Former Delhi High Court judge, Justice Najmi Waziri, has been appointed as the Chairman of the Internal Departmental Committee constituted for the protection and management of deemed forests in the national capital.

The decision was taken by the Delhi High Court, stating that it was leaving it fit to Justice Nazmi Waziri (Retd) to decide his honorarium and the facilities required for the smooth functioning of the Committee.

The heads of various Governmental Departments were expected to cooperate with the Committee, which was put at liberty to send its regular reports to the court.

The order was recently passed by the single-judge Bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.

Justice Gedela requested the Delhi government to ensure that all facilities and secretarial assistance, as required by Justice Waziri, were provided to him at the earliest.

The High Court passed the order on a petition concerning the preservation of deemed forests in the city.

Amicus Curiae, Advocate Gautam Narayan, apprised the High Court that nomination of a Retired Judge of the Delhi High Court would instill more seriousness in various departments to act in tandem with each other for ensuring the purpose of the committee.

Advocate Aditya N. Prasad appeared for petitioner Neeraj Sharma

The Delhi High Court on Friday rebuked South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) on the issue of concretization of trees in the capital, and said it is the worst kind of human rights abuse as it changes the whole environment of people. The court had sought response SDMC and Delhi Police on concretizing hundreds of trees.

The bench of Justice Najmi Waziri noted, “This is not a joke anymore. The symbiotic relationship is far too extensive. We cannot do without it. We don’t want you to concretize the trees that you can’t take care, you tell us. Resident Welfare Association will take care of it. Any number of RWAs are ready to take it up, I am confident about that,” while hearing a petition which highlighted the inaction of the authorities for preservation of trees in Vasant Vihar.

The court told Sanjeev Sabharwal, counsel appearing for SDMC that they are changing the neighboiurhood of the people and people are becoming alien in their own environment, which happens to be the worst form of human rights abuse. Constitutional rights are living document. Just because the corporation is not working, does not mean the citizens will be pushed back.”

Justice Najmi Waziri went on to explain the importance of trees in our environment and asked if the SDMC is aware about the value of a fully grown tree. According to report filed in the Supreme Court the value of a fully grown tree is 1 crore rupees, a tree which has a 100 year life .While further giving an example he said, if a lady has lived in a colony for about 50 years, where she used to get up and look at that one tree, and suddenly if its chopped off or it becomes ill because of MCD contractors concretizes it to the tree trunk then there will be no air, water, nitrogen for the tree and eventually it dries up. And some day due to heavy winds or storms it will come down. Then that particular neighborhood will never be the same nor for the lady neither for her children.

Also Read: Allahabad High Court sets aside Mathura judge order appointing receiver at Giriraj Ji Govardhan Mandir Vrindavan

“Is there no sense of urgency for a citizen’s right? said the bench. The counsel replied, “Today is the Constitution day. I am appearing for so and so.” The bench interrupted and remarked,” For what? Kya kehne ke liye aaye hai app. It is not for the court. Please respect the citizens. Their rights come first that is why I said there have to be separate counsels for both the parties as there will be conflict of interest. Aapko citizen dikhta hi nai hai.”

The bench while showing disapproval over the whole incident said,

“Look at the condition? Do you have no concern for your immediate neighbors, elderly gentleman who would want to go for a walk? How will they go for a walk? Seedhe chalna mushkil hota hain. Look at the condition of the footpath. Their lives are endangered. Look at this mushkil. Every portion, it has been just concretized.”

The court inquired about the situation on the site form Aditya N Prasad, counsel appearing for the petitioner.

Also Read: Allahabad High Court says permitting authority has power to withdraw it even if there’s no such provision in relevant law

To which Prasad submitted,

” Because of gag orders the work is going on intermittently and now there is a Supreme Court order stopping all the constructions and even if the civil work doesn’t go on, the horticulture is doing whatever they can by removing wires, nails and spraying insecticides. The survey representative is constantly present there.”

