Supreme Court Allows Crematorium to Continue Operations: South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. Federation of Residents Welfare Association, Vasant Kunj (21 October 2022)

Date of the Judgment: 21 October 2022

Citation: Civil Appeal No. 7614 of 2022

Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and M.M. Sundresh, J.

Can a long-established crematorium be shut down because residential areas developed nearby? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case concerning a cremation ground in Masoodpur, New Delhi. The core issue was whether the South Delhi Municipal Corporation should be compelled to relocate a crematorium that had been in use for over a century, simply because residential colonies were later built in the vicinity. The Supreme Court bench of Justices M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh delivered the judgment, with Justice M.R. Shah authoring the opinion.

Case Background

The dispute revolves around a cremation ground in Masoodpur, New Delhi, which has been in use for over 100 years, primarily serving the residents of Masoodpur village. In 1995, the Residents Welfare Association of Vasant Kunj filed a writ petition before the High Court of Delhi, seeking the closure of the cremation ground. The association argued that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had already provided an alternative cremation ground in the same area. The High Court, noting a communication from the DDA to close the Masoodpur cremation ground and shift it to Kishangarh, directed the Municipal Corporation to take a decision under Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957.

Following the High Court’s order on 03 December 2003, the Municipal Corporation’s Standing Committee decided not to close the Masoodpur crematorium, stating it was not in the public interest and had been used by the village for a long time. Subsequently, the Municipal Corporation filed an application to modify the 2003 order, which the High Court dismissed. This led to the present appeal by the Municipal Corporation.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

The High Court of Delhi initially directed the Municipal Corporation to decide on the matter of the Masoodpur crematorium under Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. The Standing Committee, after considering the matter, decided against closing the crematorium. The Municipal Corporation then sought a modification of the High Court’s earlier order, which was rejected, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

Legal Framework

The case primarily revolves around the interpretation of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. Key provisions include:

• Section 42(f) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957: This section outlines the obligatory duties of the Municipal Corporation, which include making provisions for the regulation of places for the disposal of the dead. “it is the duty cast upon the Municipal Corporation to make provision for regulation of places for the disposal of dead.”
• Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957: This section deals with the power of the Municipal Corporation to close burning and burial grounds. It states that a burning or burial ground can be closed with the previous sanction of the Standing Committee if it is deemed offensive or dangerous to the health of the neighborhood. “…any burning or burial ground has become offensive, or dangerous to the health of the persons residing at neighbourhood, the burning and burial ground can be ordered to be closed with the previous sanction of the Standing Committee.”

Arguments

Arguments by the Municipal Corporation:

• The Municipal Corporation argued that the Standing Committee had taken a conscious decision not to close the crematorium at Masoodpur Village, exercising its powers under Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957.
• They contended that the crematorium had been in use long before the residential society at Vasant Kunj came into existence and that it was not in the public interest to close it.
• The Municipal Corporation emphasized that under Section 42 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, it is their duty to regulate places for the disposal of the dead.
• They argued that the subsequent establishment of residential colonies should not be a reason to close a long-used crematorium.

Arguments by the Federation of Residents Welfare Association, Vasant Kunj:

• The Residents Welfare Association argued that the crematorium was too close to the residential complexes of Vasant Kunj and that it was not in the interest of the residents to continue its operation.
• They submitted that the DDA had already provided an alternative crematorium at Kishangarh, which is only seven kilometers away, and that the Masoodpur crematorium should be shifted there.
• They contended that the High Court’s initial direction to shift the crematorium should not be modified.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame issues in a separate section but the core issue was:

1. Whether the High Court was correct in not modifying its earlier order directing the shifting of the crematorium at Village Masoodpur to Kishangarh, despite the Standing Committee of the Municipal Corporation deciding not to close the crematorium.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

The following table demonstrates as to how the Court decided the issues

Authorities

The Supreme Court considered the following legal provisions:

• Section 42(f) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957: This section mandates the Municipal Corporation to make provisions for regulating places for the disposal of the dead.
• Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957: This section empowers the Municipal Corporation to close burning or burial grounds if they are deemed offensive or dangerous to health, with the prior sanction of the Standing Committee.

The Court did not cite any other authorities.

Judgment

How each authority was viewed by the Court:

• The Court held that the decision of the Standing Committee under Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957* was valid and should not have been interfered with by the High Court.
• The Court also took note of the obligatory function of the Municipal Corporation under Section 42(f) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957* to make provisions for the disposal of the dead.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the fact that the crematorium at Masoodpur had been in operation for over a century, predating the establishment of residential colonies in Vasant Kunj. The Court emphasized that the Standing Committee of the Municipal Corporation had taken a conscious decision not to close the crematorium, which was a valid exercise of its powers under Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. The Court also highlighted the obligatory duty of the Municipal Corporation under Section 42(f) of the Act to provide for the disposal of the dead. The Court noted that the crematorium was not found to be offensive or dangerous to the health of the neighborhood, which is a prerequisite for its closure under Section 391 of the Act.

Logical Reasoning:

The Supreme Court considered the historical context, the decision of the Municipal Corporation’s Standing Committee, and the lack of evidence that the crematorium was a health hazard. The court rejected the argument that the crematorium should be shifted simply because residential areas were developed nearby, emphasizing that such a precedent would be detrimental to the public interest. The Court also considered the obligatory functions of the Municipal Corporation to provide for the disposal of the dead.

The Court stated, “The crematorium at Village Masoodpur is being used for the village people since long and it appears that the same is being used much prior the Act, 1957 came into force.”

The Court further observed, “Therefore, when a conscious decision has been taken by the Standing Committee of the Municipal Corporation under Section 391 of the Act, 1957 not to close the crematorium at Village Masoodpur, the High Court ought to have modified its earlier order dated 03.12.2003 in Writ Petition No. 3687/1995 by which the Municipal Corporation was directed to shift the crematorium to Kishangarh.”

The Court also noted, “If the request made on behalf of respondent No. 1 is accepted in that case on the settlement of the residents subsequently every crematorium in the city/town will have to be shifted outside the town/city, which shall not be in the interest of the residents of the village/city/town.”

Key Takeaways

• Long-standing crematoriums should not be closed simply because residential areas develop nearby.
• The decisions of the Municipal Corporation’s Standing Committee, made under Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, should be respected.
• The Municipal Corporation has an obligatory duty to provide for the disposal of the dead under Section 42(f) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957.
• The Supreme Court directed the Municipal Corporation to modernize the crematorium by shifting it to a modern electric crematorium within twelve months.

Directions

The Supreme Court directed the Municipal Corporation to modernize the crematorium by shifting it to a modern electric crematorium within twelve months.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that a long-standing crematorium should not be closed or shifted merely because residential areas have developed nearby. The decision emphasizes the importance of respecting the decisions of the Municipal Corporation’s Standing Committee under Section 391 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, and the obligatory duty of the Corporation under Section 42(f) of the Act. This ruling clarifies that the historical context and the public interest should be considered when deciding on the location of crematoriums, rather than prioritizing the convenience of subsequently established residential areas. There is no change in the previous positions of law, but it clarifies the position.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by the Municipal Corporation, setting aside the High Court’s order. The Court held that the crematorium at Masoodpur should continue to operate, given its long history and the decision of the Standing Committee of the Municipal Corporation. The Court also directed the Municipal Corporation to modernize the crematorium by shifting it to a modern electric crematorium within twelve months.