SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT ON BUFFER ZONE


CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5016 OF 2016 MANTRI TECHZONE PVT. LTD. … APPELLANTS VERSUS FORWARD FOUNDATION AND ORS. …

RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS.8002-8003 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12326 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.9227 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.1343 OF 2017

CIVIL APPEAL NO.10995 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.10993 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.10994 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.2246 OF 2018

CIVIL APPEAL NO.10992 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12157 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12152 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12156 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12158 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12160 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NO.12159 OF 2016

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.4923-4924 OF 2017

CIVIL APPEAL NO.14966 OF 2017 2

J U D G M E N T S.ABDUL NAZEER, J.

1. These appeals have been preferred under Section 22 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (for brevity ‘NGT Act’) challenging the judgment and order dated 07.05.2015 and 04.05.2016 respectively passed by the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal, New Delhi (for short ‘the Tribunal’).

2. The appellants in Civil Appeal Nos. 5016 of 2016 and 8002-8003 of 2016 are respondent Nos. 9 and 10 in the Original Application No. 222 of 2014 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the respondent Nos. 9 and 10’). The said Application was filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein (hereinafter referred to as ‘the applicants’). Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in these appeals are the State of Karnataka and other authorities. They were arrayed as respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in the application. Respondent Nos. 12 and 13 herein were subsequently impleaded in the application (for short ‘the impleaded respondents’).

3. The State of Karnataka has filed Civil Appeal Nos. 4923-4924 of 2017, challenging the general condition and direction No.(1) contained in the order of the Tribunal dated 04.05.2016. The other appeals have been filed by different entities, who were not parties 3 before the Tribunal challenging the order of the Tribunal dated 04.05.2016 insofar as it directs a buffer/green zone of 75 meters in respect of lakes, 50 meters in respect of primary Rajakaluves, 35 meters in case of secondary Rajakaluves and 25 meters in case of tertiary Rajakaluves with retrospective effect. According to them, they are adversely affected by the aforesaid condition in the impugned order.

4. The applicants filed O.A. No.222 of 2014 by contending that ecologically sensitive land was allotted by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (for short ‘the KIADB’) to respondent Nos. 9 and 10 vide Notifications dated 23.04.2004 and 07.05.2004 respectively for setting up of Software Technology Park, Commercial and Residential complex, hotel and Multi Level Car Parks. The Master Plan formulated by the Bangalore Development Authority (for short the ‘BDA’), identifies the allotted land as ‘Residential Sensitive’, though the same land was identified in the Draft Master Plan as ‘Protected Zone’. It was further contended that the Revenue Map in respect of properties as referred in the Land Lease Agreements has multiple Rajakaluves (Storm Water Drains). The development projects in question sit right on the catchment and wetland area which feeds the Rajakaluves, which in turn drains rain water into Bellandur Lake. The project will thus encroach two Rajakaluves of 1.38 acres and 1.23 acres each. 4

5. The Satellite Digital Images of the area from the year 2000 to 2012 show encroachment upon these Rajakaluves, as well as the manner in which they are covered by the construction. The State Level Expert Appraisal Committee (for short ‘SEAC’), which was to assist the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (for short ‘SEIAA’), held its meetings on various dates to examine the project. It had required the appellant No.9 to submit a revised NOC from the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (for short ‘BWSSB’) for the project in question. It was also observed that the project lies between the Bellandur Lake and the Agara Lake. Respondent No.9 was also directed to take protective measures to spare the buffer zone around Rajakaluves and also to commit that no construction would be carried out in the buffer zone. In the meeting of 11.11.2011, it was recorded that the project proposes car parking facility for 14,438 cars in that environmentally sensitive area.

6. It was alleged that NOC was issued covering an area of 17,404 sq. mtrs. whereas the built up area, as noted by SEAC, is 13,50,454.98 sq. mtrs. Respondent No.9 obtained NOC from BWSSB by concealing material facts and by misrepresenting that NOC is required only for residential units which form a very minuscule part of the total project. Respondent No.9 had approached the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (for short ‘the KSPCB’) for obtaining 5 clearance, which was granted on 04.09.2012 subject to the fulfillment of the conditions stated in the consent order which included leaving the buffer zone all along the valley and towards the lake. It is further contended that the grant of consent by the KSPCB to respondent No.9 also contained a condition with regard to obtaining Environmental Clearance from the Competent Authority and no construction was to commence until such clearance was granted.

7. Applicants further contended that respondent No.9 violated the conditions and commenced construction of the project. There was also violation of the stipulations stated in the approval of SEAC in relation to buffer zone and construction over Rajakaluves. The construction had been commenced over the ecologically sensitive area of the lake catchment area and valley, with utter disregard to the statutory compliances. Referring to these blatant irregularities, the applicant submitted that the conversion of land from ‘Protected Zone’ to ‘Residential Sensitive Area’ is violative of the law. The project is right in the midst of a fragile wetland area which ought not to have been disturbed by the development activity. The fragile environment of the catchment area has been exposed to grave and irreparable damage. It has severely disturbed and damaged the Rajakaluves. Respondent Nos. 9 and 10 started to level the land by filling it with debris, thus causing damage to the drains. The conditions with 6 regard to no-disturbance to the Storm Water Drains, natural valleys and buffer area in and around the Rajakaluves have been violated. It has in turn, affected the ground water table and bore wells which are the only source of water for thousands of households. Fishing and agriculture which depends on Bellandur Lake are also severely affected. The construction over the wetland between the two lakes is in violation of Wetlands (Conservation of Management) Rules, 2010 (for short ‘Rules of 2010’).

8. It was submitted that SEIAA in its meeting dated 29.09.2012, decided to close the file pertaining to respondent No. 10 due to non-submission of requisite information and the application thereof was rejected in November, 2012. Despite the rejection, respondent No.10 commenced construction on the project in full swing.

9. The applicants also relied upon the findings of the Joint Legislative Committee, constituted under the Chairmanship of Shri A.T. Ramaswamy in the month of July 2005, which stated that there were 262 water bodies in the Bangalore city in 1961 which drastically came down because of trespass and encroachments. It was also affirmed that about 840 kms. of Rajakaluves have been encroached upon in several places and have become sewage channels. The applicants also relied on the Report of the Committee under the Chairmanship of Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.K. Patil suggesting immediate 7 remedial action in order to remove encroachments on the lake area and the Rajakaluves and preservation of the lakes in and around Bangalore city. It was further contended that other Expert Committees, including Lakshman Rau Expert Committee had also submitted proposals for preservation, restoration or otherwise of the existing tanks in Bangalore Metropolitan Area which recommended to maintain good water surface in Bellandur tank and to ensure that the water in the tank is not polluted. The Central Government in August 2013 had issued an advisory on conservation and restoration of water bodies in the urban areas. The applicants claim to have obtained monitoring report of the project by respondent No.5, Ministry of Environment and Forests, through RTI on 21.08.2013. The report dated 14.08.2013 revealed that the project proponents are in clear breach of their undertaking to carry out all precautionary measures to ensure that the Bellandur lake is not affected by the construction and operational phase of the project. This approach is particularly with regard to the major alteration in natural sloping pattern of the project site and natural hydrology of the area.

10. The Lake Development Authority (for short ‘the LDA’), after inspection in the catchment area of the Bellandur Lake submitted its report dated 12.06.2013 which confirms that the project will have disastrous impact, including deleterious effect on the Bellandur Lake. 8 This report was brought to the notice of KIADB. The LDA has also opined that the land should be classified and maintained as sensitive area. The KIADB called upon respondent No. 9 to comply with the rules of Ecology and Environment Department and to obtain necessary approval from KSPCB and LDA. Despite all this, respondent Nos. 9 and 10 have continued with their illegal constructions and have caused damage to the ecology and the environment by irreparably jeopardizing the ecological balance in this sensitive area. The applicants rely upon the Revised Master Plan, 2013 issued by BDA which specifically provides that 30 meters buffer zone is to be created around the lakes and 50 meters buffer zone to be created on either side of the Rajakaluves. It was also pleaded that respondent No. 9 had obtained the NOC from BWSSB only with regard to residential units and not for the entire project and that the Environmental Clearance obtained by respondent No.9 is based upon the partial NOC issued by BWSSB which itself is a misrepresentation. It was contended that the projects are bound to create water scarcity as the requirement of the project of respondent No. 9 alone is approximately 4.5 million liters per day, i.e. 135 million liters per month, which is more than what the BWSSB supplies to the entire Agaram Ward. The construction of respective projects by respondent Nos.9 and 10 respectively, besides having commenced without 9 permission from the authorities and being in violation of the conditions imposed for grant of permission/consent, is bound to damage the environment, resulting in change in the topography of the area, posing potential threat of extinction of the Bellandur lake, causing traffic congestion, shortening and wiping out the wetlands, extinction of Rajakaluves and causing serious and potential threat of flooding and massive scarcity of water in the city of Bangalore, particularly the areas located near the water bodies.

11. Respondent No.9 in its objections contended that it was incorporated with the objective of establishing an Information Technology Park and R & D Centre with facilities such as residential complexes, parks, education centres and other allied infrastructure within a single compound. It had submitted the proposal to establish such Information Technology Park and other facilities to the State Government and requested for allotment of land for the project. Its proposal was considered in 78th High Level Committee meeting held on 21.06.2000 and after examining the proposal, it was approved by the Government on 06.07.2000. Before the State High Level Committee, it had informed that its requirement was 110 acres of land, 25 MW of power from the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (for short the ‘KPTCL’), and four lakh litres of water per day from BWSSB. The lands for the project were initially notified vide 10 Notification dated 10.02.2004. Subsequently, the lands were allotted vide letter dated 28.06.2007 for which Lease-cum-Sale Agreement was signed on 30.06.2007. Considering the overall development of the State of Bangalore, this respondent proposed a Mixed Use Development Project consisting of an Information Technology Park, residential apartments, retail, hotel and office buildings with a total built up area of 13,50,454.98 sq mtrs. The Project was conceived as a zero waste discharge project. The project is located one and a half kms. away from the southern-side of the Bellandur Lake. Towards the North, adjacent to the Project, lies vast stretches of lands belonging to the Defence and towards the East, lies the Project of respondent No. 10 and another developer is also developing a project on the western side. It has obtained sanction plan on 04.07.2007 which was renewed from time to time.

12. Respondent No. 9 claims that it has obtained NOC from Airport Authority of India on 09.04.2010. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, vide its communication dated 16.04.2010, granted clearance for the project construction. BWSSB, vide its communication dated 26.04.2011 issued NOC for portion of the proposed construction to be built. The Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Ltd. also granted NOC for arranging power supply to the proposed residential and commercial building in its favour. Environmental Clearance was granted by 11 SEIAA vide communication dated 17.04.2012. The Director General of Police has issued NOC and KSPCB vide order dated 04.09.2012 accorded its consent for construction of the said project subject to the conditions stated therein. It was further stated that after grant of the Environmental Clearance on 17.09.2012, the same was published in the leading newspapers “Kannada Prabha” and “The Indian Express” on 12.03.2012 and 14.03.2014 respectively.

13. It submitted a modified the building plan which was approved by KIADB vide its letter dated 30.08.2012, which was valid up to 10.08.2014. It started the construction of the project in November 2012, taking all precautions as per terms and conditions of the orders issued by the competent authorities. It was also submitted that it has raised the constructions in accordance with the plans and conditions of the Environmental Clearance and consent orders and that it has not violated any of the conditions and has not caused any adverse impact on the ecology and environment of the area. It has denied the contention that its construction activity has blocked the Rajakaluves and has adversely affected the lake. It has already spent a sum of Rs 306.73 crores on the project towards procurement of men and materials, machinery, infrastructure, medical and sanitary facilities, etc. and that it has availed financial assistance from various banks and financial institutions towards the construction and execution of 12 the project and that various contracts have been signed with the third parties. It is specifically pleaded that the petition is barred by time and suffers from defects and laches.

14. Respondent No.10 pleaded that the applicants raised multifarious proceedings against it which is an abuse of the process of law and mala fide. It had submitted a revised proposal in respect of its project in question and to obtain fresh clearance on 31.08.2007 with an investment of Rs. 179.22 crores. The State High Level Committee had cleared the project which was communicated to it on 25.01.2008. Its properties are located in between Bellandur Lake and Agara Lake but there are no primary storm water drains and secondary storm water drains that exist in its properties. It has clearances from various authorities, including Environmental Clearance and consent for establishment.

15. KIADB stated that after possession of the land was handed over to respondent Nos. 9 and 10, one year time was granted for the implementation of the project which was extended from time to time. The building drawings were approved on 04.07.2007, and the modified building drawings were approved on 26.04.2011 and 30.08.2012 with specific conditions. In its meeting held on 16.07.2013, it was resolved to inform respondent No. 9 to fully comply with the Ecology and Environment Rules and to obtain approvals from the LDA and KSPCB. 13 LDA vide its letter dated 24.09.2013, had informed KIADB that the construction activity in the catchment area in the Bellandur Lake could drastically impact the Lake with deleterious effects and asked it to stop construction activity of respondent Nos. 9 and 10. However, the validity of the building drawings was again extended up to 10.08.2014. The Lokayukta on 17.12.2013 had written a letter in respect of complaint filed by the South East Forum for Sustainable Development where it had been averred that the decision had been taken by the Board on 21.12.2013 to keep in abeyance the approval accorded and even the re-validations of plans. This was also informed to respondent No.9. The Board took a decision which was communicated to respondent No.9 on 02.01.2014, wherein it asked the respondent No.9 to stop all construction activities on the allotted lands. The said communication was challenged by respondent No. 9 and on the stop-work notice, stay was granted by the High Court of Karnataka. The stop-work notice dated 23.12.2013 issued by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (for short ‘BBMP’) was also stayed vide order dated 21.01.2014. The proposal submitted by respondent Nos. 9 and 10 had been approved by the State Government. The land allotted to respondent Nos. 9 and 10 does not consist of any Rajakaluves. 14

16. The LDA took a stand that it was not at all aware of the project initiated by KIADB. It came to know about the entire project only when certain newspaper reports surfaced during the month of June, 2013 and till that time it was in the dark. After the complaints, it inspected the Bellandur Lake and the Agara Lake on 12.06.2013 and prepared an inspection report. In the report, it was noticed that large scale construction activities were going on in the catchment area of Bellandur Lake and that there was a change in the land use, which in turn has directly affected the catchment of Bellandur Lake. The wetland area of Agara Lake had also shrunk, which originally formed the irrigation area for the adjoining agricultural lands. Therefore, it had questioned the decision of KIADB vide letter dated 06.07.2013 and even requested it to stop the construction activity and to re-classify the land as non-SEZ area. It was thereafter on 31.08.2013, that respondent No. 9 wrote a letter for according approval for the proposed development projects. However, vide its letter dated 23.09.2013, LDA informed KIADB that it had no authority to grant or deny construction projects, but it also communicated its objections to KIADB mentioning that construction activity would be in contravention of the directions of the Supreme Court. Despite these warnings, KIADB granted approval to the extension of the building drawings of the project in favour of the project proponents with certain 15 conditions, like ensuring that all natural valleys, valley zone, irrigation tanks and existing roads leading to villages in the said land should not be disturbed. Further, the natural sloping pattern of the project site was not to be altered and the lakes and other water bodies within and/or at the vicinity of the project area should be protected and conserved. Despite the objections, the plans were approved and approvals were extended from time to time. It has taken a categorical stand that the projects as approved by the KIADB would have adverse impact on Bellandur and Agara Lakes.

17. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following questions for consideration and determination: 1. Whether the application filed by the applicants and supported by respondent Nos. 11 and 12, is barred by time and thus, not maintainable? 2. Whether the petition as framed and reliefs claimed therein, disclose a cause of action over which this Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the application under the provisions of the NGT Act, 2010? 3. Whether the present application is barred by the principle of res judicata and/or constructive res judicata? 4. Whether the application filed by the applicants should not be entertained or it is not maintainable before the Tribunal, in view of the pendency of the Writ Petitions 36567-74 of 2013, before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka? and 5. What relief, if any, are the applicants entitled to? Should 16 or not the Tribunal, in the interest of environment and ecology issue any directions and if so, to what effect?

18. The Tribunal by its order dated 07.05.2015 at Annexure A-2, disposed of the applications with the following directions: 1) We decline to pass any direction or order to stop further progress and/or demolition of the project or any part thereof at this stage. However, we constitute the following Committee to inspect the projects in question and submit a report to the Tribunal inter alia but specifically on the issues stated hereinafter: a) Advisor in the Ministry of Environment and Forest dealing with the subject of wetlands. b) CEO of the Lake Development Authority, Karnataka State. c) Chief Town Planner of BBMP, Bangalore. d) Chairman of SEAC which recommended the grant of Environmental Clearance to the projects in question. e) Sr. Scientist (Ecology) from the Indian Institute of Sciences, Bangalore. f) Dr. Siddharth Kaul, former Advisor to MoEF. g) A Senior Officer from the National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee. 2) Member Secretary of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board shall act as the Convener of the Committee and would submit the final report to the Tribunal. 3) The Committee shall inspect not only the sites where the projects in question are located but even other areas of Bangalore which the Committee in its wisdom may consider 17 appropriate, in order to examine the interconnectivity of lakes and impact of such activities upon the water bodies with particular reference to lakes. 4) The Committee shall submit whether the projects in question have encroached upon or are constructed on the wetlands and Rajakaluves. If so, are there any adverse environmental and ecological impact of these projects on the lake, particularly Bellandur Lake and Agara Lake, as well the Rajakaluves. The report should specify, if any Rajakaluves have been covered by the construction activities of respondent Nos. 9 and 10 or by any of the projects in the area in question. 5) Committee should submit in its report, if these projects have any adverse impacts upon the surrounding ecology and environment, with particular reference to lakes and wetlands. If yes, then whether any part of the project is required to be demolished. If so, details thereof along with reasons. 6) The Committee shall substantially notice if any of the conditions of the Environmental Clearance order in each case of respondent Nos. 9 and 10 have been violated. If so, to what extent and suggest remedial measures in that behalf to restore the ecology of the area. 7) The Committee would also recommend what should be the buffer zone around the lake(s) and interconnecting passages and wetlands. The Committee shall also report, whether activities of multipurpose projects which have serious repercussions on traffic, air pollution, environment and allied subjects should be permitted any further or not, 18 particularly, in wetlands and catchment areas of water bodies. 8) Recommendations should be made with regard to the steps and measures that should be taken for restoration of lakes, particularly in the city of Bangalore. 9) The Committee shall also find out that whether the construction of the projects is in accordance with the sanctioned drawings and bye-laws in accordance with the letters dated 4 th July, 2007 and 22nd April, 2008 respectively. Further, the Committee would also report whether both respondent Nos. 9 and 10 have installed ETP/STP and have taken full measures for recycling of used water for washing and flushing, etc. in terms of letters dated 11th October, 2013 and 3rd January, 2013, issued by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board to respondent Nos. 9 and 10 respectively. 10) In the event, the Committee is of the opinion that the adverse impacts noticed are redeemable, then what directions need to be issued in that behalf and the cost involved for achieving the said conservation and restoration of lakes and water bodies.

11) Till the submission of the report by the Committee and directions passed by the Tribunal in that regard, both respondent Nos. 9 and 10 are hereby restrained from creating any 3rd party interests or part with the possession of the property in question or any part thereof, in favour of any person.

12) The Committee shall submit its report to MoEF and to this Tribunal as expeditiously as possible and in any case 19 not later than three months from today. During that period we restrain MoEF, SEIAA and/or any public authority from sanctioning any construction project on the wetlands and catchment areas of the water bodies in the city of Bangalore.

13) The Committee shall report if the project proponents are proposing to discharge their trade or domestic effluents into the lake or any of the water bodies in and around of the area in question.

14) For the reasons stated in the judgment, respondent No. 9 is liable and shall pay a sum of Rs. 117.35 crores, while respondent No. 10 shall pay a sum of Rs. 22.5 crores respectively being 5 per cent of the project value, within two weeks from today. The said amount would be paid to the KSPCB, which shall maintain a separate account for the same and would spend this amount for environmental and ecological restoration, restitution and other measures to be taken to rectify the damage resulting from default and non–compliance to law by the Project Proponent in that area, after taking approval of the Tribunal.

15) We make it clear that the said respondents would not be entitled to pass on the amount in terms of direction 14, on to the purchasers because this liability accrues as a result of their own intentional defaults, disobedience of law in force and carrying on project activities and construction illegally and unauthorizedly. 20 19. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, respondent Nos. 9 and 10 filed Civil Appeal Nos. 4829 and 4823 of 2015 before this Court. This Court by its Order dated 20th May, 2015 passed the following order: “One of the main contentions raised by the Appellants in these Appeals is that though the Tribunal had heard the matter only on preliminary issues and no arguments on merit were advanced, final judgment decides the merits of the disputes as well and above all a penalty of Rs.117.35 crores against the original Respondent No.9 (the Appellant in C.A. No. 4832 of 2015) and Rs. 22.5 crores against Original Respondent No. 10 (the appellant in C.A. No. 4829/2015) is imposed. On the aforesaid averment, we feel that it would be more appropriate for the appellant to file an application before the Tribunal with the prayer to recall the order on merits and decide the matter afresh after hearing the counsel for the parties, as the Tribunal knows better as to what transpired at the time of hearing. With the aforesaid liberty granted to the petitioners, the appeals are disposed of. Certain preliminary issues are decided against the appellants which are also the subject matter of challenge. However, it is not necessary to deal with the same this stage. We make it clear that in case the said application is decided against the 21 appellants or if ultimately on merits, it would be open to the appellants to challenge those orders by filing the appeal and in that appeal all the issues which are decided in the impugned judgment can also be raised. The counsel for the appellants state that they would file the requisite application within one week. Till the said application is decided by the Tribunal, there shall be stay of the direction pertaining the payment of aforesaid penalty. Mr. Raj Panjwani points out that the Tribunal has allowed the appellants to proceed with the construction only on the payment of the aforesaid fine/penalty. We leave it to the Tribunal to pass whatever orders it deems fit in this behalf, after hearing the parties.” 20. In relation to Issue No.5, an opportunity of hearing was granted to the respondents. The Tribunal passed order dated 06.04.2016 on these applications as under: “M.A. No. 603 of 2015 and M.A. No. 596 of 2015 These Applications have been filed on behalf of the Respondent 9 & 10 respectively. It is not necessary for us to refer to any details in view of the directions that we propose to issue in this case. Without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and subject to just 22 exception we would hear the parties in terms of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India primarily on the question of imposition of Environmental Compensation and merits attached in relation thereto. Parties are given liberty to address their submissions on that behalf. With the above directions the M.A. No. 603 of 2015 and M.A. No. 596 of 2015 stand disposed of without any order as to cost.”

