National Green Tribunal
Jitender Yadav vs Union Of India on 17 September, 2019
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, K. Ramakrishnan
Item Nos. 01 & 02 Court No. 1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Original Application No. 376/2016
AND
Earlier O.A. No.276/2015
AND
I.A No. 601/2019
(With report dated 17.08.2019)
Jitender Yadav Applicant(s)
Versus
Union of India & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 17.09.2019
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P WANGDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant: Mr. Aamir Khan with Mr. Kabeer Shrivastava,
Advocates
For Respondent(s): Mr. Rahul Verma, AAG for State of Uttarakhand
Mr. Sumit Prakash Sharma, Advocate for R-12
Mr. R.H.A. Sikander, Advocate for R-4
Mr. Rajkumar, Advocate for CPCB
Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate for UKPPCB
Mr. Attin Shankar Rastogi, Advocate for
MoEF&CC
ORDER
1. The issue for consideration is remedial action against unscientific disposal of municipal solid waste at Almora, State of Uttarakhand. The matter has been pending before this Tribunal for the last about four years. Several directions have been issued for compliance of the Municipal Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.
1
2. Progress in the matter was reviewed vide order dated 16.05.2019 in the light of the status report dated 15.05.2019 filed by the State of Uttarakhand to the effect that steps were being taken to ensure that waste processing facility becomes operational.
3. In view of long unexplained delay, the Tribunal directed furnishing of performance guarantee in the sum of Rs. 10 lakhs by the State of Uttarakhand to the satisfaction of CPCB with the clear stipulation that the amount would be forfeited and spent for restoration of the environment if the waste processing facility does not become operational within stipulated time.
4. Further report has been filed on 17.08.2019 by the Secretary, Urban Development, Uttarakhand indicating the steps taken. It is stated that the DRP for the purpose has been approved and performance guarantee furnished. During the hearing, it has been orally stated that 50% of the legacy waste at Almora has already been cleared and the remaining is likely to be cleared within next two months.
5. Let further steps be taken for compliance of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.
6. While the individual case may stand disposed of with the above direction, there is another aspect of the matter which remains to be considered.
7. On 12.09.2018, this Tribunal directed the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC) to take steps to implement the Extended Producer's Responsibility (EPR) in accordance with Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016, (PWM Rules) as amended in 2018. 2
8. On 16.05.2019, noticing the failure on the part of the MoEF&CC in furnishing any information about compliance of the said direction, the Tribunal sought an explanation and directed that on the default, the concerned Joint Secretary, MoEF&CC may remain present in person.
9. On this aspect, written submissions have been filed by the MoEF&CC to the effect that a Committee has been constituted on the subject which held several meetings. Last such meeting was held on 31.05.2019. The Ministry was in the process of preparing final draft guideline document on National Framework on EPR to be placed in public domain for receiving further comments. The minutes of the meeting do not indicate any tangible action beyond recording suggestions. The minutes of the meeting also show that except a Joint Secretary, all other participants representing Government are of junior level.
10. The PWM Rules elaborately lay down the norms and the responsibilities. Rule 9 requires the producers to workout the modalities for the waste collection system based on EPR and also by involving State Urban Development Departments. Primary responsibility is of the producers who introduce such products in the market. The minutes of the meeting merely shows shifting of responsibility instead of adhering to the mandate of the PWM Rules. The PWM Rules have a provision for State Level Monitoring Committees for effective monitoring of the implementation of the PWM Rules.
3
11. Hazardous impact of unscientific handling of plastic waste is well acknowledged.1 The minutes of the meeting and the submissions filed on behalf of the MoEF&CC are not consistent with the mandate of the PWM Rules which require immediate enforcement of liability by effective mechanism instead of deferring the subject. One of the means to implement EPR is to require stamping of non-degradable product with the information as to how after use such product is to be handled.
12. This Tribunal is also considering the matter of implementation of PWM Rules based on an application filed by the CPCB itself, complaining that the States are not furnishing the requisite information and not taking preventing and regulatory steps as per the PWM Rules.2 The matter was last reviewed on 22.07.2019 and directions were issued requiring the States/UTs to take further action to meet the gaps pointed out by the CPCB within the laid down timelines failing which compensation may be required to be paid by the defaulting States/UTs.
13. Further, vide order dated 16.01.2019 in O.A. No. 606/2018, the Tribunal directed the Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs to appear in person before the Tribunal with their respective reports on 1 "Fact Sheet on Plastic Waste in India, 2018", TERI- Plastic contributes to 8% of the total solid waste, with Delhi producing the maximum quantity followed by Kolkata and Ahmedabad. Significant amount of toxic heavy metals like copper, zinc, lead and cadmium recovered from plastic wastes from sea shores have an adverse effect on the coastal ecosystems. Lead and Cadmium pigments, commonly used in most of the plastics as additives are hazardous in nature and are known to leach out. "Impacts of Marine Debris: Entanglement of Marine Life in Marine Debris Including a Comprehensive List of Species with Entanglement and Ingestion Records", David W. Laist - Plastic debris affects at least 267 species worldwide, including 86% of all sea turtle species, 44% of all seabird species, and 43% of all marine mammal species. https://www.indiaspend.com/india-is-generating-much-more-plastic-waste-than-it-reports-heres- why/- CPCB data on plastic waste generation from a 2015 study showed that, in 2010-12, India generated 25,940 tonnes plastic per day. This would amount to 9.5 million tonnes per year. In 2016-17 too, CPCB received figures from only 25 regional pollution boards. The total plastic waste generation figure for that year was estimated at 1.6 million tonnes, or 160,000 truckfulls. India's annual plastic consumption is expected to cross 20 million tonnes in 2020. 2 Execution Application No. 13/2019 in O.A. No. 247/2017, Central Pollution Control Board vs. State of Andaman & Nicobar & Ors.
4
the subject of compliance of the Solid Waste Management Rules along with other subjects including PWM Rules. The Chief Secretaries have accordingly appeared and given their reports but since the reports were not found to be adequate, time was given for taking further action and furnish further reports.
14. It will be appropriate that the Chief Secretaries look into the issue of compliance of PWM Rules as per mandate of law and the MoEF&CC also concludes the long pending issue of framing National Framework on EPR within two months instead of adopting long winded procedure which has been going on for more than two years, inspite of the enactment of the Rules more than three years ago. The concerned Joint Secretary, MoEF&CC may remain present in person, to assist the Tribunal in Execution Application No. 13/2019 in O.A. No. 247/2017, Central Pollution Control Board vs. State of Andaman & Nicobar & Ors. on 04.12.2019.
15. The MoEF&CC may ensure that meeting takes place with the involvement of senior officers who are competent to take decision and for this purpose CPCB must be also involved. The compliance report of the MoEF&CC may be filed latest by 30.11.2019. The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) may lay down a compensation regime and scale on 'Polluter Pays' principle by appointing such Expert Committee as may be found necessary and furnish its report before the next date. The scheduled date of 16.10.2019 in Execution Application No. 13/2019 will now stand deferred to 04.12.2019.
This application stands disposed of except for consideration of the compliance report of the MoEF&CC in above matter. 5 A copy of this order be placed in the file of Execution Application No. 13/2019 for reference.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP S.P Wangdi, JM K. Ramakrishnan, JM Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM September 17, 2019 Original Application No. 376/2016 DV 6