IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 126 OF 2006 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 126 OF 2006 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 126 OF 2006 Shetkari Sangharsh Samitee & Anr. ..Petitioners versus M/s. Maharashtra Energy Generation Ltd. & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. S. S. Pakale for the Petitioners. Mr. P. M. Patil, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 2, 5 and 7. Mr. J. S. Bhat i/b. M/s. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe for the Respondent No. 1. Mrs. S. V. Bharucha for the Respondent No. 6. Mr. Anil Singh for the Respondent No. 8. WITH WITH WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 140 OF 2007 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 140 OF 2007 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 140 OF 2007 Shetkari Sangharsh Samitee & Anr. ..Petitioners versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Pankaj Kowli i/b. M/s. U. M. Jhaveri for the Petitioners. Mr. S. G. Anney, Senior Advocate with Mr. H. N. Vakil i/b. Mulla & Mulla & Craigie Blunt & Caroe for the Respondent No. 1. Mr. R. V. Govilkar for the Respondent No.2. Mr. S. R. Nargolkar, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 4 - State WITH WITH WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 154 OF 2007 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 154 OF 2007 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 154 OF 2007 Shetkari Sangharsh Samitee & Anr. ..Petitioners versus M/s. Patni Energy Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. S. S. Pakale for the Petitioners. Ms. P. P. Tendulkar for the Respondent No.4. Mr. S. R. Nargolkar, AGP for the State. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI And CORAM : BILAL NAZKI And CORAM : BILAL NAZKI And S. A. BOBDE, JJ. S. A. BOBDE, JJ. S. A. BOBDE, JJ. DATE : 16TH JANUARY, 2008. DATE : 16TH JANUARY, 2008. DATE : 16TH JANUARY, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The above Petitions are being disposed of together which have been filed in public interest. Three different Companies are envisaging establishment of Power Projects in different areas of Maharashtra and there are grievances of the Petitioners against the establishment of these three Projects. 2. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the orders passed by different Benches of this court on various occasions, we have found that till date these Projects have not been cleared by various Departments of which clearance is needed under various Statutes. Therefore, there is no apprehension of these Projects being established immediately. This Court by Order dated 23.8.2007 has considered the controversy in detail and has directed in the matter that no steps shall be taken for establishment of the Projects by the concerned, till they get the relevant sanctions from various departments. In this view of the matter, we feel that no further orders are needed to be passed in these Petitions. Further, in one of the Petition being Petition No. 126 of 2006 it has been pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that clearance under Environmental Protection Act has been given by Ministry of Environment and Forest to establish the Project. He is at liberty to challenge the order before the Appropriate Forum, if so advised. We make it further clear that no steps shall be taken by the concerned Respondents to initiate the Projects unless they get clearances needed to set up the Projects. We further clarify that no steps shall be initiated to establish the Projects, however Respondents shall be at liberty to seek the land by acquisition or otherwise in accordance with law. All the Petitions are accordingly disposed of. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.) (S. A. BOBDE, J.)