21. It is evident from the above orders that the Tribunal had granted opportunity to the parties to address it “limited question”, as aforementioned. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed an order dated 04.05.2016 as under: “General Conditions or directions: 1. In view of our discussion in the main Judgment, we are of the considered view that the fixation of distance from water bodies (lakes and Rajkalewas) suffers from the inbuilt contradiction, legal infirmity and is without any scientific justification. The RMP – 2015 provides 50m from middle of the Rajkalewas as buffer zone in the case of primary Rajkalewas, 25m in the case of secondary Rajkulewas and 15m in the tertiary Rajkulewas in contradiction to the 30m in the case of lake which is certainly much bigger 23 water body and its utility as a water body/wetland is well known certainly part of wet land. Thus, we direct that the distance in the case of Respondents Nos. 9 and 10 from Rajkulewas, Waterbodies and wetlands shall be maintained as below:- (i) In the case of Lakes, 75m from the periphery of water body to be maintained as green belt and buffer zone for all the existing water bodies i.e. lakes/wetlands. (ii) 50m from the edge of the primary Rajkulewas. (iii) 35m from the edges in the case of secondary Rajkulewas (iv) 25m from the edges in the case of tertiary Rajkulewas This buffer/green zone would be treated as no construction zone for all intent and purposes. This is absolutely essential for the purposes of sustainable development particularly keeping in mind the ecology and environment of the areas in question. All the offending constructions raised by Respondents Nos. 9 and 10 of any kind including boundary wall shall be demolished which falls within such areas. Wherever necessary dredging operations are required, the same should be carried out to restore the original capacity of the water spread area and/or wetlands. Not only the 24 existing construction would be removed but also none of these Respondents – Project Proponent would be permitted to raise any construction in this zone. All authorities particularly Lake development Authority shall carry out this operation in respect of all the water bodies/ lakes of Bangalore. 2. The capacity of the existing STPs to treat sewage is 729 MLD, whereas another 500 MLD sewage is proposed to be treated in 10 upcoming STPs. In this context, all the STPs operating in the area whether Government or privately owned, should meet the revised standards notified by CPCB/MoEF. 3. Bangalore city receives treated potable water of 1360 MLD from river Cauvery whereas the requirement is for another 750 MLD and the entire area falls in critical zone in terms of ground water exploitation. Information reveals that only one million litre per month of STP treated water is used by builders for construction purposes. For this reason, the BWSSB issues partial NOC to various residential and commercial projects in respect of supply of potable water. In this context, following directions need to be issued: i. At the time of grant of EC, the water requirement for the construction phase 25 and operation phase should be considered separately. Due consideration should also be given for identification of source of supply of water and this should be a pre-requisite for grant of EC. ii. All the project proponents should necessarily use only treated sewage water for construction purpose and this should be reflected in EC as a condition for construction phase. iii. Wherever the quality of treated sewage water does not conform to the quality needed for construction, necessary upgradation in STP should be undertaken immediately. Specific Conditions/ Directions for Respondent 9; In addition to the above directions which should be equally part of EC condition in respect of respondents nos. 9 & 10, following specific conditions shall apply to respondent no. 9: i. Reclaimed area of the lake to the extent of 3 acres 10 guntas in survey No. 43 should be restored to its original condition at the cost of project proponent. The possession of this area should be restored by Respondent No. 9 to the concerned Authorities 26 immediately. In addition, a buffer zone of 75 m should be provided between the lake and the project area and this should be maintained as green area. ii. In the remaining area, where primary Rajkalewa is abutting the project area, 50 m buffer zone on the side of the project area from the edge of the rajkalewa should be maintained as green belt. iii. Several irrigation canals or tertiary rajkalewas taking off from the Agara tank were passing through the area of respondent No. 9, and serve the dual purpose of irrigating paddy fields and disposal of surface run off (storm water drains) during rainy season. However on account of the activities of the project, these drains have been totally obliterated. For the purpose of proper disposal of storm runoff from the entire area falling between the Agara lake and the Belandur Lake, respondent No. 9 must provide required number of storm water drains based on proper hydrological study. These storm drains should have a buffer zone of 15 m on either bank maintained as green belt. 27 iv. The cumulative quantity of earth excavated for the construction of project is around 4 lakhs cubic meters in the depth range of 0 to 9 meters. This has created huge hillock like structure obstructing the natural flow pattern of surface runoff from Agara Lake side to Balendur Lake side or primary Rajkalewas. For this purpose, during construction phase garland drain should be constructed around the existing dumping site for safe disposal of runoff to the Rajkalewas. For the disposal of excavated material, a proper muck disposal plan duly approved by SIEAA shall be prepared. In any case the plan should ensure that no muck/sediment flows into Rajkalewas and/or Belandur lake. v. The Kharab land identified by Revenue Dept. admeasuring 1 acre 2 guntas should be demarcated and maintained separately as green belt. vi. The entire green belt created under the directions of this Tribunal should not to be considered as part of green belt of the project as part of EC condition and will be over and above the green belt as indicated in the EC. 28 vii. In view of the heavy traffic load in the adjoining Sarjapur road, a proper study on the basis of traffic density,foot falls expected, etc., a proper plan needs to be prepared and the concept of service road exclusively for the project needs to be worked out and additional parking space created within the project area and incorporated as a part of the overall project layout, within a period of 3 months. 10. Though, at the time of hearing prior to passing the Judgment, we had heard the parties on all aspects but still we have provided re-hearing to the parties on all issues with emphasis on imposition of environmental compensation including the quantum. Upon hearing, we are of the considered view that environmental compensation imposed upon Respondent No. 9 calls for no variation and the Respondent No. 9 should be called upon to pay the said amount of Rs. 117.35 Crores determined under the Judgment prior to commencement of any project activity at the site. Respondent No. 10 has not commenced any actual construction activity but has carried out various preparatory steps including excavation and deposition of huge 29 earth by creating a hillock at the premises in question and a site office. Thus, considering cumulative effect on environment and ecology due to various breaches in that behalf by Respondent No. 10 and the fact that the remedial measures can more effectively be taken by the Respondent No.10, we reduce environmental compensation payable by Respondent No. 10 to Rs. 13.5 crores (3% of the stated project cost instead of 5% as imposed in the original judgment). General Directions: 1. We direct SEIAA, Karnataka to issue amended order granting Environmental Clearance within four weeks from today incorporating all the conditions stated in this judgement and such other conditions as it may deem appropriate in light of this judgment and Inspection Note of the Expert Members. The Project Proponents would be permitted to commence activity only after issuance of amended Environmental Clearance order. 2. SEIAA Karnataka and MoEF shall ensure regular supervision and monitoring of the project and during the construction and even upon completion to ensure that activity is carried out strictly in accordance with the conditions of the order granting Environmental Clearance, this Judgment, Notification of 2006 and other laws in force. 30 3. The distances in respect of buffer zone specified in this judgment shall be made applicable to all the projects and all the Authorities concerned are directed to incorporate such conditions in the projects to whom Environmental Clearance and other permissions are now granted not only around Belandur Lake, Rajkulewas, Agara Lake, but also all other Lakes/wetlands in the city of Bengluru. 4. We hereby direct the State of Karnataka to submit a proposal to the MoEF for demarcating wetlands in terms of Wetland Rules 2010 as revised from time to time. Such proposal shall be submitted by the State within four weeks from today and the MoEF shall consider the same in accordance with law and grant its approval or otherwise within four weeks thereafter. After such approval is granted by MoEF, the State would issue notification notifying such areas immediately thereafter in accordance with Rules and law. 5. Both the Respondents Nos. 9 and 10 shall ensure that debris or any construction material that has been dumped into the Rajkulewas, or on their Banks and on the buffer zone of wetlands should be removed within four weeks from today. In the event they fail to do so, the same shall be removed by the Lake Development Authority 31 along with the State Administration and recover charges thereof from the said Respondents. 6. There is a serious discrepancy even in regard to the measurement of land as far as Respondent No. 9 is concerned. Admittedly the Respondent has been allotted and is in possession of land admeasuring 63.94 acres, though Environmental Clearance has been granted for 2,92,636.03 Sq. Meters which is equivalent to 72.22 acres. For this reason alone, Environmental Clearance cannot be given effect to. While issuing the amended Environmental Clearance, SEIAA Karnataka shall take into consideration all these aspects and, if necessary, would require Respondent No. 9 to submit a fresh layout plant and the entire project may be revised in accordance with law. 7. Both the Respondents (Project Proponents) shall submit an appropriate plan in view of the conditions imposed in this judgment and the amended Environmental Clearance that would be issued. 8. The amount of environmental compensation will be deposited prior to issuance of amended Environmental Clearance. With the above directions, the Original Application No. 222 of 2014 and Misc. Applications Nos. 596/2016 and 603/2016 are 32 finally disposed of while leaving the parties to bear their own costs.” 22. Appearing for the appellants in C.A. No.5016 of 2016, Shri Mukul Rohatgi, learned senior counsel, has submitted that the State Government in exercise of the power conferred under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act (for short ‘KIAD Act’) declared the land in question as an industrial area. Thereafter, the land in question has been acquired by the State Government in the year 2004. Following the acquisition, on 28.06.2007, the land was allotted to the appellant by the KIADB. The SEIAA granted environmental clearance which was followed by public notice concerning clearance on 14.03.2012. Neither the allotment of land nor the environmental clearance was challenged before the Tribunal. Thus, none of the statutory decisions or processes, are the cause of action for the purpose of the application. The averments made in the original application does not satisfy or meet the requirements of Section 14(1) and (3) of the NGT Act and the original application does not spell out the cause of action relevant for the purpose of said provision. Since the statutory processes and clearances could not have been challenged for being hit by Section 14(3), the construction activities which were the alleged cause of action could not have been 33 challenged. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have held that the application was not maintainable. 23. Further the application is barred by limitation. Though environmental clearance was granted on 17.02.2012 and it was published in two leading newspapers on 12.03.2012 and 14.03.2012, modified plan was approved by the KIADB on 30.08.2012, the application ought to have been filed within six months from the date on which cause of action for the dispute first arose in terms of Section 14 of the NGT Act. The present application has been filed in March, 2014 which was much beyond the prescribed period of limitation. No application seeking condonation of delay has been filed accompanying the application. Hence, the Tribunal ought to have dismissed the application on the ground that as it is barred by time. 24. It was also argued that buffer zone laid down by the NGT is substantially higher as compared to buffer zone which is required to be maintained as per the Revised Master Plan, 2015 issued on 22.06.2007. This is contrary to the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Planning Act’). 25. Shri Neeraj Kishan Kaul and Shri R.Venkataramani, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, in this case have also made similar submissions. It was argued that the direction imposing penalty/compensation is illegal on the ground that the applicants did 34 not allege that the construction work of the project has caused environmental wrong. No wrong or injury either to Bellandur lake water body or to Bellandur lake area, has been alleged and established. As such, there is no question of any enquiry relating to imposition of penalty or any compensation. 26. Shri Maninder Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, in C.A. Nos.5016 and 10995 of 2016, while supporting the submissions made by Shri Rohatgi, has submitted that the appellant has obtained sanction and approvals for the project from the competent authorities. It could not start construction despite grant of all the permissions, including environmental clearance as early as possible i.e. 30.09.2013. Hence, imposing penalty/compensation is entirely unsustainable. 27. Learned Advocate General, Shri Udaya Holla, appearing for the appellant-State of Karnataka in C.A.Nos.4923-4924 of 2017, has submitted that the State of Karnataka is also aggrieved by the order of the NGT to the extent of setting aside the buffer zone in respect of water bodies and drains specified in the Revised Master Plan, 2015, and enlargement of the buffer zone in respect of lakes and Rajakaluves. It is also aggrieved by the order of the NGT directing the 35 authorities to demolish all the offending constructions raised/built in the buffer zone, which will result in demolition of 95% of the buildings in Bengaluru. It is submitted that the Revised Master Plan is statutory in nature and NGT has no power, competence or jurisdiction to consider the validity or vires of any statutory provision/regulation. Therefore, the order of the NGT to that extent is liable to be set aside. 28. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants in other cases, have also supported the arguments of the learned Advocate General. It was contended that the Revised Master Plan provides for a 30 meters buffer zone around the lakes and a buffer zone of 50 meters, 25 meters and 15 meters from the primary, secondary and tertiary drains, respectively to be measured from the centre of the drain. Vide the impugned judgment, the NGT has revised these buffer zones and has directed that the buffer zone be maintained for 75 meters around the lake and 50, 35 and 25 meters respectively from the primary, secondary and tertiary drain, respectively. Variation of buffer zone, as directed by the NGT is without any legal and scientific basis and has the effect of amending the Revised Master Plan, 2015, without there being any challenge to the same or any relief sought with respect to the said Revised Master Plan. 29. On the other hand, Shri Sajan Poovayya, learned senior counsel, appearing for the applicants, has fairly submitted that the applications 36 were filed only against the appellants in C.A Nos. 5016 of 2016 and 8002-8003 of 2016 (respondent Nos. 9 & 10). He has no objection to set aside the order in so far as the appellants in other appeals including the State of Karnataka are concerned. He has also no objection to set aside the general conditions and directions of the NGT in paragraph (1) of the order dated 04.05.2016 except the directions issued against respondent Nos. 9 and 10. In view of the above, it is not necessary to examine the contentions of the learned Advocate General in Civil Appeal Nos. 4923-4924 of 2017. It is also not necessary to consider the contentions urged in the other civil appeals except the appeals filed by respondents Nos. 9 and 10. 30. Shri Poovayya has strongly opposed the submissions made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants in C.A. No. 5016 of 2016 and C.A. Nos. 8002-8003 of 2016. It is submitted that the Tribunal is a specialized body for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment. The jurisdiction of the Tribunal is provided under Sections 14, 15 and 16 of the NGT Act. Section 14 provides for the jurisdiction over all civil cases where a substantial question relating to environment is involved. However, such question should arise out of implementation of the enactments specified in 37 Schedule I. The Tribunal has the jurisdiction under Section 15(1)(a) of the NGT Act to provide relief and compensation to the victims of pollution and other environmental damage arising under the enactments specified in Schedule I. Under Sections 15(1)(b) and 15(1) (c), the Tribunal can provide for restitution of property damaged and for restitution of the environment for such area or areas, as the Tribunal may think fit. Sections 15(1)(b) and 15(1)(c) have not been made relatable to enactment specified in Schedule I of the Act. Section 15(1)(c) is an entire island of power and jurisdiction read with Section 21 of the Act. He submits that whenever ecology is being compromised and jeopardized, the Tribunal can apply Section 20 for taking restorative measures in the interest of environment. The limitation provided in Section 14 is period of six months from the date on which cause of action first arose whereas in Section 15 it is five years. Therefore, the petition is not barred by time. 31. He has further submitted that the provisions of Section 33 shall have the effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other law for the time being in force. This gives the Tribunal overriding powers over anything inconsistently contained in KIAD Act, Planning Act, Revised Master Plan of Bangalore, 2015 and Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short ‘KMC Act’). Therefore, the Tribunal while providing for restoration of environment in an area can 38 specify buffer zone around specific lakes and water bodies in contravention with zoning regulation. 32. Regarding limitation, he has submitted that the application filed by respondents 1 to 3 was not an application simplicitor under Section 14 of the Act. It was an application where a specific prayer has been made with reference to Lake Development Authority’s report dated 12.06.2013 and the Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change Monitoring Committee report dated 14.08.2013 for restoration of ecologically sensitive land and for maintaining sensitive area in its natural condition so that ecological balance of the area is not disturbed. Therefore, the petition was under Section 15 of the Act and it can be filed within five years from the date on which the cause for such compensation or relief first arose. 33. It was further submitted that right to appeal under Section 22 is not a vested right unless provided by statute. Exercise of Appellate Jurisdiction without the fulfillment of statutory mandate would be without jurisdiction. Section 22 of the Act provides for an appeal on the ground specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the CPC’). Under Section 100 of the CPC, an appeal can be filed only on the ground that the case involves a substantial question of law as may be framed by the Appellate Court. In the instant case, the appeal does not involve any substantial question of 39 law hence it has to be dismissed in limine. He has taken us through various materials placed on record in order to substantiate that the direction passed and penalty imposed by the Tribunal upon to project proponents are sustainable. He prays for dismissal of the appeals. 34. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel of the parties and perused the materials placed on record. 35. Before considering the other contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, let us first consider the scope of enquiry in appeals filed under Section 22, which is as under: “22. Appeal to Supreme Court.- Any person aggrieved by any award, decision or order of the tribunal, may, file an appeal to the Supreme Court, within ninety days from the date of communication of the award, decision or order of the Tribunal, to him, on any one or more of the grounds specified in section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908): Provided that the Supreme Court may, entertain any appeal after the expiry of ninety days, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficience cause from preferring the appeal.” 36. It is settled that there is no vested right of appeal unless the statute so provides. Further, if a statute provides for a condition subject to which the appropriate Appellate Court can exercise jurisdiction, the Court is under an obligation to satisfy itself whether 40 the condition prescribed is fulfilled. Exercise of appellate jurisdiction without the fulfillment of statutory mandate would be without jurisdiction. Therefore, the right of appeal provided under Section 22 is to be read subject to the conditions provided therein. 37. Section 22 provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court on the grounds specified in Section 100 of the CPC. Under Section 100 CPC, an appeal can be filed only on the ground that the case involves a substantial question of law as may be framed by the Appellate Court. The scope of appeal under Section 22, therefore, is restricted to substantial question of law arising from the judgment of the Tribunal. The test to determine whether the question is substantial question of law or not was laid down by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Sir Chunilal V. Mehta and Sons, Ltd. v. Century Spinning and Manufacturing, 1962 Supp. (3) SCR 549. This Court has laid down the test as under: “The proper test for determining whether a question of law raised in the case is substantial would, in our opinion, be whether it is of general public importance or whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties and if so whether it is either an open question in the sense that it is not finally settled by this Court or by the Privy Council or by the Federal Court or is not free from difficulty or calls for discussion of alternative views. If the question is settled by the highest court or the general principles to be applied in determining the question are well settled and there is a mere question of applying those principles or that the plea raised is 41 palpably absurd the question would not be a substantial question of law.” 38. It is equally settled that merely because the remedy of appeal is provided against the decision of the Tribunal on a substantial question of law alone, that does not ipso facto permit the appellants to agitate their appeal to seek re-appreciation of the factual matrix of the entire matter. The appellants cannot seek to re-argue their entire case to seek wholesale re-appreciation of evidence and the factual matrix that has been considered by the Tribunal is ex facie impermissible under Section 22. There cannot be fresh appreciation or re-appreciation of facts and evidence in a statutory appeal under this provision. 39. The first question raised by the learned counsel is in relation to the maintainability of the application before the Tribunal. 40. The Tribunal has been established under a constitutional mandate provided in Schedule VII List I Entry 13 of the Constitution of India, to implement the decision taken at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. The Tribunal is a specialized judicial body for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment. The right to healthy environment has been construed as a part of the right to life under Article 21 by way of 42 judicial pronouncements. Therefore, the Tribunal has special jurisdiction for enforcement of environmental rights. 41. The jurisdiction of the Tribunal is provided under Sections 14, 15 and 16 of the Act. Section 14 provides the jurisdiction over all civil cases where a substantial question relating to environment (including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment) is involved. However, such question should arise out of implementation of the enactments specified in Schedule I. 42. The Tribunal has also jurisdiction under Section 15(1)(a) of the Act to provide relief and compensation to the victims of pollution and other environmental damage arising under the enactments specified in Schedule I. Further, under Section 15(1)(b) and 15(1)(c) the Tribunal can provide for restitution of property damaged and for restitution of the environment for such area or areas as the Tribunal may think fit. It is noteworthy that Section 15(1)(b) & (c) have not been made relatable to Schedule I enactments of the Act. Rightly so, this grants a glimpse into the wide range of powers that the Tribunal has been cloaked with respect to restoration of the environment. 43. Section 15(1)(c) of the Act is an entire island of power and jurisdiction read with Section 20 of the Act. The principles of sustainable development, precautionary principle and polluter pays, propounded by this Court by way of multiple judicial 43 pronouncements, have now been embedded as a bedrock of environmental jurisprudence under the NGT Act. Therefore, wherever the environment and ecology are being compromised and jeopardized, the Tribunal can apply Section 20 for taking restorative measures in the interest of the environment. 44. The NGT Act being a beneficial legislation, the power bestowed upon the Tribunal would not be read narrowly. An interpretation which furthers the interests of environment must be given a broader reading. (See Kishsore Lal v. Chairman, Employees’ State Insurance Corpn. (2007) 4 SCC 579, para 17). The existence of the Tribunal without its broad restorative powers under Section 15(1)(c) read with Section 20 of the Act, would render it ineffective and toothless, and shall betray the legislative intent in setting up a specialized Tribunal specifically to address environmental concerns. The Tribunal, specially constituted with Judicial Members as well as with Experts in the field of environment, has a legal obligation to provide for preventive and restorative measures in the interest of the environment. 45. Section 15 of the Act provides power & jurisdiction, independent of Section 14 thereof. Further, Section 14(3) juxtaposed with Section 15(3) of the Act, are separate provisions for filing distinct applications before the Tribunal with distinct periods of limitation, thereby amply 44 demonstrating that jurisdiction of the Tribunal flows from these Sections (i.e. Sections 14 and 15 of the Act) independently. The limitation provided in Section 14 is a period of 6 months from the date on which the cause of action first arose and whereas in Section 15 it is 5 years. Therefore, the legislative intent is clear to keep Section 14 and 15 as self contained jurisdictions. 46. Further, Section 18 of the Act recognizes the right to file applications each under Sections 14 as well as 15. Therefore, it cannot be argued that Section 14 provides jurisdiction to the Tribunal while Section 15 merely supplements the same with powers. As stated supra. the typical nature of the Tribunal, its breadth of powers as provided under the statutory provisions of the Act as well as the Scheduled enactments, cumulatively, leaves no manner of doubt that the only tenable interpretation to these provisions would be to read the provisions broadly in favour of cloaking the Tribunal with effective authority. An interpretation that is in favour of conferring jurisdiction should be preferred rather than one taking away jurisdiction. 47. Section 33 of the Act provides an overriding effect to the provisions of the Act over anything inconsistent contained in any other law or in any instrument having effect by virtue of law other than this Act. This gives the Tribunal overriding powers over anything inconsistent contained in the KIAD Act, Planning Act, Karnataka 45 Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (“KMC Act”); and the Revised Master Plan of Bengaluru, 2015 (“RMP”). A Central legislation enacted under Entry 13 of List I Schedule VII of the Constitution of India will have the overriding effect over State legislations. The corollary is that the Tribunal while providing for restoration of environment in an area, can specify buffer zones around specific lakes & water bodies in contradiction with zoning regulations under these statutes or the RMP. 48. The second question raised by the appellants is that the petition is barred by time. According to appellants, environmental clearance was granted to the respondent No. 9 on 17.02.2012 for which notice was published in the leading newspaper on 12.03.2012 and 14.03.2012. Modified building plan was approved on 30.08.2012, which was followed up to 10.08.2014. Similar events had taken place in regard to the project of respondent No. 10 who had been granted environmental clearance on 30.09.2013. The application had to be filed within a period of six months from the date on which cause of action for such dispute has first arisen in terms of Section 14 of the NGT Act. Admittedly, the present application has been filed in March, 2014 and according to them, it is much beyond the prescribed period of limitation. Also, there is no application for 46 condonation of delay accompanying the main application. Therefore, the Tribunal will not have jurisdiction to condone the delay. 49. The OA No. 222 of 2014 was not an application simpliciter under Section 14 of the Act. It was an application where a specific prayer has been made with reference to Lake Development Authority’s (“LDA”) Report dated 12.06.2013 and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEF”) Monitoring Committee Report dated 14.08.2013 for restoration of ecologically sensitive land and for maintaining the sensitive in its natural condition so that the ecological balance of the area is not disturbed. It is clear from the documentary evidence supported by data, that the project proponents have committed breaches and the implementation of the project is bound to have serious adverse impact on the ecology, hydrology and the environment in the catchment area of Bellandur Lake. The environmental degradation as established from the documents would give rise to an independent cause of action. Therefore, this was a petition under Section 15 of the Act and thus it could be filed within 5 years from the date on which the cause for such compensation or relief first arose. 50. In fact, in the original application before the Tribunal there was no mention of the provision under which it was being filed. It is well settled principle of law that non-mention of or erroneous mention of the provision of law would not be of any relevance, if the Court had the 47 requisite jurisdiction to pass an order. It would be a mere irregularity and would not vitiate the application or the judicial order of the Tribunal. 51. Shri R. Venkataramani, learned senior counsel, appearing for the appellant in CA No.5016 of 2016 has submitted that the constructions had not commenced before the grant of environment clearance. The inspection report dated 11.01.2012 of the Chairman of the KSPCB observes that “no construction” had commenced on the date of inspection. This report cannot be overlooked on the basis of some dumping of debris which could not be attributed to the appellant. He has pointed out the report of the Committee appointed by the Tribunal in the month of August 2015, wherein it was stated that “it started construction after obtaining clearance”. In this regard he has also taken us through various documents placed on record and submits that there is absolutely no justification in imposing monitoring penalty/compensation without assessment of impact. 52. The Tribunal has pointed out on the basis of the Committee report of August 2015, that the appellant had encroached 3 acres 10 guntas of Bellandur Lake and a boundary wall has been raised around the said land. The Tribunal has also found that the project proponents have violated the Master Plan. They have not obtained the mandatory clearance from the Sensitive Zone Committee constituted 48 by the Government of Karnataka. It is also clear from the materials on record that there are several other violations by the project proponents. The Tribunal has discussed all these issues from para 52 onwards. It is also clear from the materials on record that there is a definite possibility of environment, ecology, lakes, and wetland being adversely affected by these projects. That is why, the Tribunal has observed as under: “72.

