32 – 121 years old Mullaperiyar
dam in the State of Kerala, Chief Engineer of the dam project
envisaged the lifetime of the dam for a period of 50 years – Need
for assessment of lifespan of Mullaperiyar dam, keeping in view
the safety of the citizens especially the persons residing downstream
of the river – Writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus
directing the Government of India to appoint an international agency
to study and to adjudge the lifespan of Mullaperiyar Dam and the
dam to be de-commissioned within the time period – Held: There
has to be a greater degree of disaster management and better
preparedness to face any kind of disaster caused by the dam –
Issuance of directions to Central Government, State of Kerala as
well as State of Tamil Nadu to constitute a separate sub-committee
u/s. 9 of the 2005 Act, to exclusively monitor the measures for
ensuring a high level of preparedness to face any disaster, occurring
from Mullaperiyar Dam – All States to work in harmony with the
Central sub-committee – Disaster Management Act, 2005 – ss. 9,
21, 23(4).
State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Kerala and another
[2014] 12 SCR 875 : (2014) 12 SCC 696 – referred
to.
Case Law Reference
[2014] 12 SCR 875
referred to
Para 3
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No.
878 of 2017.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
[2018] 1 S.C.R. 206
206
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
207
Manoj V. George, Ms. Shilpa Liza George, Amit Masih, Kamlendra
Mishra, Narender Kumar Verma, Advs. for the Petitioner.
K. K. Venugopal, AG, Ms. Pinky Anand , ASG, Subramonium
Prasad, Sr. Adv./AAG, Umavathy, K. V. V. Vijayakumar, Mohan V.
Katarke, G. Prakash, Advs.  for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DIPAK MISRA, CJI. 1. This writ petition is preferred by a
public spirited person under Article 32 of the Constitution of India praying
for issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Government of India to
appoint an international agency with the technical expertise to study and
to adjudge the lifespan of Mullaperiyar Dam and ascertain the date/
period on which the said dam must be de-commissioned;  appoint a High
Powered Committee to suggest to this Court to declare a date/time period
for de-commissioning of Mullaperiyar Dam; direct the State owning the
dam, that is, Tamil Nadu to make financial provisions for damages to life
and restoration of environment in the eventuality of a burst of Mullaperiyar
Dam before it is de-commissioned, and pass any other order or direction
as this Court may deem fit and proper to do so in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
2. The essential facts which need to be stated for adjudication of
this petition are that Mullaperiyar Dam was constructed under a lease
agreement executed in the year 1886 between the Maharaja of erstwhile
Travancore with the British Secretary of State for Madras Presidency
for a duration of 999 years. In pursuance of the said agreement, the dam
was constructed across river Periyar in crude lime surky mortar at a
time when dam engineering was in its infancy. Periyar river originates
from Sivagiri and Western Ghats at an elevation of 2400 meters from
the sea level and joins Mullayar river downstream at an elevation of 850
m.  It is at this elevated junction, the Mullaperiyar dam was built having
a height of 53.6 m (176 ft.) from the foundation and a length of 365.7 m
(1,200 ft) for catering to the irrigational needs of the neighbouring State
of Tamil Nadu under the said lease agreement.
3. There is an assertion in the petition that the Chief Engineer of
the dam project, Mr. John Pennycuick envisaged the lifetime of the dam
for a period of 50 years.  As 121 years have expired from the date of the
construction of the dam, the decommissioning of the said dam has become
essential and there is need for assessment of the lifespan of the dam
RUSSEL JOY v. UNION OF INDIA
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
208
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 1 S.C.R.
regard being had to the safety of the citizens especially  the persons
residing downstream of the river.  There is reference to the litigations
filed between the State of Kerala and State of Tamil Nadu for long
period and more recently in CS (OS) No. 3 of 2006 before this Court
which was decided on 07.05.20
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.