During the hearing of the present matter the court pulled up Delhi Police regarding the car parking on pavements which was shown in photographs brought on record. And asked about the affidavit of DCP and what does the order say ?, also asked to make pathways free of any and every obstacle.

The bench threatened to discharge the vakalatnama of the counsel stating,

“You are in contempt today. Do you not understand simple things? This is simply just making statement here and there. Kya kiya hai abhi tak? I will discharge your vakalatnama now. Give me an answer which is worthy of making a submission in this court. Kya kiya hai tabse aap ne. You have done nothing, therefore you are in contempt. Do you understand that? You are officer of the government? Law officer? Is this the answer you want to give us that we will not comply with the court’s orders.”

On a previous occasion, the bench observed that the constitutional guarantee of citizens’ freedom of movement as enshrined in the Constitution should not be edged in by the lack of civic amenities.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed an appeal challenging the Single Judge’s order wherein the Court had refused to interfere with Delhi Development Authority’s decision pertaining to non-issuance of fresh demand letter seeking outstanding amount from a successful bidder of a plot in Delhi’s Rohini and ruled that extension of time to deposit outstanding amount is a policy matter of DDA and the Court will be extremely slow in interfering with such policy decisions.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh while refusing to entertain the instant petition, noted: 

“It ought to be kept in mind that extension of the time to deposit the outstanding amount of the price of the land is a policy matter of the DDA and this Court will be extremely slow in interfering with the policy of the DDA unless the same is violative of constitutional provisions or the same is arbitrary in nature.”

An appeal was preferred  against an order passed by the Bench of Justice Najmi Waziri on September 20, 2021, wherein the Single Judge was of the view that there is no merit in petitioner’s claim for issuance of fresh demand letter from the DDA to arrange funds for making payment of the outstanding amount for a plot purchased in auction. 

The petitioner, one Jitin Garg, was a successful bidder at an auction of a plot at Rohini held in September 2019. A Letter of Intent was issued by the DDA in December 2019 seeking payment of 25%  of the total amount for the plot, which was paid by the petitioner in due time. 

Thereafter, a demand letter was issued in March 2020 for payment of the remaining 75% of the total sale consideration by June 2020. After the period got over, the petitioner sought issuance of a fresh demand letter from the DDA to arrange for the outstanding amount, even though the DDA already extended time to make payment till December 31, 2020.

Also Read: Delhi HC disposes of plea for reopening of Mother Dairy shop in Noida Sector 19

“Enough is enough,” the Bench exclaimed, while observing that when the petitioner succeeded in the bid, he was well aware that he is required to deposit the amount for the plot in question within a stipulated time, and hence he should have been ready for payment of the full price.

“The Court cannot show more leniency, especially when there are contractual terms involved between the appellant and the respondent in auction of the plot in question and thereafter demand of the money by the Delhi Development Authority. In such demand there is bound to be a time-limit, otherwise there will be no end of extension of the time-limit and no sale can be finalized by the DDA,”

-stated the Bench.

The Bench further added:

“Too much extension of time to deposit the money is not desirable. Public body has to complete the work within the time limit. Salaries are to be paid and services are to be purchased. Hence, such allottees have to deposit the money within a time-bound schedule.” 

The Bench concluded by observing, “Charity beyond law is a cruelty to others”, and dismissed the instant appeal.

The Delhi High Court today issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on a petition challenging Section 44(1) (c) (Offences triable by Special Courts) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

A Divisional Bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Najmi Waziri passed the directions on a petition filed by NGO Advantage India through its President Girish Vaid and posted the matter for further hearing on September 29.

The petition is filed by Advocates Tanveer Ahmed Mir & Prabhav Ralli.

The plea contended, “Section 44(1) (c) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the same being manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of the petitioner’s fundamental rights under Articles 14,19 & 21 of the Constitution of India, and being against the covenant, intent and scheme of the provisions of the PMLA, 2002 and violative of principles of natural justice.”