In light of the above scope of the project and records before the Tribunal and the defaults on the part of the Project Proponents, the cumulative adverse effects of the activities undertaken by the respondents before us can be summed up as under:

1) The construction of both the projects had started prior to the grant to Environmental Clearance.

 2) The EIA Notification of 2006 requires that without grant of Environmental Clearance, no project can commence its activity. This restriction applies not only to operationalization of the project but even for the purposes of establishment.

3) Revenue Map images shows multiple Rajakaluves flowing through the project(s) in question. The images further show encroachment on Rajakaluves. 49

4) Digital images of the land available on Google satellite images showing encroachment on two major Rajakaluves.

5) Google Satellite images retrieved from Google archives clearly reflect two distinct features. Firstly, change in the wetland area between the period of 13th November, 2000 and 23rd November, 2010. Secondly, it reveals the excavation work carried out by Respondent Nos. 9 and 10 commenced prior to obtaining Environmental Clearance.

6) Restriction in regard to extraction of ground water was not strictly complied with as permission of Central Ground Water Authority was not obtained before construction.

7) The conditions with regard to the natural slopping pattern of the project site to remain unaltered and natural hydrology of the area to be maintained as it is, to ensure natural flow of storm water as well as in relation to Lakes and other water bodies within and/or at the vicinity of the project area to be protected and conserved: The inspection report by the MoEF clearly notes that condition nos. (xxxix) and (xl) in the Environmental Clearance of respondent no. 9 cannot be complied with as it will necessarily result in some alteration of the natural slopping pattern of the project site and the natural hydrology of the area. It noted that the project 50 area is located in the catchment area of the Bellandur Lake and the project authorities have informed that they will take all precautionary measures to ensure that the lake will not be affected by project activities either during construction or operation phase.” 53. In paragraph 81, the Tribunal has observed as under: “81. …………Another very important aspect which cannot be overlooked by the Tribunal is with regard to the respondent nos. 9 & 10 carrying on their project activity fully knowing that they were incapable of or it was not possible for them to comply with condition no. xxxix and xl (or alike conditions) in the order granting the Environmental Clearance. This has even been noticed by the MoEF in its monitoring report dated 14th August, 2013. These respondents never applied for variation or amendment of these conditions and continued with their construction activities. This renders these respondents entirely liable for environmental and ecological damage and the restoration and restitution thereof.” 54. In our view, the findings arrived at by the Tribunal are not only based on the documents that were available on record but also on the pleadings that were made by the parties buttressed by the Committee’s report and the inspection note of the Expert Members. 51 Therefore, the directions passed and the penalty imposed by the Tribunal on both project proponents are valid and sustainable and do not suffer from any perversity. 55. We are also of the view that it is impermissible for the appellants to seek a factual review through the methodology of re-appreciation of factual matrix by this Court under Section 22 of the NGT Act. 56. Shri R.Venkataramani, learned senior counsel has also raised a subsidiary issue relating to res judicata. According to him, respondent Nos. 12 and 13 filed Writ Petition Nos.3656-57/2013 seeking similar reliefs in a representative capacity. The issues raised therein are same as those canvassed in the application before the Tribunal. The reliefs sought for are essentially the same. Hence, the applications are barred by the principle of res judicata. 57. The Tribunal has answered this issue in paragraphs 47 to 51 of the order. There was no dispute in so far as filing of the writ petitions is concerned. However, the parties are not common nor the issues in application and the writ petitions are directly and substantially the same. After examination of the pleadings, the Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that there is no commonality of a cause of action or likelihood of a conflict between the judgments. The prayers and the geneses of the respective proceedings are entirely distinct and different in their scope and relief. The issues before the 52 Tribunal would essentially relate to environment ecology and its restoration while the proceedings before the High Court relate to entirely different issues with acquisition of land, its allotment and transfer to the third party. These issues in both the proceedings are neither substantial nor materially identical. 58. After elaborately considering this question, the Tribunal has concluded as under: “51. ….For these reasons, we find no merit in this contention of respondent Nos. 9 and 10. The purpose of the doctrine of res judicata is to provide finality and conclusiveness to the judicial decisions as well as to avoid multiplicity of litigation. In the present case, the question of re-agitating the issues or agitating similar issues in two different proceedings does not arise. The ambit and scope of jurisdiction is clearly decipherable. The jurisdictions of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka and this Tribunal are operating in distinct fields and have no commonality in so far as the issues which are raised directly and substantially in these petitions, as well as the reliefs that have been prayed for before the Hon’ble High Court and the Tribunal are concerned. There is no commonality in parties before the Tribunal and the High Court. The ‘cause of action’ in both proceedings is different and distinct. The matters 53 substantially and materially in issue in one proceedings are not the same in the other proceeding. There is hardly any likelihood of conflicting judgments being pronounced by the Tribunal on the one hand and the High Court on the other. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the present applications are neither hit by the principles of res judicata nor constructive res judicata. We also hold that culmination of proceedings before the Tribunal into a final judgment would not offend the principle of ‘judicial propriety’, because of the Writ Petitions pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka.” 59. We do not find any error in the aforesaid conclusion of the Tribunal. We are of the view that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the objections taken by the respondent Nos. 9 and 10 do not satisfy the basic ingredients to attract the application of res judicata or constructive res judicata. 60. The State of Karnataka is aggrieved by the following offending portion of the order dated 04.05.2016: “

1. In view of our discussion in the main Judgment, we are of the considered view that the fixation of distance from water bodies (lakes and Rajkalewas) suffers from the inbuilt contradiction, legal infirmity and is without any 54 scientific justification. The RMP – 2015 provides 50m from middle of the Rajkalewas as buffer zone in the case of primary Rajkalewas, 25m in the case of secondary Rajkulewas and 15m in the tertiary Rajkulewas in contradiction to the 30m in the case of lake which is certainly much bigger water body and its utility as a water body/wetland is well known certainly part of wet land. Thus, we direct that the distance in the case of Respondents Nos. 9 and 10 from Rajkulewas, Waterbodies and wetlands shall be maintained as below:- (i) In the case of Lakes, 75m from the periphery of water body to be maintained as green belt and buffer zone for all the existing water bodies i.e. lakes/wetlands. (ii) 50m from the edge of the primary Rajkulewas. (iii) 35m from the edges in the case of secondary Rajkulewas (iv) 25m from the edges in the case of tertiary Rajkulewas This buffer/green zone would be treated as no construction zone for all intent and purposes. This is absolutely essential for the purposes of sustainable development particularly keeping in mind the ecology and environment of the areas in question. 55 All the offending constructions raised by Respondents Nos. 9 and 10 of any kind including boundary wall shall be demolished which falls within such areas. Wherever necessary dredging operations are required, the same should be carried out to restore the original capacity of the water spread area and/or wetlands. Not only the existing construction would be removed but also none of these Respondents – Project Proponent would be permitted to raise any construction in this zone. All authorities particularly Lake development Authority shall carry out this operation in respect of all the water bodies/ lakes of Bangalore.” 61. We have already noticed that Shri Poovayya has no objection to set aside the aforesaid impugned portion of the order in so far as the appellants in all the appeals except the appeals filed by respondent Nos.9 and 10. The aforesaid portion of the order contains not only general directions but also certain directions against respondent Nos. 9 and 10. Therefore, only that portion of the order which does not pertain to respondent Nos. 9 and 10 needs to be quashed. 62. In the light of the above discussion,

we pass the following order:

 i) Civil Appeal No. 5016 of 2016 and Civil Appeal Nos. 8002-8003 of 2016 filed by the 56 appellants/respondent nos. 9 and 10 are hereby dismissed. The impugned judgment and order in so far as appellants/respondent Nos. 9 and 10 are concerned is sustained.

 ii) All the other appeals are hereby allowed and the direction/condition No. (1) in the order dated 4.5.2016 is hereby set aside except the direction issued against respondent Nos. 9 and 10. 63.

 There will be no order as to costs. …………………………………

J. (A.K. SIKRI) …………………………………

J. (S. ABDUL NAZEER) …………………………………

J. (M.R. SHAH)

March 5, 2019.

BBMP proposes to issue A Katha for B Katha properties – A Press Report


BBMP will issue A Katha to eligible B Katha properties across 110 villages amalgamated into erstwhile BMP, thus facilitating over few lakh property owners to obtain building plans and housing loan, but with a rider.

The details are awaited.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/cheer-for-owners-as-karnataka-is-set-to-regularise-b-khata-properties/articleshow/65586717.cms

BANK AUCTION PROPERTIES


There is an opportunity to buy properties, attached/seized by the Banks and are being e-auctioned or auctioned by the Banks.

Buyers are required to obtain diligent title or opinion on the properties, check with the chartered engineers about the quality and above all, check the compliance to the prevailing laws.

Bank Sanction of loans or approval or properties attached may or may not have good titles and irregularities are noticed in innumerable cases.

The buyers MUST NOT BE UNDER THE OPINION OR FEELING OR CONCEPT that the bank attached and auctioned properties have good title and compliance, therefore, it is strongly advised to obtain the legal opinion.

BDA PROPERTY AT BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE ON 80 FEET ROAD IS FOR SALE-4,000 sft Site and 4,000 sft building


BDA allotted site with 4000 Square feet of site and 4000 sft building constructed on it, situated on 80 feet road, in Banashankari 2nd Stage, Bangalore is for SALE by the OWNER.

Original Owner.

Clear Titles.

Up to date tax paid.

Latest Katha Certificate and Extract in the name of the owner.

50 Feet X 80 Feet-4,000 Square feet of site or land.

West Facing.

4000 Square Feet of 15 to 20 years old, but well maintained building.

Genuine Buyers with good financial standing may contact:

NO AGENTS AND NO BROKERS. DIRECTS BUYERS ARE PREFERRED.

ecopackindia@gmail.com

ecopackindia@yahoo.com

ecopackindia@live.com

BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS-2019-20


Highlights Of Interim Budget 2019-20

The key highlights of the Interim Budget 2019-20 presented by the Union Minister for Finance, Corporate Affairs, Railways & Coal, Shri Piyush Goyal in Parliament today are as follows:

New Announcements

v  Farmers

·         12 crore small and marginal farmers to be provided with assured yearly income of Rs. 6000 per annum under PM-KISAN

o   Outlay of Rs. 75,000 crore for FY 2019-20 with additional Rs. 20,000 crore in RE 2018-19

·         Outlay for Rashtriya Gokul mission increased to Rs 750 crore

·         Rashtriya Kamdhenu Ayog  to be setup for sustainable genetic up-gradation of the Cow resources

·         New separate Department of Fisheries for welfare of 1.5 crore fishermen

·         2% interest subvention to Farmers for Animal husbandry and Fisheries activities; additional 3% in case of timely repayment.

·         Interest subvention of 2% during disaster will now be provided for the entire period of reschedulement of loan

v  Labour

·         Pradhan Mantri Shram Yogi Maandhan scheme to ensure fixed monthly pension to 10 crore unorganized sector workers

o   Rs 3000 per month after 60 years of age with an affordable contribution of only Rs 100/55 per month

v  Health

·         22nd AIIMS to be setup in Haryana

v  MGNREGA

·         Rs. 60, 000 crore allocation for MGNREGA in BE 2019-20

v  Direct Tax proposals

·         Income upto Rs. 5 lakh exempted from Income Tax

·         More than Rs. 23,000 crore tax relief to 3 crore middle class taxpayers

·         Standard Deduction to be raised to Rs. 50,000 from Rs. 40,000

·         TDS threshold to be raised from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 40,000 on interest earned on bank/post office deposits

·         Existing rates of income tax to continue

·         Tax exempted on notional rent on a second self-occupied house

·         Housing and real estate sector to get boost-

o   TDS threshold for deduction of tax on rent to be increased from Rs. 1,80,000 to Rs. 2,40,000

o   Benefit of rollover of capital gains increased from investment in one residential house to two residential houses for capital gains up to Rs. 2 crore.

o   Tax benefits for affordable housing extended till 31st March, 2020 under Section 80-IBA of Income Tax Act

o   Tax exemption period on notional rent, on unsold inventories, extended from one year to two years

v  Fiscal Programme

·         Fiscal deficit pegged at 3.4% of GDP for 2019-20

·         Target of 3% of fiscal deficit to be achieved by 2020-21.

