ARUN KUMAR SHARMA v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Discusses suppression of facts, bonafide intention, and parallel proceedings, which are relevant across various legal domains.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: 2025 INSC 826
Decision Date: 14-07-2025
List of Laws
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981; Petroleum Rules, 2002; The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010; Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959; Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973; General Principles of Law
- Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: The judgment mentions Section 25 of the Act. It states that the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board (MPPCB) issued Consent to Establish under this section for a petrol pump.
- The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981: The judgment mentions Section 21 of the Act. It states that the MPPCB issued Consent to Establish under this section for a petrol pump.
- Petroleum Rules, 2002: The judgment discusses Rule 144 of the Petroleum Rules, 2002. The appellants argued that the NOC was issued in violation of this rule. The NGT stated that the Safety and Test Certificate as required under Rules 130 and 126 of the Petroleum Rules, 2002 were issued by the competent person approved by CCE, Nagpur. The judgment also notes that prior approval was granted in Form-XIV of the Petroleum Rules, 2002. The NGT stated that the Petroleum Rules are not covered under the scheduled Act of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The appellants also argued that the Impugned NOC was also not issued in accordance with the Petroleum Rules, 2002.
- The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010: The judgment refers to Section 14 read with Schedule 1 of the NGT Act. The NGT stated that the issue of violation of Rule 144 of Petroleum Rules 2002 cannot be raised before the Tribunal as per Section 14 read with Schedule 1 of the NGT Act. The NGT stated that the Petroleum Rules, 2002 are not falling within the schedule of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 and any objection with respect to The Petroleum Rules, 2002 cannot be entertained under the NGT Act, 2010.
- Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959: The judgment refers to Section 172 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959. The applicant challenged the authority of the revenue officials to convert the residential land into the commercial plots and that the provisions contained in Section 172 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 and Madhya Pradesh Gram Panchayat (Development of Colonies) Rule, 2014 has not been properly followed.
- Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973: The appellants argued that the NOC was violative of the M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, as the contesting respondents did not take the necessary permission from the Director, Town and Country Planning for constructing the Petrol Pump. The appellants also argued that the illegal construction being carried out by the Respondent on the proposed site of Petrol Pump, without obtaining Development Permission from the Town and Country Planning, which is mandated in the Collector's NOC dated 07.02.2024. The court clarifies that it has not examined the issue relating to violation of M.P. Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 raised in the writ petition pending before the High Court.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment discusses the principle of suppression of material facts and lack of bonafide intention. The court found that the appellants suppressed the initiation of parallel proceedings before the High Court and that the proceedings before the NGT were initiated to subserve the business interest of one of the appellants. The court also discusses the importance of candour in legal proceedings.
🔒 For Members Only