Section 44 (1)(c) says, “If the court which has taken cognisance of the scheduled offence is other than the Special Court which has taken cognisance of the complaint of the offence of money-laundering under sub-clause (b), it shall, on an application by the authority authorised to file a complaint under this Act, commit the case relating to the scheduled offence to the Special Court and the Special Court shall, on receipt of such case, proceed to deal with it from the stage at which it is committed.”

The plea alleged that PMLA, 2002 defines the scheduled offence and the money laundering offence as two distinct offences under Section 2(y) and Section 3 of the Act respectively, which are punishable separately under two different statutes and the PMLA nowhere provides for both the offences to be tried by the same court simultaneously.

Also Read: Supreme Court issues notice to CBI in Judge Uttam Anand death and safety of judges case

Both the cases have their own set of facts, there is no common evidence and the same has to be assessed independently. Therefore, Section 44(1)(c) is in clear contradistinction to the scheme and intent of the Act itself, it added.

The Delhi High Court took note of the large-scale illegal and unauthorised constructions near Qutub Minar, a protected heritage monument in Mehrauli, and directed the South Delhi Municipal Corporation’s Zonal Deputy Commissioner to fix responsibility of officers involved in it. 

A single-judge bench of Justice Najmi Waziri said, “The construction has been carried out in such a large area-surely, this could not have escaped the attention of either the police, the ASI or the Corporation (SDMC).”

The petitioner has shown Google Earth screengrabs annexed with the petition which revealed the nature and timeline of ongoing unauthorised constructions. 

During the hearing, the SDMC counsel said that on the basis of misrepresentation of facts and fabrication of documents, permission for a building has been taken from the ASI and the Corporation.

Justice Najmi Waziri said, “This is odd because permission could not have been granted for any construction in the prohibited zone of 100 metres abutting a protected monument.”

“The construction has taken place roughly 40 metres from Qutub Minar, a world-renowned, protected monument,” he said. 

The Court has directed the Zonal Deputy Commissioner of the Corporation to also look into the matter and fix the responsibility of the officers who may be found to be in dereliction of their duties. 

The Court has also impleaded Delhi Police and Tree Officer, GNCTD as necessary parties in the matter and issued notice to them. It has directed the Director General of the ASI, the DCP South to look into the matter with respect to the role of police in this. 

On the submission of the SDMC Counsel that only one full-grown tree has been cut, the Court said the photographs shown would reveal that a quite number of trees have been felled. 

Following which Justice Najmi Waziri has directed Tree Officer, GNCTD to visit the site and look into the matter and ascertain the position apropos the trees that may have been felled or damaged. “Remedial measures as may be directed by the Tree Officer shall be initiated,” said the Court. 

The Court was informed that the construction at the site has been stopped. The Court has further directed Corporation, ASI, Delhi Police and Tree Officer to file their affidavits, along with photographs and relevant documents within four weeks. 

The Court was hearing the petition filed by Rishi Sehdev through Advocates Ashish Chauhan, Vikram Singh Baid, Kushagra Bansal of A. K. Associates who has alleged large-scale violations of building bye-laws and ongoing illegal and unauthorised construction near the Qutub Minar. The petitioner has annexed Google Pictures which revealed the nature and timeline of the ongoing illegal, unauthorised and large-scale construction near the protected monument site. 

The petitioner has sought directions for demolition of illegal and unauthorized construction activity undertook at property bearing no. H-5/1 to H-5/20, Kalka Das Marg, Mehrauli, Delhi, famously known as Qutub Colonnade and its adjoining land, as clearly marked in the Map, in contravention to the law, procedure and guidelines governing protection of sites under the Archaeological Survey of India.

“The said illegal conduct of the Respondents in allowing/overlooking the construction activity being undertaken in such close vicinity of the Qutub Minar has caused grave harm to the sanctity and aesthetics of historical sites which are already in dire need to conservation from the over burdened and polluted NCR of Delhi,” stated in the petition. 

Read Also: Munger police firing: PIL filed in Patna High court seeking CBI inquiry

No city enjoys inexhaustible natural resources. Thus, it is this judicial activism spearheaded by the likes of Justice Waziri in recent times that shall play a significant role in shaping the near future seeking to replenish, care, nurture and augment the said limited resources.

