![]() Thursday, May 23, 2002 |
| National | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | National
By Our Legal Correspondent
A vacation Bench of the court, comprising Justices N. Santosh Hegde and S.N. Variava, at the same time issued notice to the Centre and Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra Governments (respondents) on a petition from the Narmada Bachao Andolan (petitioner) against the decision to raise the height of the dam without the completion of the stipulated rehabilitation of the dam oustees. The respondent-State authorities were directed to file their replies before May 30. Earlier, Shanti Bhushan, senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that according to the Apex Court's earlier directive rendered in October 2000, the authorities concerned should have ensured the environmental clearance and full rehabilitation of the dam oustees before deciding to increase the height of the dam. In response to a query from the Bench as to why the petitioner did not approach for necessary relief the grievance redressal authority (GRA), headed by a retired judge in each of the three States, the counsel submitted that the GRA did not have the power to stay the decision in respect of increase in the height of the dam.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|