·         Fiscal deficit brought down to 3.4% in 2018-19 RE from almost 6% seven years ago

·         Total expenditure increased by over 13% to Rs.27,84,200 crore in 2019-20 BE

·         Capital Expenditure for 2019-20 BE estimated at Rs. 3,36,292 crore

·         Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) allocation increased to Rs. 3,27,679 crore in BE 2019-20

·         National Education Mission allocation increased by about 20% to Rs. 38,572 crore in BE 2019-20

·         Allocation for Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS) increased by over 18% to Rs. 27,584 crore in BE 2019-20

·         Substantial increase in allocation for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes –

o   Allocation for SCs increased by 35.6% – from Rs. 56,619 crore in BE 2018-19 to Rs. 76,801 crore in BE for 2019-20

o   Allocation for the STs increased by 28% – from 39,135 crore in BE 2018-19 to Rs. 50,086 crore in 2019-20 BE

·         Government confident of achieving the disinvestment target of 80,000 crore

·         Focus now on debt consolidation along with fiscal deficit consolidation programme

v  Poor and Backward Classes

·         “First right on the resources of country is that of the poor”: FM

·         25% additional seats in educational institutions to meet the 10% reservation for the poor

·         Targeted expenditure to bridge urban-rural divide & to improve quality of life in villages

·         All willing households to be provided electricity connections by March 2019

v  North East

·         Allocation to be increased by 21% to Rs. 58,166 crore in 2019-20 BE over 2018-19 BE

·         Arunachal Pradesh came on the air map recently

·         Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram came on India’s rail map for the first time

·         Container cargo movement through improved navigation capacity of the Brahmaputra

v  Vulnerable sections

·         A new committee under NITI Ayog to identify all the remaining De-notified nomadic and semi-Nomadic tribes.

·         New Welfare development Board under Ministry of social justice and empowerment for development and welfare of De-notified nomadic and semi nomadic tribes

v  Defence

·         Defence budget to cross Rs 3,00,000 crore for the first time ever

v  Railways

·         Capital support of Rs.64,587 crore proposed in 2019-20 (BE) from the budget

·         Overall capital expenditure programme to be of Rs. 1,58,658 crore

·         Operating Ratio expected to improve from 98.4% in 2017-18

                                                                             to 96.2% in 2018-19 (RE) and

                                                                             to 95% in 2019- 20 (BE)

v  Entertainment Industry

·         Indian filmmakers  to get access to Single window clearance as well for ease of shooting films

·         Regulatory provisions to rely more on self-declaration

·         To introduce anti-camcording provisions in the Cinematograph Act to control piracy

v  MSME and Traders

·         2% interest subvention on an incremental loan of  Rs 1 crore for GST registered SMEs

·         Atleast 3% of the 25% sourcing for the Government undertakings will be from women owned SMEs

·         Renewed Focus on Internal trade ; DIPP renamed to Department for Promotion of Industries and Internal trade

v  Digital Villages

·         The Government to make 1 lakh villages into Digital Villages over next five years

v  Other Announcement(s)

·         New National Artificial Intelligence portal to support National Program on Artificial Intelligence

Achievements during 2014-19

v  State of the Economy

·         India universally recognized as a bright spot of the global economy during last five years

·         “Country witnessed its best phase of macro-economic stability during 2014-19”, says FM

·         India is now the 6th largest economy in the world from being the 11thlargest in 2013-14

·         Annual average GDP growth during 2014-19 higher than any government since 1991

·         Government has broken inflation’s back from backbreaking inflation during 2009-14: FM

·         Average inflation down to 4.6%, lower than during any other Government

·         Inflation in December 2018 down to 2.19% only

·         Fiscal deficit down to 3.4% in 2018-19 RE from the high of almost 6% seven years ago

·         CAD likely to be only 2.5% of GDP this year against a high of 5.6% six years ago

·         India attracted massive amount of FDI, worth $239 billion, during the last 5 years

·          “India is solidly back on track and marching towards growth and prosperity”, says FM

·         India becomes the fastest growing major economy in the world

·         Double-digit inflation contained and fiscal balance restored

·         Liberalization of FDI policy, allowing most FDI to come through the automatic route

v  Farmers

·         Assured MSP of minimum 50% to all 22 crops

·         Interest subvention doubled in last 5 years

·         Soil Health card, Neem coated Urea game changer in farm sector

v  Labor

·         Employment opportunities expanded ; EPFO membership increased by 2 crore

·         Minimum income for every category of workers increased by 42% in last 5 years

v  Poor and Backward Classes

·         10% reservation for the poor  in educational institutions and government jobs

·         Free electricity connection to every household under Saubhagya Yojana

·         World’s largest healthcare programme, Ayushman Bharat, for nearly 50 crore people

·         Aspirational Districts Programme for development in 115 most backward districts

·         Rs. 1,70,000 crore spent during 2018-19 for cheaper food grains to poor and middle class

·         143 crore LED bulbs provided in mission mode with the cooperation of private sector

·         Poor & middle class are saving Rs. 50, 000 crore p.a. in electricity bills due to LED bulbs

·         10 lakh patients benefited from free treatment under Ayushman Bharat

·         Jan Aushadhi Kendras providing medicines at affordable prices to poor and middle class

·         14 out of 21 AIIIMS operating presently have been announced since 2014

·         Government tripled rural roads’ construction under the PMGSY

·         15.80 lakh habitations out of 17.84 lakh connected with pucca roads

·         Rs. 19,000 crore for PMGSY in BE 2019-20 against Rs. 15,500 crore in RE 2018-19

·         1.53 crore houses built under PM Awas Yojana during the 2014-18

v  Women development to women led development

·         6 crore free LPG gas connections provided under Ujjwala Yojna ; All 8 crore by next year

·         70% of MUDRA Loan availed by Women

·         Maternity leave extended to 26 weeks

·         Financial support for pregnant women under Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana

v  Youth

·         Over one crore youth trained under Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikash Yojana

·         Self-employment boost through MUDRA, STAND-UP and START-UP India

v  MSME and Traders

·         Up-to Rs 1 crore loans can be availed in less than an hour

·         25%-28% is the average savings due to GeM (Government e-Market place)

v  Income Tax

·         Tax collections nearly doubled in five years- from Rs. 6.38 Lakh crore in 2013-14 to almost Rs. 12 lakh crore this year

·         80% growth in tax base- from 3.79 crore to 6.85 crore in five years

·         Tax administration streamlined- Last year, 99.54% of the income-tax returns accepted as were filed

·         Technology intensive project approved to improve assessee friendliness –In two years, returns to be processed in 24 hours and refunds issued simultaneously

·         Earlier benefits given to middle class-

o   Basic exemption limit increased from Rs. 2 lakh to Rs. 2.5 lakh

o   Tax rate reduced from 10% to 5% for the tax slab of Rs. 2.5 lakh to Rs. 5 lakh

o   Standard deduction of Rs. 40,000 introduced for the salaried class

o   Deduction of savings under section 80C increased from Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 1.5 lakh

o   Deduction of interest for self-occupied house property raised from Rs. 1.5 lakh to Rs. 2 lakh

·         Special benefits and incentives already given to small businesses and startups-

o   Overall compliance processes simplified.

o   Threshold for presumptive taxation of business raised from Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 2 crore

o   Benefit of presumptive taxation extended for the first time to small professionals fixing threshold limit at Rs. 50 lakh

o   Presumptive profit rate reduced from 8% to 6% to promote a less cash economy

o   Tax rate for about 99% companies reduced to 25%

v  GST

·         GST made India a common market

·         GST led to increased tax base, higher collections and ease of trade

·         Inter-state movements now faster, more efficient, and hassle free

·         Responsive and sensitive reduction of tax rates – Most items of daily use now in the 0% or 5% tax slab

·         Relieving the businesses and service providers-

o   Exemptions from GST for small businesses doubled from Rs. 20 lakh to Rs. 40 lakh

o   Small businesses having turnover up to Rs. 1.5 crore pay only 1% flat rate and file one annual return only

o   Small service providers with turnover upto Rs.50 lakhs can opt for composition scheme and pay GST at 6% instead of 18%

o   Soon, businesses comprising over 90% of GST payers to be allowed to file quarterly return

·         Encouraging GST revenue trends – The average monthly tax collection in the current year is Rs. 97,100 crore per month as compared to Rs. 89,700 crore per month in the first year

v  Infrastructure

·         Civil Aviation – UDAN Scheme

o   Number of Operational Airports crossed 100

o   Latest: Pakyong airport in Sikkim

o   Domestic Passenger traffic doubled in last 5 years

·         Roads

o   India is the fastest highway developer in the world

o   27 kms of highways built each day

o   Stuck projects completed – Eastern Peripheral Highway around Delhi

                                                  – Bogibeel rail-cum-road bridge in Assam and Arunachal Pradesh

·         Waterways

o   Flagship programme of Sagarmala along the coastal areas

o   For first time, container freight movement started on Kolkata to Varanasi inland waterways

·         Railways

o   ‘Safest year’ for railways in its history

o   All Unmanned Level Crossings on broad gauge network eliminated.

o   Semi high-speed “Vande Bharat Express” introduced – first indigenously developed and manufactured

v  Climate Change

·         International Solar Alliance

o   To promote renewable energy

o   First treaty based international inter-governmental organisation headquartered in India

o   Installed solar generation capacity grown over ten times in last five years

o   Now creating lakhs of new age jobs

v  Digital India Revolution

·         More than 3 lakh Common Service Centres (CSCs) exist to deliver services to the citizens

·         India now leading the world in the consumption of mobile data

·         Monthly consumption of mobile data increased by over 50 times in the last five years

·         Under Make in India, mobile and parts manufacturing companies increased from 2 to more than 268 providing huge job opportunities

v  Jan Dhan-Aadhaar-Mobile (JAM) and Direct Benefit Transfer

·         In the last five years, nearly 34 crore Jan Dhan bank accounts opened

·         Aadhaar now near universally implemented

·         Ensure the poor and middle class receive the benefits of Government schemes directly in their bank accounts by eliminating middlemen

v  Customs and trading across borders

·         Customs duties on 36 capital goods abolished

·         Digitization of import and export transactions

·         RFID technology to improve logistics

v  Steps against corruption

·         Government walked the talk on corruption and ushered in a new era of transparency: FM

·         RERA and Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act have brought transparency in real estate

·         The Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 to help confiscate economic offenders

·         Government conducted transparent auction of natural resources such as coal & spectrum

v  Drive against Black money

·         Undisclosed income of about Rs 1,30,000 crore brought under tax through initiatives like Black money Law,  Fugitive Criminal offenders Act, Demonetisation etc.

·         Benami assets worth Rs 6,900 crore have been attached

·         18% growth in Direct tax

v  Banking Reforms and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)

·         The IBC has institutionalized a resolution-friendly mechanism

·         Government has stopped the culture of “phone banking”: FM

·         Government adopted 4Rs approach of recognition, resolution, re-capitalization & reforms

·         Government has implemented measures to ensure ‘Clean Banking’

·         Government has already recovered Rs. 3 lakh crore in favor of banks and creditors

·         Government has invested Rs. 2.6 lakh crore for recapitalization of public sector banks

v  Cleanliness

·         Government launched Swachh Bharat Mission as a tribute to 150 years of Gandhi Ji

·         FM thanks 130 crore Indians for translating Swachh Bharat into a national revolution

·         India has achieved 98% rural sanitation coverage

v  5.45 lakh villages have been declared “Open Defecation Free”

v  Defence

·         OROP under implementation in full spirit with Rs 35,000 crore already disbursed

·         Military pay service hiked

v  Other achievements

·         Government put a stop to questionable practices of hiding high NPAs

·         Swachh Bharat Mission as the world’s largest behavioral change movement

Key message in the Interim Budget 2019-20

·         Moving towards realizing a ‘New India’ by 2022 –

o   Clean and healthy India with universal access to toilets, water and electricity to all

o   An India where Farmers’ income would have doubled

o   Ample opportunities to youth and women to fulfil their dreams

o   An India free from terrorism, communalism, casteism, corruption and nepotism

Vision for the next Decade

·         Foundation for India’s growth and development laid in the past 5 years

·         Poised to become a Five Trillion Dollar Economy in the next five years

·         Aspire to become a Ten Trillion Dollar Economy in the next 8 years thereafter

Ten dimensions of Vision for India of 2030

India would be a modern, technology driven, high growth, equitable and transparent society

1.      To build physical as well as social infrastructure and to provide ease of living

2.      To create a Digital India, digitize government processes with leaders from youth

3.      Making India pollution free by leading transport revolution with Electric Vehicles and focus on Renewables

4.      Expanding rural industrialisation using modern digital technologies to generate massive employment

5.      Clean Rivers, safe drinking water to all Indians and efficient use of water through micro-irrigation

6.      Besides scaling up of Sagarmala, Coastline and Ocean waters powering India’s development and growth

7.      Aim at our space programme – Gaganyaan, India becoming the launch-pad of satellites for the World and placing an Indian astronaut into space by 2022

8.      Making India self-sufficient in food, exporting to the world to meet their food needs and producing food in the most organic way

9.      A healthy India via Ayushman Bharat with women having equal rights and concern for their safety and empowerment

10.  Transforming India into a Minimum Government Maximum Governance nation with pro-active and responsible bureaucracy

Ashok Chakra Gallantry Award


The President, Shri Ram Nath Kovind giving away the gallantry award Ashoka Chakra to 12974389N Lance Naik, Nazir Ahmad Wani, Bar to Sena Medal, the J&K Light Infantry/34th Battalion the Rashtriya Rifles (Posthumously), the award received by his wife Ms. Mahajbeen and his mother Ms. Raja Banoo, at the 70th Republic Day Celebrations, at Rajpath, in New Delhi on January 26, 2019.