By Aman Singh Bakhshi

The Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde, speaking at the valedictory session of the International Judges’ Conference on ‘Judiciary and the Changing World’ in the National Capital on February 23, expressed his views on a single system of laws, calling it the greatest need for environmental issues as they must not be hindered by national or international borders. The Hon’ble CJI went on to state that the

Judiciary is the guardian of constitutional values and serves to counter-balance populist forces in a commitment to the rule of law.

Having said that, it is apparent that the whole planet has experienced dramatic environmental changes over the past two decades. Air Quality Index (AQI), gas chambers, greenhouse effect, global warming etc. are some of the few terms that have been added to one’s daily dictionary in recent times. 

That also having been said, one can only ponder over adopting such stringent environmental policies and regulatory frameworks that pose a system of proper checks and balances and provides for harsher punishments for its violations. However, such statements are futile when effective implementation, enforcement and compliance of such policies and framework continue to pose challenges.

This is where the judiciary comes into the picture and plays a pivotal role in meeting these environmental enforcement and compliance challenges. For instance, on December 18, 2008, the Philippine Supreme Court decided to issue a continuing mandamus to all government agencies requiring the clean-up, restoration and preservation of Manila Bay.[1] A Manila Bay Advisory Committee (MBAC) was constituted, time and again, as recently as in 2020, tasked to minutely monitor the implementation of the 2008 decision by the Philippine Supreme Court.

Justice Kuldip Singh (Retd.), earned his name as the “Green Judge” by leading the environmental bandwagon when his lordship coined the principle of polluter pays, precautionary principle and the doctrine of public trust. Justice Singh passed various crucial judgments on several environmental issues during his tenure, including issuing guidelines for industries around the Taj Mahal.

On one such occasion, Justice Singh ordered the closure of aged and coughing textile mills functioning in the congested areas of the national capital and directed the government agencies to develop more green areas within the city. During his tenure, Justice Singh had create the sense of terror amongst the polluting industries and anti-environment lobbies, including bureaucracy. Justice Kuldip Singh retired as a judge from the Supreme Court of India on December 31, 1996.

The “post” of the Green Judge, after the retirement of Justice Kuldip Singh, fell “vacant” for almost two decades. Our country could not find a suitor who could live up to the name and carry the torch. However, saddling it onto himself, Justice Najmi Waziri of the Delhi High Court, has started his crusade for the cause of environment in the latter part of the last decade, pursuant to his appointment as a judge.

I have had the pleasure of appearing before his lordship on many occasions. As first hand experience, I recall an encounter recently in a matter before the Delhi High Court, when his lordship, troubled with the degrading air quality in the national capital, observed in open court that

considering the increasing levels of pollution in the city, the best dose of medicine for the residents of Delhi and adjoining areas is a breath of fresh air, which can only be achieved by planting more trees within the city besides preserving the existing ones.

In his pragmatic approach, Justice Waziri uses his dauntlessness and innovative use of the law, to further the “green” cause regardless of the nature of cases before him. Recently, in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp &Anr. vs. Abhayakumar Deepak &Anr.[2], in a contempt case for willful breach of the Court’s orders passed in a civil suit seeking injunctions against the Respondents, Justice Waziri, on an acknowledgement of guilt by the Respondents, imposed a cost of Rs 80 Lakhs on the Respondent in view of the good stature of the respondent and the extensive business and financial footprint of the company.

However, his lordship emphasized that the sum ought to be utilized for the larger public good. Therefore, his lordship, took judicial note of the degrading air quality in Delhi and its deleterious effects in great detail, ordered the Respondents to plant 1,40,000 trees on the Central Ridge, specifying that the plants shall be of deciduous indigenous variety and shall be of nursery age of three and a half years old and have a height of at least six feet. The Respondents were further directed to take care of the plants at least till a certain time.

