National Green Tribunal
Dr Pramod Eknathrao Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra Through The ... on 5 February, 2025
Item No.11, 12 &13 (Pune Bench)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE
[Through Physical Hearing (with Hybrid Option)]
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.03 OF 2023 (WZ)
Sandip Sheshrao Jadhav ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.79 OF 2023 (WZ)
Dr. Pramod s/o Eknathrao Jadhav & Ors. ... Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
AND
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.53 OF 2023 (WZ)
Sanjay Khandu Navgire & Ors. ... Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
Date of Hearing : 05.02.2025
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicants : Mr. Asim Sarode, Advocate in all O.As.
Respondents : Mr. Vilas Jadhav, Advocate for R-3/MPCB
Ms. Anuradha Mantri, Advocate for R-4
Mr. R.B. Mahabal, Advocate for R-5
Mr. Prabhakar K. Joshi, Advocate for R7 to R-15 and R-21 in
O.A. No.03/2023, for R-7 to R-15 and R-20 in O.A. No.79/2023
and for R-1, R-7 to R-15 and R-20 in O.A. No.53/2023
Mr. Saurabh Kulkarni, Advocate with Mr. Adwait Gokhale,
Advocate for R-6, R-16 and R-18
Page 1 of 4
ORDER
1. Today, these matters are listed for final hearing. Mr. Asim Sarode, learned counsel for the applicants, has appeared and states that the Joint Committee in para 7.0 under the head `Recommendations' in sub-clause (i), it is recorded that an amount of Rs.27,75,000/- may be considered as Environmental Damage Compensation (EDC) to be levied from M/s Radico NV Distilleries Maharashtra Ltd., MIDC Area, Shendra, Aurangabad - respondent No.5 and in sub-clause (iii) of the same, it is mentioned that concentration of BOD & COD of the ground water samples at Gat nos.143, 141 and 123 has showed increasing trend and thereafter, recommendation is made that there is need to carry out detailed study of time-bound action plan to contain further impact, if any. Further it is recommended that a detailed study in this regard may be directed to be conducted by the institutes like Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri/major Government Engineering Colleges/Institutes to prepare Detailed Project Report (DPR) for remediation of the contaminated ground water at aforesaid three Gat numbers. In view of these recommendations, learned counsel submits that there is clear evidence that three survey numbers belonging to the applicants are found to be contaminated as BOD and COD had shown increased trend. Therefore, this study, which is directed to be carried out, is not ordered by this Tribunal for determination of the extent of the damage caused to the said land and also for preparing a plan for taking remedial measures so that no further damage happens to the said land. He also states that this recommendation at sub-clause (i) of Para 7.0 also states that an amount of Rs.27,75,000/-, by way of EDC, should be levied against respondent No.5, but in that regard, learned counsel Mr. Saurabh Kulkarni, appearing for respondent No.6 - Dwarkadas Yeshwantrao Bansod (Pathrikar), stated that he never claimed any compensation to be levied from respondent No.5.
2. From the side of respondent No.5 - M/s Radico NV Distilleries Maharashtra Ltd., learned counsel Mr. R.B. Mahabal, has appeared and Page 2 of 4 states that the said industry is located about 47 kms. away from the place/village Pathri where these lands are stated to be located. So, there is no remotest possibility where the spent wash was accidently flowing could cause any damage to their lands. Learned counsel has also provided colour photograph of the location of the village as well as that of the industry, which is taken on record. Copy of the same shall be provided to the learned counsel for other parties within two days.
3. We find that till now, the Joint Committee report has not been adjudicated by this Tribunal and parties/respondents have stressed that the Joint Committee report be adjudicated first before proceeding for final arguments in this case. We accept the request and after having read the report of the Joint Committee, we find that in the recommendations made by the Joint Committee in para 6.0, sub-clause (ii), it is clearly stated that the Joint Committee, during its visit, saw no visual evidence of spread of spent wash/spent wash sludge on the agricultural land under reference during the period from January, 2018 to June, 2018. Total 8 no. of ground water samples from the dug well and 4 nos. of soil samples were collected in coordination with Taluka Agricultural Officer in the area under reference. The Joint Committee also collected reference ground water sample from the dug well and soil sample from the area outside the impact area. All the aforesaid samples of ground water from the dug wells and soil from the agricultural lands were collected at the locations as suggested by and in presence of the applicant as well as respondent No.6. Despite these observations in the above para, the recommendation is made for levying an amount of Rs.27,75,000/- towards EDC from respondent No.5 for damage caused by spent wash at Gat No.144 belonging to respondent No.6 and it is recorded in para 7.0 sub-clause (iii) of the Joint Committee report that concentration of BOD and COD of the ground water samples at Gat Nos.143, 141 and 123 has shown increased trend. So, these recommendations appear to be contradictory in view of the conclusions cited above in para 6.0
(ii). We need a clarification in this regard to be submitted by the Joint Page 3 of 4 Committee within two weeks from the date of uploading of this order so that we can adjudicate this report and thereafter, proceed with the final arguments.
4. We direct that along with a copy of previous Joint Committee report and other relevant documents to be provided by the MPCB (nodal agency) to the Joint Committee for carrying out this order.
5. Put up these matters for next consideration on 16.04.2025.
Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM February 05, 2025 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NOs.03/2023(WZ), 79/2023 (WZ) AND 53/2023 (WZ) npj Page 4 of 4