8 Sep 2023 12:25 PM GMT
The Telangana High Court today adjourned hearing of a petition filed by Telangana Ganesh Murti Kalakaar Welfare Association challenging ban on plaster of paris idols vide Revised Guidelines 2.0 for Idol Immersion issued by the Central Pollution Control Board, citing paucity of time.While doing so, the Bench headed by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe criticised a lawyer-intervenor for...
The Telangana High Court today adjourned hearing of a petition filed by Telangana Ganesh Murti Kalakaar Welfare Association challenging ban on plaster of paris idols vide Revised Guidelines 2.0 for Idol Immersion issued by the Central Pollution Control Board, citing paucity of time.
While doing so, the Bench headed by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe criticised a lawyer-intervenor for "making faces".
“We can ask you really inconvenient questions. You will find it very difficult to answer. We want to hear you, be reasonable. We have a calendar here, we are looking at that and fixing a date, not like anything that comes to my mind. Why we are not hearing today is due to paucity of time,” the CJ remarked.
The lawyer had request the Court for 45 minutes to advance his arguments. However, due to Court running only till 1:30pm (on account of roster change and a scheduled meeting), the bench decided to adjourn the matter, so as to provide the parties to submit their arguments at length.
However, the lawyer-intervenor noticeably disagreed with the next date assigned by the Court.
The grievance of the intervenor was that the date assigned by the Court was one after the date of idol immersion (September 28) and would defeat the purpose of the petition. He also brought the Court's attention to an interim order passed by the Court last year, forbidding immersion of idols in any water body except those artificially made, specifically for the purpose of immersion. He submitted that despite the said order, idols were immersed into the Hussain Sager Lake, adding to its existing pollution.
To this the Court observed, “If an interim order was passed, then that order still stands. What is the assurance that even if we pass an order this time, it will be followed? You are left with the recourse of filing contempt. If you see somebody going against the order of the Court, gather evidence and file a petition and then we will hold everybody accountable.”
Considering that lawyer’s request was reasonable, however not delivered correctly, the Bench decided to advance the date to before the day of immersion and scheduled the matter for hearing on September 25.
Petitioner Advocate: M V DURGA PRASAD
Respondent Advocates: V NARASIMHA GOUD(SC FOR HMDA), GP FOR HOME, GP FOR IRRI AND COMM AREA DEV, K RAVINDER REDDY (SC FOR GHMC), KONDAPALLY RAVIKRISHNAKANTH, P SHIV KUMAR (SC FOR TSPCB), THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, GP FOR HOME
Telangana Ganesh MurtiKalakaar Welfare Association vs. Union of India