Another instance of his lordship’s widely publicized boldness and affection for the environment is when Justice Waziri pulled up the Delhi Government and directed it to undertake plantation of 99,930 saplings as compensation. However, the shaken Delhi Government went up to plant 3.2  lakh saplings in the city, increasing the same four-fold.[3]

On another occasion, in an industrial disputes-related case[4], Justice Waziri directed the MCD to plant 500 trees in the riot-affected Northeast Delhi. Justice Waziri went on to observe that the

“…visual relief and therapeutic effects of greenery around one’s place of work, residence or in one’s neighbourhood cannot be overemphasized. All-the-more, in a post-riot scenario where thousands of citizens have suffered damages in body and mind, the presence of large number of trees and greenery will surely facilitate in healing of a bruised and battered society.

The concern for a greener Delhi reflects in most of Justice Waziri’s orders, making it clear that such parties planting trees/ saplings shall water and nurse the same as well,since mere planting of trees/ saplings will be futile if the same are not nurtured or cared for. As seen mostly, his lordship usually goes on a step further to direct that such trees/ saplings shall not have any concrete around them and be planted in a way so as to bring them in conformity with the directions of the National Green Tribunal.

Justice Waziri’s crusading zeal does not seem to be diminishing, regardless of the work roaster allocated to his lordship. Justice Waziri broke new legal ground, while quashing an FIR against a couple, who had employed a minor for household work, his lordship directed the accused pay Rs.1.5 Lakhs to the victim and further, to plant 100 trees in the Central Ridge.

Needless to state, the variety and physical description of the said trees to be planted were particularly mentioned by his lordship in the court order.[5]  Similarly, his lordship in another case, allowed two men to withdraw cases filed against each other subject to plantation of 100 trees in the capital as a “gesture of goodwill to society”.[6]Furthermore, his lordship seeks to implement his idea of a green Delhi regardless of the status or affluence of the parties. In the infamous 2G scam case, Justice Waziri granted more time to the accused to file their responses on the Enforcement Directorate’s appeal challenging their acquittal, subject to planting 3,000 trees each.[7]

The manifest duty to care for, protect and improve the natural resources is apparent in a plethora of orders passed by his lordship. Justice Waziri is also often known to haul up officers and departments for their lackadaisical attitudes in implementation of the orders of the court. Justice Waziri, recently, issued a contempt notice to the Deputy Conservator of Forest, South district, after he failed to file a compliance report, without any specific reason, despite repeated directions issued by the court to undertake plantation of 100 trees in the Asola village area of Delhi.[8]

One amongst many such noteworthy instances is when Justice Waziri passed a similar direction to an Insurance Company to plant 100 trees, on failure to bring on record the legal heirs of the respondents in an MACT Appeal, by virtue of an interim order dated 13^th December, 2019.[9] However, the Insurance Company appealed against this particular condition imposed by Justice Waziri. The Supreme Court, by virtue of an Order dated 6^th August, 2020[10] passed by a bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ajay Rastogi, JJ., agreed to the submission of the counsel for the Insurance Company and found the condition of planting about 100 trees by the Insurance Company as “unworkable” in its character, as an Insurance Company cannot look after the said trees as directed by the Justice Waziri and the panacea should have been addressed by imposition of cost. The Supreme Court went on to observe that “the appropriate course of action for the learned Judge should have been to dismiss the appeal in this case pending before the High Court.” However, the Supreme Court decided to dismiss the appeal altogether.

After much deliberation on this unique kind of judicial reform by giving fresh dimensions to the law by Justice Najmi Waziri, the aforesaid Order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court falls flat in the wake of the much-needed judicial activism with respect to the environment protection in the National Capital Region.

No city enjoys inexhaustible natural resources. Thus, it is this judicial activism spearheaded by the likes of Justice Waziri in recent times that shall play a significant role in shaping the near future seeking to replenish, care, nurture and augment the said limited resources. I, therefore, humbly request the Supreme Court participate in the crusade for a greener environment in the wake of alarming pollution levels in Delhi, its allied illnesses and particularly when the city is virtually gasping to breathe fresh air for it is the duty to care for the natural resources that has been cast upon all citizens by virtue of Article 51A of the Constitution of India.