THE GALLANTRY AWARDS 2019 – THE HEROES & THE BRAVE-HEARTS PROTECTING US


The full list of the recipients of gallantry and other Defence decorations to Armed Forces personnel and others is as follows:

SL. NO.RANK & NAMESERVICE 
ASHOKA CHAKRA 
112974389N LANCE NAIK NAZIR AHMAD WANI, BAR TO SENA MEDALTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRY /34TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLES (POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
KIRTI CHAKRA 
1.SS-46936F MAJOR TUSHAR GAUBA, 20THBATTALION THE JAT REGIMENT  ARMY 
215496659X SOWAR VIJAY KUMAR, THE ARMOURED CORPS / 22ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLES (POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
3SHRI RAJENDRA KUMAR NAIN, CONSTABLE, 130, BN, AT AWANTIPORA, DISTT – PULWAMA (J&K)(POSTHUMOUS)MHA 
4SHRI PRADIP KUMAR PANDA, CONSTABLE, 130, BN, AT SANT NAGAR, SRINAGAR (J&K)(POSTHUMOUS)MHA 
SHAURYA CHAKRA 
 LIEUTENANT Colonel VIKRANT PRASHER, 10THBATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 MAJOR AMIT KUMAR DIMRI, THE GARHWAL RIFLES /14THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-76258F MAJOR ROHIT LINGWAL, 9TH BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 MAJOR IMLIAKUM KEITZAR, 4TH BATTALION THE 4TH GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 CAPTAIN ABHAY SHARMA, SENA MEDAL / FIRST BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 CAPTAIN ABHINAV KUMAR CHOUDHARY / THE CORPS OF SIGNALS / 21STBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 LANCE NAIK AYYUB ALI, THE RAJPUTANA RIFLES / 9THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
8.14945605A SEPOY AJAY KUMAR, THE MECHANISED INFANTRY / 42NDBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLES (POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
9.16121676N SAPPER MAHESH HN, THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / 44TH  BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
10.SHRI ZILE SINGH, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, 180 BN, CRPFMHA 
11.SHRI IRFAN RAMZAN SHEIKHMHA 
PARAM VISHISHT SEVA MEDAL 
 IC-35471M GENERAL BIPIN RAWAT, UYSM, AVSM, YSM, SM, VSMADC INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-38011W LIEUTENANT GENERAL PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, AVSM, VSM / THE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-38226WLIEUTENANT GENERAL SURINDER SINGH, AVSM**, VSM / THE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-38403K LIEUTENANT GENERAL SHOKIN CHAUHAN, AVSM, YSM, SM, VSM (RETD)   / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-38643F LIEUTENANT GENERAL RANBIR SINGH SALARIA, VSM / THE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-38708KLIEUTENANT GENERAL ASHOK AMBRE, AVSM**, SM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-38750H LIEUTENANT GENERAL MANOJ MUKUND NARAVANE, AVSM,SM,VSM, THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-38753W LIEUTENANT GENERAL JASWINDER SINGH SANDHU, UYSM, AVSM, VSM, THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-38879WLIEUTENANT GENERAL ASHWANI KUMAR, AVSM, VSM / THE ARMY AIR DEFENCEARMY 
 IC-39438M LIEUTENANT GENERAL PATTACHERAVANDA CHENGAPPA THIMMAYA,VSM,THE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-39445HLIEUTENANT GENERAL SUDARSHAN SHRIKANT HASABNIS, VSM / THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-39590A LIEUTENANT GENERAL HARISH THUKRAL, SMTHE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-39607H LIEUTENANT GENERAL IQROOP SINGH GHUMAN, AVSM / THE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-39865H LIEUTENANT GENERAL MICHAEL MATHEWS, VSM** / THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-40098F LIEUTENANT GENERAL DUSHYANT SINGH, AVSM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 MR-03993P LIEUTENANT GENERAL BIPIN PURI, VSM, THE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 MR-37934P MAJOR GENERAL VIJAY DNAYANDEV CHOWGULE, VSM /THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-40378P MAJOR GENERAL BOLLINA VENKATA RAO, VSMTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-40792N MAJOR GENERAL DEV ARVIND CHATURVEDI, AVSM, SM /THE INFANTRYARMY 
 VICE ADMIRAL AJIT KUMAR PAYYAPILLIL, AVSM, VSM (02275-W)NAVY 
 VICE ADMIRAL AJAY KUMAR SAXENA, AVSM, VSM, (50763-W)NAVY 
 VICE ADMIRAL GURTEJ SINGH PABBY, AVSM, VSM (40869-H)NAVY 
 AIR MARSHAL HEMANT SHARMA  AVSM VSM (15941), AERONAUTICAL ENGINEER (ELECTRONICS)AIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL SARDAR HARPAL SINGH AVSM VM (16071) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL BALAKRISHNAN SURESH AVSM VM (16206) / FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL RAGHUNATH NAMBIAR AVSM VM & BAR (16378) / FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL PANDURANG NARAYAN PRADHAN AVSM (16403) / FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL HEMANT NARAYAN BHAGWAT AVSM VM (16423)/ADMINISTRATION (RETIRED)AIR FORCE 
UTTAM YUDH SEVA MEDAL 
1.IC-39929H LIEUTENANT GENERAL SARANJEET SINGH, YSM/THE INFANTRY / HEADQUARTERS 16 CORPSARMY 
2.IC-40022F LIEUTENANT GENERAL ANIL KUMAR BHATT, AVSM, SM, VSM / THE INFANTRY / HEADQUARTERS 15 CORPSARMY 
3.IC-40235P LIEUTENANT GENERAL GOPAL R, AVSM, SM, INFANTRYARMY 
ATI VISHISHT SEVA MEDAL 
 IC-38528F LIEUTENANT GENERAL KAPIL KUMARAGGARWAL, SM, VSMTHE CORPS OF ELECTRONICS AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-38694P LIEUTENANT GENERAL PARAMJIT SINGH, VSMTHE CORPS OF ELECTRONICS AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-39117P LIEUTENANT GENERAL B S SAHRAWAT, SMTHE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-39437K LIEUTENANT GENERAL SHASHANK TARAKANT UPASANI, SM, VSM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-39464H LIEUTENANT GENERAL M H THAKUR, VSM, INFARMY 
 IC-39501W LIEUTENANT GENERAL ANANT PRASAD SINGH / THE ARMY AIR DEFENCEARMY 
 IC-39874K LIEUTENANT GENERAL TARANJIT SINGH, VSM** / THE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-39956M LIEUTENANT GENERAL GURPAL SINGH SANGHA, SM, VSM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-39996N LIEUTENANT GENERAL RAJEEV SABHERWAL, VSM / THE CORPS OF SIGNALSARMY 
 IC-40007M LIEUTENANT GENERAL YENDURU VENKATA KRISHNA MOHAN, SM, VSM, THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-40025P LIEUTENANT GENERAL GIRI RAJ SINGH, SM,THE ARMY ORDNANCE CORPSARMY 
 IC-40299A LIEUTENANT GENERAL SANJAY VERMA, VSM**, / THE CORPS OF ELECTRONICS AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-40393K LIEUTENANT GENERAL JAGDEEP KUMAR SHARMA / THE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-41461Y LIEUTENANT GENERAL YOGENDRA DIMRI, VSM / THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-41465P LIEUTENANT GENERAL AJAI SINGH, THE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-41471H LIEUTENANT GENERAL SURENDAR KUMAR PRASHAR, VSM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 MR-04262N LIEUTENANT GENERAL UMESH KUMAR SHARMA / THE ARMY MEDEICAL CORPSARMY 
 MR-04434X LIEUTENANT GENERAL RAJAN SINGH GREWAL, VSM / THE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 IC-39864AMAJOR GENRAL VIKRAM DEV DOGRA, THE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-39909P MAJOR GENERAL PARAMJIT SINGH SANDHU, VSM(RETD) / THE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-40133Y MAJOR GENERAL SANJAY CHRISTOPHER MESTON,SM, VSM (RETD) / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-40982A MAJOR GENERAL GURDARSHAN SINGH AUL, THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-41154F MAJOR GENERAL ALOK RAJ, THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-41464M MAJOR GENERAL TEJPAL SINGH RAWAT, VSM** / THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-41521H MAJOR GENERAL HARSHA GUPTA,YSM,VSMTHE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-41858L MAJOR GENERAL CODANDAPOOVAIAHCARIAPPA, SM, VSM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-41912N MAJOR GENERAL TARUN KUMAR CHAWLA, THE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-42753N MAJOR GENERAL CHANNIRA BANSIPONNAPPA, VSM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-42491H MAJOR GENERAL CHANDI PRASAD SANGRA, YSM, THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-42833L MAJOR GENERAL GAJINDER SINGH, THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-43021K MAJOR GENERAL GULAB SINGH RAWAT, YSM, SM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-43756N BRIGADIER SANJEEV LANGEH, SM, THE JAMMU & KASHMIR RIFLESARMY 
 VADM SUNIL ANAND, NM (02585-Z)NAVY 
 VICE ADMIRAL BADHWARVINAY (02437N)NAVY 
 REAR ADMIRAL SANDEEP NAITHANI, VSM (50884-W)NAVY 
 REAR ADMIRAL RAVINDRA JAYANTNADKARNI, VSM (02602-N)NAVY 
 REAR ADMIRAL KAPIL MOHAN DHIR, VSM (02785-B)NAVY 
 REAR ADMIRAL MAKARAND ARVIND HAMPIHOLI, NM (02859-Y)NAVY 
 REAR ADMIRAL DINESH KUMAR TRIPATHI. NM (02904-Z)NAVY 
 AIR MARSHAL RAJESH KUMAR VM (16770) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL AMIT TIWARI, VM (16806) FLYING PILOTAIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL AMIT DEV VSM (16972) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR MARSHAL MANNEPALLI BALADITYA VSM (17230) LOGISTICSAIR FORCE 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL ANIL KUMAR GUPTA VSM (16942) AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (MECHANICAL)AIR FORCE 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL SOUMITRA KUMAR DEY VSM (17030)ADMINISTRATIONAIR FORCE 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL MAHENDRA VIKRAM SINGH (17272) MEDICALAIR FORCE 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL PIJUSH MUKHERJEE VSM (17671), AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (ELECTRONICS)AIR FORCE 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL AMAR PREET SINGH (17695) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE DHANANJAY VASANT KHOT VM (19516) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE MANU CHAUDHARY, VM (19896) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE GEORGE THOMAS VM (20118) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
YUDH SEVA MEDAL**  86
 IC-42794XMAJOR GENERAL MV SUCHINDRA KUMAR, YSM, VSM / THE INFANTRYARMY 
YUDH SEVA MEDAL 
 IC-42475L MAJOR GENERAL SAVNEET SINGH, SM, VSM,THE INFANTRY / HEADQUARTER 3 INFANTRY DIVISIONARMY 
 IC-46723N BRIGADIER HARBIR SINGH, SM,THE SIKH LIGHT INFANTRY REGIMENT / HEADQUARTER 12 SECTOR RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-49911A BRIGADIER PRASANNA KISHORE MISHRA, SMJAMMU AND KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRY / HEADQUARTER 104 INFANTRY BRIGADEARMY 
 IC-49939A BRIGADIER VIKRAM SINGH SEKHONTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES / HEADQUARTER 10 INFANTRY BRIGADEARMY 
 IC-50034K BRIGADIER VINOD KUMAR NAMBIAR, SMTHE PARACHUTE REGIMENT / HEADQUARTER 161 INFANTRY BRIGADEARMY 
 IC-50306Y BRIGADIER ARVIND CHAUHAN1ST GORKHA RIFLES / HEADQUARTER 28 INFANTRY BRIGADEARMY 
 IC-60800H COLONEL NEERAJ PANDEYTHE ASSAM REGIMENT / 42ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-61359X COLONEL DHARMENDRA SINGH NEGITHE RAJPUTANA RIFLES / 44TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-64976L COLONEL H SABARINATH, 2ND BATTALION THE 4TH GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
BAR TO VISHISHT SEVA MEDAL 
 IC-41235F BRIGADIER SANJEEV SAINI, VSM (RETD)3RD GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-51574P COLONEL DIGVIJAY SINGH BASERA, VSM5 GORKHA RIFLES (FRONTIER FORCES)ARMY 
VISHISHT SEVA MEDAL 
 IC-38718N MAJOR GENERAL BIRAJ KUMAR GUHA (RETD), THE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-39888KMAJOR GENERAL ASHWINI SHARMA , THE CORPS OF ELECTRONICS AND MECHANICALENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-40787HMAJOR GENERAL RAJU K SUBRAMANI, THE CORPS OF ELECTRONICS AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-41511Y MAJOR GENERAL MOHAN JEET SINGH SYALI, THE CORPS OF ELECTRONICS AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC–41887AMAJOR GENERALPRABODH SHARAN RANA, THE CORPS OF SIGNALSARMY 
 IC-42000F MAJOR GENERAL SANJAY GUPTA THE INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-42165AMAJORGENERALASHOK KUMAR, THE ARMY AIR DEFENCE CORPSARMY 
 IC-42275P MAJOR GENERAL SANDEEP SINGH, THE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-42294A MAJOR GENERAL SAHAILJANANDJHATHE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-42313A MAJOR GENERAL NUDURUPATI DURGA PRASAD / THE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-43771H MAJOR GENERAL S MOHAN, THE ARMY AIR DEFENCEARMY 
 IC-43684P MAJOR GENERAL JAGDISH BALIRAM CHAUDHARI, SM / THE BRIGADE OF THE GUARDSARMY 
 NR-16957HMAJOR GENERAL ANNAKUTTY BABU, THE MILITARY NURSING SERVICESARMY 
 IC-41481M BRIGADIER TARUNDEEP KUMAR, VSM, ARMD (RETD) / THE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-42404K BRIGADIER JAI SINGH, SM(RETD), THE GRENADIERSARMY 
 IC-42610N BRIGADIER JASPAL SINGH MAKOL (RETD)9TH BATTALION THEGORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-42779H BRIGADIER YOGESH KAPOOR, THE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-43254L BRIGADIER SANDEEP SINGH KAHLON, THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-43914X BRIGADIER RAJIV KUMAR MAHNA , YSM, SMTHE KUMAON REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-44038K BRIGADIER HARIHARAN DHARMARAJAN, SM** / THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-44065N BRIGADIER MANJINDER SINGH, YSMTHE MADRAS REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-44509M BRIGADIER SUYASH SHARMATHE CORPS OF SIGNALSARMY 
 IC-44552N BRIGADIER RAGHU SRINIVASANTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-44603W BRIGADIER VIVEK KASHYAPTHE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-45985X BRIGADIER NITIN KUMAR SHARMATHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-47076L BRIGADIER RAKESH KAPOORTHE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-47960K BRIGADIER DHIRAJ MOHANTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-48081H BRIGADIER RAJIV KUMARTHE CORPS OF ELECTRONICS AND MECHNICAL ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-49417K BRIGADIER PRAVEEN CHHABRATHE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-49459W BRIGADIER SANJIV RANJAN SHARMA, SMTHE JAMMU & KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-50304N BRIGADIER RANJAN MALLIK, SMTHE RAJPUTANA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-50798HBRIGADIER BHUPESH HADA, SCTHE PARACHUTE REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-50829X BRIGADIER ARUN CGTHE KUMAON REGIMENTARMY 
 MR-04905A BRIGADIER SOUMYESH NATH BHADURITHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 MR-05134H BRIGADIER SURINDER SINGH BHATIATHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 MR-05959N BRIGADIER BHUPENDRA NATH KAPURTHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 IC-46718H COLONEL MANOJ KAUSHIKJUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL’S DEPARTMENTARMY 
 IC-50702P COLONEL PUNEET AHUJA, SMTHE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-51601N COLONEL UTTTAM HUKKUTHE ARMY AVIATION CORPSARMY 
 IC-52038Y COLONEL PUNEET SRIVASTAVATHE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-52055Y COLONEL SIMERJEET SINGHTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-52929F COLONEL ASHISH RANJANTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-53113X COLONEL AMARESH GUNJAN, SMTHE GARHWAL RIFLESARMY 
 IC-53217L COLONEL GAURAV SANANTHE ARMY AIR DEFENCEARMY 
 IC-53601M COLONEL YUDHVIR SINGH SEKHONTHE BIHAR REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-53708F COLONEL SANJAY GTHE MADRAS REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-54434N COLONEL RAVI MADHOKTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-56151L COLONEL AJEEN KUMAR KTHE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL DEPARTMENTARMY 
 IC-56841P COLONEL MOHAMMAD SHOAIB KHAN, SMTHE RAJPUTANA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-56908H COLONEL PARVINDER SINGH SIDHUCORPS OF SIGNALSARMY 
 IC-57161F COLONEL GURDEEP SINGH, SMTHE ARMY AVIATIONARMY 
 IC-57564F COLONEL MANJEET SINGH KOONERTHE ASSAM REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-57753L COLONEL TAPAN JYOTINDRA VAISHNAVTHE PUNJAB REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-59219M COLONEL SUMIT SHERON,SMTHE INTELLIGENCE CORPSARMY 
 IC-59682N COLONEL RAVI RATHORETHE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-60128P COLONEL LALIT KUMAR JAINTHE ARMY AVIATION CORPSARMY 
 IC-60718N COLONEL ASHISH CHOPRA1/1 GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-60834W COLONEL HEMANT SAHNITHE RAJPUTANA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-61465W COLONEL DEEPENDRA JASROTIA3RD BATTALION THE 4THGORKHA RIFLES (CHINDITS)ARMY 
 IC-65055X COLONEL JOGINDER PAL SINGHTHE KUMAON REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-65256ACOLONELAJAY THAKUR10TH JAMMU & KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRYARMY 
 MR-06623ACOLONELGAURAV KUMARTHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 MR-07603Y RANK COLONEL HAKAM SINGHTHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 DR-10471F      COLONEL MANINDER HUNDALTHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 IC-56048A       LIEUTENANT COLONEL R VAMSI MOHANTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-56768F LIEUTENANT COLONEL PREET BALJIT SINGH SRA / THE ARMY AVIATION CORPSARMY 
 IC-67976W MAJOR HEMAND RAJ R28, MADRASARMY 
 MR-08564X MAJOR SANDEEP KUMARTHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 IC-80669X CAPTAIN MOHAMMAD NAVAID20TH BATTALION THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLESARMY 
 JC-470660H SUBEDAR MAJOR SULTAN SINGH SHEKHAWAT / THE RAJPUTANA RIFLESARMY 
 JC-521355F SUBEDAR MAJOR RANDHIR SINGHTHE DOGRA REGIMENTARMY 
 JC-617671X SUBEDAR MAJOR THAKUR PRASAD POUDEL5/5 GORKHA RIFLES (FRONTIER FORCE)ARMY 
 JC-623828H SUBEDAR MAJOR RESHAM BAHADUR GURUNG,  7/8 GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 JC-826245P SUBEDAR MAJOR B KARUNAKANANTHE ARMY PHYSICAL TRAINING CORPSARMY 
 REAR ADMIRAL SANJAY MISRA (02767-N)NAVY 
 REAR ADMIRAL MOHIT GUPTA (03038-B)NAVY 
 REAR ADMIRAL VISHWANATHANR (50947-N)NAVY 
 COMMODORE JANAK BEVLI (03748-T)NAVY 
 COMMODORE DINESH SINGH (03348-H)NAVY 
 COMMODORE KALYANA VENKATRAMAN (03841-B)NAVY 
 COMMODORE MANISH MISRA (03696-Z)NAVY 
 COMMODORE DEEPAK KUMAR(03392-H)NAVY 
 COMMODORE ASHUTOSH RIDHORKAR (03664-A)NAVY 
 COMMODORE SAI VENKAT RAMAN (03565-A)NAVY 
 COMMODORE SANJEEV DUREJA (41332-K)NAVY 
 COMMODORE INDRAJIT DASGUPTA (51105-Y)NAVY 
 CAPTAIN RAVI KUMAR DHINGRA (03852-B)NAVY 
 CAPTAIN SUSHEEL MENON (03939A)NAVY 
 SURGCAPTAIN GORUR KRISHNAMURTHY SHREERAM (75622-T)NAVY 
 SATYANARAYAN, MCPO I (GW), 164116-TNAVY 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL AVINASH GOPAL KSHIRSAGAR (17277) / AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (MECHANICAL)AIR FORCE 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL KALVAKUNTLA SHEKHAR REDDY (17774) LOGISTICSAIR FORCE 
 AIR VICE MARSHAL ARUN BHASKAR GUPTA (18121) FLYING PILOTAIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE SANJEEVA SINHA (17626)AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (MECHANICAL)AIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE MAHESH BHASKAR ASERKAR (19540) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE RAJESH VAIDYA (18251) MEDICAAIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE ANUPAM AGARWAL (18700) MEDICAL AIR FORCE 
