Order
1. These proceedings have arisen pursuant to permission having been granted by the Attorney General under Rule 3(C) of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975.
2. The case of the petitioner was that during the course of the proceedings in Writ Petition (C) No. 967 of 1989, a criminal contempt was committed by the officers of the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board who produced before this Court a document which purported to be a report by Neeri but which document was in fact tampered and fabricated in material respect and it is on this document that the Court relied upon for pronouncing the judgment on 13-2-1996 (1996) 3 SCC 212.
3. During the course of the hearing of this petition an affidavit has been filed by the acting Director of Neeri. It will be seen that the main application in the contempt petition alleging fabrication was directed against the officials of the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board. There is no application (sic allegation) in the contempt petition against Neeri or any of its officers.
4. In the aforesaid affidavit of Shri S.N Kaul, acting Director, Neeri, it has been explained that a draft report consisting of 180 pages was prepared by Neeri. This draft report was submitted to the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board, which was the sponsoring agency, and it is on this draft report that discussion took place which resulted in the final report being prepared by Neeri which was submitted to the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board on 16-5-1994. Along with this affidavit, copy of the draft report consisting of 180 pages and copy of the final report consisting of 234 pages have been filed.
5. The original record of Writ Petition No. 967 of 1989 shows that the Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board had filed a report of Neeri in this Court on 6-1-1996. It is on this report that reliance was placed by the Court while disposing of the said writ petition.
6. If the report which was submitted in this Court by the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board was different from the final report which was submitted by Neeri to the said Board, then it may have been possible to contend that the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board and its officers were guilty of fabrication. The affidavit of Shri S.N Kaul, acting Director of Neeri clearly shows that what was filed in this Court was the copy of the final report dated 16-5-1994 which had been prepared by Neeri. In other words, Neeri itself states that the report which was filed in this Court by the Board was copy of the final report and that there was no fabrication made therein by the Board or any of its officials.
7. It appears that two scientists appointed by the petitioner had inspected a report in the office of Neeri and then observed that there has been a fabrication carried out by the Pollution Control Board. From what has been stated hereinabove, the charge of fabrication is clearly unfounded. It is possible that these two scientists may have seen the draft report which would be with Neeri but the original report when prepared would be one which was, ultimately, submitted to the sponsoring agency, namely, the Rajasthan Pollution Control Board and it is only a copy of the same which could have been retained by Neeri. Be that as it may, it is clear that what has been filed in this Court as being the final report of Neeri was the copy of the final report which was received by it. There is no basis for contending that any of the respondents have been guilty of fabrication. The whole application to our mind is without any merit.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, the contempt petition is dismissed with costs computed at Rs 10,000. The contempt notice is discharged.