“If there is lack of political will on part of the government agencies, it is the function of the judiciary to supplant it with the will, force, and the power of law.”- Antonio Opasa Jr.

The author is an advocate of the Delhi High Court

Biblio:

1https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2008/dec2008/gr_171947_2008.html

2http://delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=59139&yr=2019

3https://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi-news/3-2-lakh-saplings-planted-in-city-include-99-930-as-part-of-court-penalty-govt-to-hc/story-zgFMyXoA3KDWEclIoMNTyL.html

4 MCD v. Ramesh Chand [W.P.(C) No. 12492/2004; Order dated 03.03.2020]

5https://www.telegraphindia.com/india/100-tree-order-for-employing-minor/cid/1686179

6https://www.ndtv.com/delhi-news/high-court-directs-two-litigants-to-plant-100-trees-in-delhi-1920164

7https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/2g-case-court-directs-respondents-to-plant-15-000-trees-for-no-response-1989933

8https://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi-news/contempt-notice-to-official-over-plantation-drive/story-XgEJE2zfwYxS2gKNEW3A7H.html

9http://delhihighcourt.nic.in/dhcqrydisp_o.asp?pn=304786&yr=2019

10The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. v. Meena &Ors.; Civil Appeal No.2919/2020

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court today set aside a lower court order restraining the publication of a book titled ‘Gunning for the Godman: The True Story Behind Asaram Bapu’s Conviction’.

The order was pronounced by Justice Najmi Waziri in HarperCollin’s appeal against the injunction order passed by the district court. HarperCollins informed the court that the allegedly defamatory content was based entirely on trial record and judgement.

The court, however, directed that the already printed copies of the book be sold along with a flyer clarifying that the book is based on the judgment of a trial court, which is under appeal. Whereas, for online sale, the disclaimer should be given electronically, the court added.

The book, authored by Ajay Lamba, Additional Commissioner of Police, Jaipur and Sanjiv Mathur, claiming to be a true story, was scheduled to be released on September 5 this year, both physically and online.

Read Also: NCB summons Deepika Padukone’s manager for questioning

Earlier, this month the Delhi Court had stayed the publication of this book. The stay order was passed by Additional District Judge RL Meena, in a suit preferred by Sanchita Gupta, co-accused in the Asaram Bapu rape case.

–         India Legal Bureau

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has directed the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) and the tree Officer to remove unauthorized construction and concrete around an old banyan tree in the Chandni Chowk area of Old Delhi.

The Single judge bench of Justice Najmi Waziri, heard the petition filed by Nitin Gupta, seeking a stay on the unauthorized construction around a 300 year-old tree by the builder and also its restoration.

Expressing his anguish and displeasure, Wazri said photographs show the “horrific” condition of the “grand old tree, which has seen the unfolding of the city”.

“How can you do this to a 300-year-old tree? It has existed even before the Britishers could even think of coming to India. It is a part of the heritage of this city. How can you damage it in this manner?” Wazri said.

The bench observed: “The living entity has been a mute and patient spectator to the unfolding of history in the city of Delhi for the past three centuries. However, the builder failed to appreciate this invaluable heritage in its courtyard.”

The bench having regard for the small number of trees in Chandni Chowk  which require protection, has directed the corporation and the Tree Officer to conduct a tree census of all the identified trees in the area and to submit a compilation of the same before the court.

The counsel appearing for the Delhi government also informed the court that the builder was a repeat offender who had been previously fined Rs 80,000 for cutting an old peepal tree in the same location and urged the court to initiate appropriate criminal proceedings against him.

Read Also: Italian marines’ case: SC refuses to accept Govt’s withdrawal before hearing victim’s kin

The bench has ordered the parties to place on record the details of the fine imposed on the builder since it was disputed. All the parties have been directed to file their compliance report before August 13.

– India Legal Bureau