 AIR COMMODORE LALIT KUMAR CHAWLA VM (19871) FLYING PILOTAIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN RAJIVE SHARMA (17493) ADMINISTRATIONAIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN (TS) MANISH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA (19173) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN DEVENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT (20230)AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (MECHANICAL)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN DEBAJYOTI BORAH (22840)AERONAUTICAL ENGINEER (ELECTRONICS)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN (TS) SUBRATO KUMAR  NATH (21315)ADMINISTRATION/ AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERAIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN VARADHARAJAN RAJAGOPALAN(21582) FLYING (NAVIGATOR)           AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN SHANKAR BEVINMARAD ARUNKUMAR (21584)  / FLYING (NAVIGATOR)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN ARUN MITTU (21910) EDUCATION AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN  MANISH  SABHARWAL (22122) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN ANISH AGGARWAL (22915) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN KAMLESH SINGH (23014)ADMINISTRATION/ FIGHTER CONTROLLERAIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN ARVIND THAKUR (23078)AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (MECHANICAL)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN RAMAN KEWAL BHATLA (23686)AERONAUTICAL ENGINEER (ELECTRONICS)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN YESHPAL SINGH NEGI VM(23735) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN BARADA PRASAD SABUT (23888)
AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (ELECTRONICS)
AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN BANGALORE SATYAJI VIJAY RAO (23889) AERONAUTICAL / ENGINEERING (ELECTRONICS)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN GAURAV MANI TRIPATHI (23976) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN RISHABH MITTAL (25077) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 WING COMMANDER S AKHETO JAKHALU (26309-L) ADMINISTRATIONAIR FORCE 
 662625 MASTER WARRANT OFFICER K SURANDRAN FLIGHT ENGINEERAIR FORCE 
 GO-1890X, ADGBR SUBODH KUMAR TRIPATHI, HQ DGBRBRO 
 GO-1968X, CE (CIV) K P PURUSHOTHAMAN, HQ CE (P) VARTAKBRO 
BAR TO SENA MEDAL (GALLANTRY) 
1.IC-55461K COLONEL DHANANJAY M BHOSALE, SENA MEDAL, VISHISTH SEVA MEDALARMY AVIATION CORPS / 203 ARMY AVIATION SQUADRON (UTILITY HELICOPTER)ARMY 
2.IC-63403P LIEUTENANT COLONEL BHEEMAIAH PS, SM10TH BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
3.IC-68016K MAJOR JITENDRA SINGH MEHTA, SENA MEDAL / THE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY / 13TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
4.IC-73258W MAJOR MALAY BAIDYA, SENA MEDALTHE KUMAON REGIMENT / 13THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
5.IC-76546N MAJOR DAVINDER PAL SINGH, SENA MEDAL, THE MAHAR REGIMENT / 1ST BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
6.IC-77058X MAJOR GIRISH SHARMA, SENA MEDALCORPS OF ELECTRONICS & MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, 9THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
SENA MEDAL (GALLANTRY) 
 IC-60900N LIEUTENANT COLONEL RAVINDRA KUMARARMY AVIATION CORPS / 203 ARMY AVIATION SQUADRON (UTILITY HELICOPTER)ARMY 
 IC-63941H LIEUTENANT COLONEL SANJEEV KUMAR SINGH, THE RAJPUT REGIMENT / 44TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-64585A LIEUTENANT COLONEL AJAY SINGH KUSHWAH, 3 RASHTRIYA RIFLES BATTALION (JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES)ARMY 
 IC-66239H LIEUTENANT COLONEL BHARTENDU RAWAT20TH BATTALION THE JAT REGIMENT  ARMY 
 IC-66258N LIEUTENANT COLONEL JAIPAL SINGHTHE RAJPUTANA RIFLES / 9TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-69119P MAJOR ABHISHEK PHOGATCORPS OF ENGINEERS / 12 SECTOR RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-71589Y MAJOR GAJENDER DAGAR10th  BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 IC-71608Y MAJOR HARPRIT SINGHTHE PUNJAB REGIMENT / 22 RASHTRIYA RIFLES (PUNJAB)ARMY 
 IC-72390K MAJOR PRAVIN KUMARTHE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 IC-72542A MAJOR AMIT SAHTHE GARHWAL RIFLES / 14TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-72587A MAJOR PARITOSH SINGH KANWAL37 ASSAM RIFLESARMY 
 IC-72672H MAJOR JADHAV DHIRAJ BHARATTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / 44TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-72817H MAJOR SANDEEP KURUP4TH BATTALION THE MADRAS REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-74824X MAJOR KRISHNA DUTT TIWARI28 RASHTRIYA RIFLES BATTALION (JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES)ARMY 
 IC-75030Y MAJOR RANANJAY SINGH CHAUHANOF 9 RASHTRIYA RIFLES BATTALION (RAJPUTANA RIFLES)ARMY 
 IC-75558W MAJOR RITESH SANGWAN14 RASHTRIYA RIFLES (GARHWAL RIFLES)ARMY 
 IC-76020F MAJOR ROHIT SHUKLA, SHAURYA CHAKRA44 RASHTRIYA RIFLES (RAJPUT)ARMY 
 IC-76114Y MAJOR SAMEER SINGHTHE RETIMENT OF ARTILLERY / 41STBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-761810F MAJOR NITISH TYAGITHE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 MAJOR NIRAJ KUMARBATTALION THE GORKHA RIFLES / 15TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-76292F MAJOR VIKAS SEHRAWATTHE ARMOURED CORPS / 14TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-76379H MAJOR SHAKTI SINGHTHE MECHANISED INFANTRY / 42ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-76615Y MAJOR SANJEEV RANTA21 RASHTRIYA RIFLES (GUARDS)ARMY 
 IC-76633F MAJOR VIKAS KUMARTHE PUNJAB REGIMENT / 22NDBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-76672A MAJOR GAURAV SINGH RAWATTHE PARACHUTE REGIMENT / 31STBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-76799H MAJOR VARUN GAURTHE ARMOURED CORPS / 22NDBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-77054F MAJOR DILIP UNNIELECTRONICS AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERS CROPSFIRST BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-77179Y MAJOR SHER SINGH RANAWAT17TH BATTALION THE JAMMU AND KASHMIRLIGHT INFANTRY ARMY 
 IC-77594A MAJOR HARMEEK SINGH BAINSTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / 55THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-77782F MAJOR SHAKTI NANDAN TRIPATHY2ND BATTALION THE NAGA REGIMENTARMY 
 SS-44769X MAJOR VINISH NAIRTHE MECHANISED INFANTRY / 42ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 SS-45438H MAJOR MANISH KUMAR SINGHTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / 53RD BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 SS-46336Y MAJOR RAVI KUMARTHE BIHAR REGIMENT / 47THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-77509M CAPTAIN AMAN KUMARTHE CORPS OF SIGNALS / 42ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-78483P CAPTAIN ANIL KUMARTHE CORPS OF SIGNALS / 34THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-78870K CAPTAIN MD SAHWAJ ALAM42 RASHTRIYA RIFLES BATTALION (ASSAM)ARMY 
 IC-82127M CAPTAIN AKHIL RADHAKRISHNAN6TH BATTALION THE GARHWAL RIFLESARMY 
 SS-45276H CAPTAIN PARVINDER DAGARTHE MECHANISED INFANTRY / 42ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 SS-48558M CAPTAIN DIGVIJAY SINGH5TH BATTALION THE GARHWAL RIFLESARMY 
 IC-81713H LIEUTENANT RAMESH CHANDER PANDEY3RD BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 JC-310104N SUBEDAR BIKRANT TETETHE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / 44THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 JC-480832A SUBEDAR RAVINDER KUMARTHE RAJPUT REGIMENT / 44THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 JC-480975A SUBEDAR RAM NIWAS GURJARTHE RAJPUT REGIMENT / 44TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 JC-594270N SUBEDAR MOHD YAQOOB KHANTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRY / 41ST BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 JC-612928N SUBEDAR SUNIL KUMAR4TH BATTALION THE 4TH GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 JC-414144F NAIB SUBEDAR RAJENDRA PRASADFIRST BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 JC-414383W NAIB SUBEDAR RAJPAL DHAYAL10TH BATTALINO THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 JC-414394H NAIB SUBEDAR GIRISH CHANDRA12TH BATALLION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 JC-441392F NAIB SUBEDAR HAREESH KUMAR PK4TH BATTALION THE MADRAS REGIMENTARMY 
 JC-571619N NAIB SUBEDAR SUNDER PAL SINGHTHE MAHAR REGIMENT / 30THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 5348418N COMPANY HAVILDAR MAJOR ANIL THAPA4TH BATTALION THE 4TH GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 4081530L HAVILDAR NAGENDRA SINGH RAWAT6TH BATTALION THE GARHWAL RIFLESARMY 
 9104223X HAVILDAR RIYAZ AHMAD BHAT, SHAURYA CHAKRA, 162 INFANTRY BATTALION (TERRITORIAL ARMY) JAMMU AND KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRY / 42ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 13622956N HAVILDAR SHAMSHER SINGH9TH BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 13623439H HAVILDAR PUSHPENDRA SINGH,3RD BATTALION THEPARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 13625453N HAVILDAR MANISH KUMAR9TH BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 13756894A HAVILDAR JORABAR SINGH160 INFANTRY BATTALION (TERRITORIAL ARMY) (HOME & HEARTH) / JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES(POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 2807995L NAIK THORAT KIRAN POPATRAO4TH BATTALION THE MARATHA LIGHT INFANTRY(POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 3001182N NAIK SURESH SINGHTHE RAJPUT REGIMENT / 44TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 3004619F NAIK PARI MAL SINGHTHE REGIMENT REGIMENT / 44TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 300590F NAIK SUNIL KUMARTHE RAJPUT REGIMENT / 44THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 4083169K NAIK DEVENDRA PRASADTHE GARHWAL RIFLES / 14TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 NUMBER 4200208L NAIK NARESH CHANDRA BHATT9TH BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 4280232M NAIK RANJIT KHALKHO5TH BATTALION THE BIHAR REGIMENT(POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 4573316W NAIK RAJESH KUMARTHE MAHAR REGIMENT / FIRST BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 4576607F NAIK DEV DATT PAITOLA1 RASHTRIYA RIFLES BATTALION (MAHAR)ARMY 
 5049952Y NAIK DEEPAK THAPA14TH GORKHA RIFLES / 15TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 5350960H NAIK YAM BAHADUR BUDHA4TH BATTALION THE 4TH GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 9107622M NAIK DALJEET SINGH10TH BATTALION THE JAMMU AND KASHMIR LIGHT INFANTRYARMY 
 12954742N NAIK MOHD ASHRAF RATHER160 INFANTRY BATTALION (TERRITORIAL ARMY) (HOME & HEARTH) JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES / 41ST BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLES (POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 13624265A NAIK DINESH KUMAR HRANGKHAWL3RD BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 13626834F NAIK INDERVESHFIRST BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES)ARMY 
 13768609H NAIK RAMESH KUMARTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES / 3RD BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 15334818M NAIK M SADIKTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / FIRST BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 16020152L NAIK SHIKHER CHAUDHARYTHE RAJPUTANA RIFLES/ 9THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 3005851Y LANCE NAIK RAJINDER KUMARTHE RAJPUT REGIMENT / 44THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 16014609L LANCE NAIK DHARMENDRA SINGH BHADORIYA, THE RAJPUTANA RIFLES / 9THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 16016834Y LANCE NAIK SATENDRA SINGHTHE RAJPUTANA RIFLES / 9THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 2815324W SEPOY WAKCHAURE MAYUR BHAGWANTHE MARATHA LIGHT INFANTRY / 41STBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 3008898P SEPOY SUNIT KUMAR3RD BATTALION THE RAJPUT REGIMENTARMY 
 3206908Y SEPOY SUNIL KUMAR20TH BATTALION THE JAT REGIMENT  ARMY 
 3210590K SEPOY SANDEEP KUMAR20TH BATTALION THE JAT REGIMENT  ARMY 
 4374793A SEPOY GHUKA K ZHIMOTHE ASSAM REGIMENT / 42ND BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 4485875X SEPOY MANDEEP SINGH9TH BATTALION THE SIKH LIGHT INFANTRY(POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 15190010K SEPOY THIRUMALAI KTHE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY / 19THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 20004133H SEPOY RAMAN KUMARTHE DOGRA REGIMENT / 62NDBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLES(POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 5050918L RIFLEMAN DEV BAHADUR ROKAYA14TH BATTALION THE GORKHA RIFLES / 15THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 9109177X RIFLEMAN NARESH KUMAR17TH BATTALION THE JAMMU AND KASHMIRLIGHT INFANTRY ARMY 
 9116150H RIFLEMAN SALEEM MOHD17TH BATTALION THE JAMMU AND KASHMIRLIGHT INFANTRY ARMY 
 13768969Y RIFLEMAN RAVI SINGHTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES / 3RDBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 13777325A RIFLEMAN RAHUL KUMARTHE JAMMU AND KASHMIR RIFLES/ 28TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 G/5002910F WAHENGBAM KULLA MEITEI16THBATTALION THE ASSAM RIFLESARMY 
 G/5004180A T WONGTOKIU16THBATTALION THE ASSAM RIFLESARMY 
 15625017H GUARDSMAN NERSWN BASUMATARYBRIGADE OF THE GUARDS / 21ST BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 15625271M GUARDSMAN NITUL DASBRIGADE OF THE GUARDS / 21STBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 15197040K GUNNER KISHOR KUMAR MUNNATHE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY / 278THFIELD REGIMENT(POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 15218926X GUNNER MANDIP SINGHTHE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERY / 30THBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 4091174K PARATROOPER ASHUTOSH SINGHTHE GARHWAL RIFLES / 4 VIKAS (SPECIAL GROUP)ARMY 
 13629227N PARATROOPER GURWINDER SINGHTHE PARACHUTE REGIMENT / 31STBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 13629786X PARATROOPER MUKUT BIHARI MEENA,3RDBATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENT (SPECIAL FORCES) (POSTHUMOUS)ARMY 
 16121135M SAPPER PRASHANT BAGEWADITHE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / 44TH BATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 18010719P SAPPER ATINDER PAL SINGHTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERS / 3RDBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
 15506643H SOWAR KASHETTY SAGARTHE ARMOURED CORPS / 22NDBATTALION THE RASHTRIYA RIFLESARMY 
NAO SENA MEDAL (GALLANTRY) 
1.CDR T ANUP KUMAR (04356-Z)NAVY 
2.CDR HARI GOVIND R (04387-W)NAVY 
3.CDR VIJAY VARMA (04799-F)NAVY 
4.LT CDR MANU MISHRA (06671-K) NAVY 
5.AMIT, NAI (FD), NO. 233675-FNAVY 
6.PRAMENDRA KUMAR, CPO (CD), 122271-RNAVY 
7.LT CDR SHIRISH SHIVNATH PAVALE, (06242-K)NAVY 
VAYU SENA MEDAL (GALLANTRY) 
1.WING COMMANDER BHUVANENDRAN NAIR PRASANTH(28068)ADMINISTRATIONAIR FORCE 
2.779374 SERGEANT AMIT KUMAR JHA FLIGHT GUNNERAIR FORCE 
BAR TO SENA MEDAL (DEVOTION TO DUTY) 
 IC-41228L MAJOR GENERAL ATANU KUMAR PATTANAIK, SENA MEDALTHE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-41668Y MAJOR GENERAL ASHIM KOHLI, SENA MEDAL, THE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-42542L MAJOR GENERAL MANOJ KUMAR MAGO, YSM, SM, THE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-50313P BRIGADIER MOHIT TRIVEDI, SMTHE GRENADIERS REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-60971P COL MANISH MEHROTRA, SM20TH BATTALION THE PUNJAB REGIMENTARMY 
SENA MEDAL (DEVOTION TO DUTY) 
 V-000391W LIEUTENANT GENERAL PAILOOR RAMACHANDRAN VENKATESHTHE REMOUNT VETERINARYARMY 
 DR-10359P LIEUTENANT GENERAL SANJAY MONOHAR LONDHE, THE ARMY DENTAL CORPSARMY 
 IC-39299N MAJOR GENERAL JOYDEEP BHATTITHE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-39435Y MAJOR GENERAL SANJIV BAJAJTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-39546W MAJOR GENERAL HARVIJAY SINGHTHE CORPS OF SIGNALARMY 
 IC-40699M MAJOR GENERAL KEMPARAJ SITARAM, VSMTHE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-41068W MAJOR GENERAL ANIL CHAUDHARYTHE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-41489Y MAJOR GENERAL RAJESH CHABATHE MECHANISED INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-42300H MAJOR GENERAL PN ANANTHANARAYANAN8TH GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-42390P MAJOR GENERAL MADHAVAN UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, THE CORPS OF SIGNALSARMY 
 IC-50226F BRIGADIER AJAY KUMAR SINGHTHE SIKH REGIMENT / HEADQUARTER 70 INFANTRY BRIGADEARMY 
 IC-43333A MAJOR GENERAL K NARAYANANTHE MARATHA LIGHT INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-43746K BRIGADIER ADOSH KUMARTHE REGIMENT ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-44106M BRIGADIER NITIN RAM INDURKARTHE MAHAR REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-46148X BRIGADIER MANOJ KUMAR, VSMTHE REGIMENT OF ARTILLERYARMY 
 IC-46701P BRIGADIER VAKAMULLA HARIHARANTHE GARHWAL RIFLESARMY 
 IC-47032N BRIGADIER PRATIK SHARMATHE MADRAS REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-47261Y BRIGADIER AMARDEEP SINGH AUJLA, VSMTHE RAJPUTANA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-48703Y BRIGADIER SUNIL MISHRATHE DOGRA RIFLESARMY 
 IC-48978M OM PRAKASH VAISHNAV, VSMTHE ARMY AIR DEFENCEARMY 
 IC-49636L BRIGADIER CHARANJEEV MANJU, VSMTHE DOGRA REGIMENTARMY 
 MR-05688F BRIGADIER NARENDRA KOTWAL, VSMTHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 IC-52159A COLONEL BD CHENGAPPATHE ARMOURED CORPSARMY 
 IC-52475Y COLONEL MANEESH JOSHITHE SIKH LIGHT INFANTRYARMY 
 IC-55861W COLONEL SURJEET KUMAR SINGHTHE INTELLIGENCE CORPARMY 
 IC-57459L COLONEL MANEESH KUMAR DUBEYTHE ARMY AVAIATION CORPSARMY 
 IC-61374M COLONEL MOHIT SAH3RD BATTALION THE 8TH GORKHA RIFLESARMY 
 MR-06075N COLONEL AMIT SHARMATHE ARMY MEDICAL CORPSARMY 
 IC-52619W LIEUTENANT COLONEL YOGENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-59517H LIEUTENANT COLONEL SHASHIKANT WAGHMODE, THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 IC-60622L LIEUTENANT COLONEL SAURABH AGRAWALTHE CORPS OF SIGNALSARMY 
 IC-72823W MAJOR SHIVSHANKAR DEEP S7TH BATTALION THE PARACHUTE REGIMENTARMY 
 IC-60622L LIEUTENANT COLONEL MOHD MAJID KAMAL / THE CORPS ELECTRONICS AND MECHANICAL / ENGINEERSARMY 
 JC-352438K SUBEDAR BHOSALE PANDURANG VITTHAL / THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
 15588066L SAPPER/OPERATOR EXCAVATING MACHINERY AMANDEEP SINGH THE CORPS OF ENGINEERSARMY 
NAO SENA MEDAL (DEVOTION TO DUTY) 
 REAR ADMIRAL SURESH KUMAR GREWAL, VSM (02756-N)NAVY 
 COMMODORE SUBIR MUKHERJEE, (41401-T)NAVY 
 COMMODORE SUNIL KAUSHIK (41398-K)NAVY 
 COMMODORE P A ABDUL RAHIMAN SADIQ (51229-B)NAVY 
 COMMODORE MANDAPATI MURALI MOHAN RAJU (03614-N)NAVY 
 COMMODORE SINGH JASWINDER (03504-N)NAVY 
 CAPTAIN ASHWIN ARVIND (04266-W)NAVY 
 CAPTAIN DHARMENDRASINH J REVAR (03808-B)NAVY 
 CDR ABHILASH TOMY, KC (04988-K)NAVY 
VAYU SENA MEDAL (DEVOTION TO DUTY) 
 GROUP CAPTAIN ANJAN BHADRA (20731) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN VIRENDRA SINGH MAHIDA (20981) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN UDAYAN KUMAR (25640) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN MADHAV RANGACHARI (24477) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN SHANMUGAM RAMESH (25062) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN DEBANJAN MANDAL (25066) FLYING PILOTAIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN SAMEER PRADHAN (24236) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN ARUN MAHADEVAN (25636) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN ANUBHAV TRIPATHI (25637) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN HARPREET SINGH LUTHRA (25821) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 GROUP CAPTAIN PREM ANAND (25842) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 WING COMMANDER JINNEHALLY PUTTUSWAMY RAJU (24031), FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 WING COMMANDER NITIN KUMAR MAL (25596) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 
 SQUADRON LEADER HIMADRI BISWAS (29930) FLYING (PILOT)AIR FORCE 

Besides these, seven personnel from Army and others have also been awarded ‘Mention-in-Despatches’ by the Government, which include five for ‘Operation Rakshak’, and two Awards Approved in CH&AC Meeting.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RESERVES THE ORDER ON THE BUFFER ZONE


The apex court, after hearing a lengthy argument and submission by BBMP regarding the buffer zone and its consequences, has RESERVED ITS ORDER.

BUFFER ZONE AND NGT ORDERS


The Supreme Court was hearing the appeal on the BUFFER ZONE issue and observed that the clock cannot be put back regarding NGT order on retrospective effect and however the advocate appearing for the NGO maintained that for all future constructions or in those cases, where sanctions were granted but no development done.

The hearing will be resumed on 22-01-2019.

SUPREME COURT HEARING ON BUFFER ZONE IS SCHEDULED ON 22-1-2019


The State Government and few developers and builders have approached the Apex Court against the Sustainable Development Order of the National Green Tribunal and were heard today 16-1-2019 (Part) and posted for hearing on 22-1-2019 and the builders had EXPECTED a favourable TI, but disappointed and are EXPECTING a favourable order on 22-1-2019.

Top advocates are appearing against the NGT order.

Any modification or change in the NGT order is disastrous for the environment.

POTABLE WATER IN BENGALURU & WATER POLLUTION BY ILLEGAL DYEING UNITS – SLEEPING GIANT – KSPCB


Inspite of a good rainy season, Bengaluru is facing water shortage, even, though, there is a good and uninterrupted supply of cauvery water. The situation will be acute and grim. The underground water table in many areas of Bengaluru is not worthy of human use and is contaminated. The recent NGT order on Bellanduru and Agara lakes draws a ugly feature wherein over 400 apartment complexes, (approximately 20,000 apartments with 1,00,000 citizens living) discharging over 50,00,000 lakhs to 1,00,00,000 lakhs liters of untreated domestic sewage and coupled with industrial sewage has seeped deep into the underground water table and thus the lakes are POISONED and beyond redemption. The NGT has taken a bold and strong remedial step by directing both the state government and bbmp to immediately take up appropriate remedial measures.

The cloth dyeing units, shifted from Tirupur and other areas to Bangalore south (Bommanahalli, tavarekere,madivala, sudamangara, kashmir,gurrappanapalya,hongasandra,singasandra and many other such areas are discharging highly pathogenic sewage, which might contain CYANIDE. There was the pure silk yarn and cloth dyeing units, use CYANIDE extensively in the dyeing. The discharged colour could be seen in the Drains in Tavarekere, kashmire(near KSRTC-Akkithimmanahally) Sudamanagar ( a part), Garvebavipalya and have since shifted their illegal activities to in and around kengeri and ramanagara villages.

The KSPCB has not woken up and has not initiated any strict and severe action to contain the same, resulting in Highly contaminated, untreated and polluted water being discharged by these illegal dyeing units.

Active citizen role is required to contain this illegal activities.

2 BHK APARTMENT at house of hiranandani-devanahalli is for sale


Ready  to move in apartment with all facilities, on Devanahalli road, in the house of hiranandani is for sale.

Reasonable price.

RERA Approved Agency.

Contact:

Genuine Buyers with sufficient financial backing.  Brokers and Agents, Please ignore.

ecopackindia@gmail.com

9342816151

ANOTHER LAND SCAM IN AND AROUND BANGALORE – TV REPORT


A TV News Channel has aired a program on a developer, who had advertised all over internet and TV Channels failed to deliver the possession of the property and unable to refund the monies collected.  The investors/buyers have lodged police complaint against the builder and there may be a solution, if the builder has any money left with him to repay.

Most of the projects announced were at a throwaway prices and the location was too far and not accessible, even then, the buyers deposited their monies and landed up in this situation.

JOY ICE CREAM – PROPERTY – OFFICIALS WHO HAD RECOMMENDED THIS PROCESS ARE UNDER LOK AYUKTA SCRUTINY – A NEWS REPORT


The state government has handed a departmental enquiry to the Lokayukta against three officials, for allegedly favouring the real estate major, Prestige Estates Projects Limited. The case is regarding the allotment of land to Joy Ice Cream Pvt Ltd by…

Read more at: https://www.deccanherald.com/city/lokayukta-enquiry-joy-ice-705295.html