srk １ pil-32-06 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.32 OF 2006 The Mumbai Midwaste Action Group ... Petitioner Versus Union of India and others. ... Respondents Ms. Usha G. Peri i/by Mr. Mihir Desai for the petitioner. Ms. S.V. Bharucha for respondent No.1. Mr. C.M. Lokesh for respondent No.2. Ms. Sadhana Mahashabde for respondent No.5. Mr. Dinesh S. Sehagal for applicant-intervenor in person. ALONGWITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.41 OF 2006 Consumer Welfare Association ... Petitioner Versus Union of India and others. ... Respondents Mr. Rajiv Chavan i/by Ms. Anita Marathe for the petitioner. Ms. S.V. Bharucha for respondent No.1. Ms. Sadhana Mahashabde for respondent No.4. Mr. Sujeet P. Salkar for respondent No.6. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. Thursday, September 9, 2010 P .C. These Public Interest Litigations have been pending for the last four years. The last affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Maharashtra srk ２ pil-32-06 Pollution Control Board on 6th September, 2010. In the said affidavit, the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board has given the status of compliance as on 31st August, 2010 in the following terms: "I say and submit that the Board had issued 20 Closure Directions to the Health Care Establishments not complied with the Bio Medical Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules 1998. As per the compliance report submitted by the respective Regional Officer of the Board, all these 20 Health Care Establishments were found complied. Accordingly the Board will issue appropriate Directions to restart their operation subject to certain terms and conditions. The Board had issued 430 proposed Directions against partially complied Health Care Establishments at the time of last hearing of the matter. Out of these 430 Health Care Establishments, 221 Health Care Establishments have complied with the proposed directions and 40 Health Care Establishments were found to be closed, as noticed during the course of visit and inspection of those Health Care Establishments. I say and submit that 169 Health Care Establishments are still non-complied and the Board is going to initiate appropriate final directions against these Health Care Establishments following due process of law and giving Natural Justice. I say and submit that the present status of compliance report has been complied on 49.2010. I say and submit that the overall status of compliance of Health Care Establishments alongwith the present status report of compliance complied by the Respondent-Board are enclosed herewith and marked as an Exhibit-`I' and `II' respectively." 2. The learned counsel for Maharashtra Pollution Control Board submits that in view of the above, the present proceedings may be disposed of as substantial improvement has taken place and almost 90% of the establishments are complying with the relevant statutory provisions. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that Maharashtra Pollution Control Board has not appreciated the statutory srk ３ pil-32-06 requirements in a proper perspective and, therefore, enforcement of the statutory norms still requires considerable improvement. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will submit to the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board their suggestions which may be taken into account by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board for proper enforcement of the relevant statutory norms. 4. This may be done by the petitioner within three weeks from today. The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board will give their reply to the petitioner within three weeks thereafter. If the petitioner is not satisfied with the reply to be given by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, it will be open to the petitioner to institute fresh Public Interest Litigation before this court seeking appropriate directions. 5. Subject to the above liberty, we dispose of these petitions. CHIEF JUSTICE DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. srk ４ pil-32-06