M.C. MEHTA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Brick kiln owners (other than those who availed relocation benefits) are not obliged to surrender land upon closure or shift to fly-ash technology, as circumstances differ from category-H industrial units; the Master Plan 1990 and lack of compensation mechanism for agricultural land are key factors.
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Applicant: M.C. Mehta; Respondent: Union of India
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 29 August 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Writ Petition (civil) / Interlocutory Application
- Outcome
- Interlocutory Applications allowed; order dated 26.11.96 modified.
- Legal Topics
- Industrial Pollution, Brick Kiln Closure, Land Use, Natural Justice
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
M.C. Mehta
Applicant
Union of India
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) / Interlocutory Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether brick kiln owners in Delhi are obliged to surrender land without compensation upon closure or shift to fly-ash technology.
- 2 Whether brick kilns should be treated similarly to other category-H industries under the Master Plan 1990.
Ratio Decidendi
Brick kiln owners (other than those who availed relocation benefits) are not obliged to surrender land upon closure or shift to fly-ash technology, as circumstances differ from category-H industrial units; the Master Plan 1990 and lack of compensation mechanism for agricultural land are key factors.
Court Disposition
Interlocutory Applications allowed; order dated 26.11.96 modified.
Orders
- Brick kiln owners, upon closure or change to fly-ash technology, are not obliged to surrender land.
- Order does not apply to those who availed benefits in the matter of relocation.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment