National Green Tribunal
Suo Motu vs Government Of Karnatakarep By Its Chief ... on 10 February, 2022
Bench: K. Ramakrishnan, Satyagopal Korlapati
Item No.15:
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No. 54 of 2016 (SZ)
(Through Video Conference)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Suo Motu based on the news item published in
The Hindu dated 08.03.2016 titled
"Lake in heart of Bengaluru City turns graveyard for fish".
With
Government of Karnataka,
Rep. by its Chief Secretary,
Bengaluru and Ors. ...Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 10.02.2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Suo Motu by Court.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Rajat Jonathan Shaw represented
Mr. Darpan K.M. for R1, R2.
Mr. M.R. Gokul Krishnan for R3.
Mr. T.V. Sekar for R4.
Mr. R. Thirunavukarasu for CPCB.
Page 1 of 22
ORDER
1. As per order dated 27.10.2021, this Tribunal had extracted the order passed on 23.09.2021 in Para (1) of the order and considered the inspection report submitted by the State Pollution Control Board dated Nil, e-filed on 26.10.2021 and extracted in Para (2) of the order and then, passed the following order:-
"3. Except the fact that certain directions have been issued, they have not filed any action report for the violations noted. Even as regards to certain violations noted in the earlier report by some other parties, there is no appropriate action taken report filed by the Pollution Control Board in this regard. When this was pointed out, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Pollution Control Board submitted if some time is granted, they will come with a proper action taken report considering all the aspects mentioned in the Joint Committee report and against the persons who are found to be violators.
4. The Learned Counsel appearing for BBMP submitted that they want to file objection to the inspection report submitted by the Pollution Control Board and also file compliance report regarding the recommendations made by the Pollution Control Board. They are also directed to file their objections, if any, to the same along with compliance regarding recommendations made and both the Pollution Control Board and BBMP are directed to file the respective report and objections cum compliance report, if any, on or before 18.11.2021 and post the case for consideration on 24.11.2021.
5. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the official respondents including the Pollution Control Board and BBMP for their information and compliance of the direction."
2. The case was originally posted on 24.11.2021 for filing objections (if any) to the report and consideration of report. Thereafter, the matter has Page 2 of 22 been adjourned from time to time by successive notifications and lastly, it was adjourned to today by notification dated 24.01.2022.
3. We have received the report submitted by the Executive Engineer (Lakes), BBMP dated 18.11.2021, e-filed on the same date stating the reason for not signing the report and expressing the apologies which reads as follows:-
"REPORT Herein, I, K.V.Ravi, Executive Engineer(Lakes), Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Bengaluru respectfully submits my report as under:
01.I submit that, I have been working as Executive Engineer (Lakes) from 2009 till now.
02.I submit that, I was one the three members of Joint Committee, appointed by the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Chennai, South Zone to inspect the area in question and find out the source of pollution and persons' who are responsible for causing pollution, etc.,
03. I submit that, after constitution of the Committee, a committee visited various spots and prepared a detailed report dated:10- 08 2020, for being submitted to the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal.
04.I submit that, the consensus of the Joint Committee (except myself) was to recommend, imposition of a environment compensation on BBMP to an extent of Rs.17,83,60,000/-, for violation in the ETP of slaughter house.
05. I submit that, the figure arrived at was a whopping sum of Rs.17,83,60,000/-, which I sincerely and honestly felt that, I should bring this fact to the notice of the Hon'ble Chief Commissioner, who is the Head of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike.
06.I submit that, therefore, I processed the file and sent to the Zonal Commissioner(East).
Page 3 of 22
07.I deny that, the report had been sent to me several times for signature, but I did not sign. I respectfully submit that, only on 15-09- 2021, an information was received from CPCB to come and to sign the report available in their office, as the case was coming up before the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal on 17-09-2021. I felt that, I should bring to the notice of my higher ups and then sign and therefore I processed the file on 16-09-2021 itself and simultaneously I made enquires in the office of CPCB and I was informed that the report in question has already been submitted to the Hon'ble NGT on 16-09-202 1 itself, without my signature.
08.I submit that, I have high respect and regards to the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal and I have been obeying all the directions and instructions issued by the NGT scrupulously. Absolutely there is no intention to show any disrespect either to the Joint Committee or the Hon'ble NGT.
09.I submit that, even now I am ready and willing to put my signature on the report.
10.I submit that, non signing is bona-fide mistake, particularly in saving the finanacial interest of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike and in any event not to be taken as disrespect to any institution. If the Hon'ble NGT were to form an opinion that, I was in error then, my apologies may kindly be accepted.
11.I submit that, I assure that, such error will not take place in future and I would be more careful.
12. Therefore, the proceedings if any against me, may please be dropped.
WHEREFORE, my report may please be accepted and
proceedings may be dropped."
4. The reason stated in the affidavit for not signing the report and expressing the apology is recorded.
Page 4 of 22
5. The BBMP has filed a report of measures undertaken/ implemented/objections dated 18.11.2021, e-filed on 19.11.2021 with certain annexure which reads as follows:-
Page 5 of 22 Page 6 of 22 Page 7 of 22 Page 8 of 22 Page 9 of 22 Page 10 of 22 Page 11 of 22
6. The Central Pollution Control Board has filed an action taken report dated 15.12.2021, e-filed on the same date which reads as follows:-
"Report on action taken by CPCB in O. A No 54 of 2016 (SZ) in the matter of Suo Motu based on the news item published in The Hindu Dated 08.03.2016 titled "Lakes in heart of Bengaluru City turns graveyard of fish" vs Government of Karnataka and Ors The Hon'ble NGT vide order dt 10/06/2021 in the matter of OA No. 54 of Page 12 of 22 2016(SZ) Suo Motu based on the news item published in The Hindu Dated 08/03/2016 titled "Lakes in heart of Bengaluru City turns graveyard of fish"
vs Government of Karnataka and Ors, directed the Joint Committee to file further progress report regarding the implementation of the recommendations and suggestions made by the committee. Accordingly, the joint committee filed status report on 16/09/2021.
Subsequently, the Hon'ble NGT (SZ) vide order dt 23/09/2021 directed the following:
"The State Pollution Control Board as well as the Central Pollution Control Board are also directed to file their independent report regarding the further action taken by them as a regulator for the violations noted by them and non- compliance, in view of the directions issued by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No.606 of 2018 and the BBMP is also directed to file the report regarding steps taken by them in respect of the gap found by the majority members of the committee and also the steps taken by them for improving the water quality in the lake, which according to the committee has not improved than the condition which was found earlier."
The major observations of the joint committee in joint committee report dated 16/09/2021 are as follows:
1. The validity of the consent issued by Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 to M/s Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Civil Slaughter House, Tannery Road, Bengaluru was expired on 30/06/2009 and the Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) of the slaughter house is not operated scientifically.
2. Madras Engineering Group and Centre has not applied for Consent for Establishment and Consent for Operation from KSPCB for operation of Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) and the treated sewage is not complying with the discharge standards with reference to Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and fecal coliform.
3. The treated sewage discharged from 2 MLD STP operated by Bengaluru Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) is not complying with the discharge standards with reference to COD and fecal coliform.Page 13 of 22
The actions taken by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in the matter of OA No. 54 of 2016(SZ) are as follow:
1. In the matter of mortality of fishes due to contamination in Ulsoor Lake, CPCB issued directions dated 04/04/2016 under 18(1) (b) of the Water (Prevention and control of Pollution) Act 1974 to KSPCB to ensure the following:
i. KSPCB shall issue directions under Section 33 (A) of the Water Act to BBMP and BWSSB to immediately stop discharge of untreated sewage in the surrounding areaof the lake.
ii. KSPCB shall direct BBMP and BWSSB to set up STPs of adequate capacity and provide underground sewerage system to cover the entire local/ urban areas and to bridge the treatment gap along with enforcement of consent management in line withstandards for sewage treatment. iii. KSPCB shall direct concerned agency to ensure tertiary treatment of sewage beforedischarge into lakes.
iv. KSPCB shall direct concerned authorities to earmark boundary of the lake, and establish bunds along the periphery of the lake.
2. Based on the joint committee report dated 16/09/2021 submitted to the Hon'ble NGT (SZ), CPCB issued directions to KSPCB on 09/12/2021 under Section 18(1) b of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 in the matter of M/s Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Civil Slaughter House, Tannery Road, Bengaluru to ensure of the following:
i. To close down all activities of M/s BBMP Civil Slaughter House, Tannery Road, Bengaluru with immediate effect.
ii. To disconnect electricity supply of M/s BBMP Civil Slaughter House, Tannery Road, Bengaluru by Bengaluru Electricity Supply Company Limited.
iii. To disconnect water supply of M/s BBMP Civil Slaughter House, Tannery Road, Bengaluru by Bengaluru Water Supply and Sewerage Board. iv. To carry out assessment of environmental damage and recovery of the cost from M/sBBMP Civil Slaughter House.Page 14 of 22
v. M/s BBMP Civil Slaughter House, Tannery Road, Bengaluru shall not operate without Consent from KSPCB.
The copy of direction dated 09/12/2021 issued to KSPCB is appended as Annexure 1.
3. As the treated sewage at 100 KLD STP operated by Madras Engineering Group and Centre, Bengaluru in their campus and 2 MLD STP operated by BWSSB were not complying with the prescribed discharge standards for COD and Fecal Coliforms, CPCB issued directions to KSPCB on 18/11/2021 under Section 18(1) b of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 to ensure of the following:
i. KSPCB shall issue directions to concerned authorities (Madras Engineering Group and Centre, Bengaluru and BWSSB) to ensure that sewage treatment plants are optimally operated so as to comply with the prescribed norms. ii. KSPCB shall direct the BWSSB to ensure that entire sewage generated in the catchment of lake Ulsoor is conveyed to STPs and these STPs are operated at the designed capacity and conform to the prescribed norms. iii. KSPCB shall impose environmental compensation on Local Municipal bodies/State Level Authorities for discharge of untreated wastewater into Ulsoor Lake.
The copy of direction dated 18/11/2021 issued to KSPCB is appended as Annexure 2.
4. In pursuance to Hon'ble NGT order dated 10/5/2019 in O.A No. 325/2015 in the matter of Lt. Col. Sarvadaman Singh Oberoi Vs UoI, CPCB prepared Indicative Guidelines for Restoration of Stagnant Water Bodies and uploaded in CPCB website at https://cpcb.nic.in/NGTMC/Ind-Guidelines-RestWaterBodies-10062019.pdf on 10/06/2019. The indicative guidelines were also circulated to all States/ Union Territories (UTs) vide CPCB letters dated 18/6/2019 and 26/07/2019 and requested all the States and UTs to submit the action plans for restoration of water bodies prepared in line with the Indicative Guidelines for Restoration Page 15 of 22 of Stagnant Water Bodies.
Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority vide email dated 4/02/2021 informed that Karnataka Tank Conservation and Development Authority has been designated as the Nodal Agency for restoration of stagnant water bodies in the State of Karnataka.
5. The information received from Karnataka State in compliance to the directions issued by the Principal Bench of Hon'ble NGT, New Delhi in O.A. No.606 of 2018 are as follow:
i. Total number of Urban Local Bodies (UPBs) in Karnataka are 316. ii. As per the information provided by KSPCB, total solid waste generated in the State is approximately 11085 TPD. Out of this 6817 TPD is processed and it accounts for 61.5% of the total waste generated in the State. 1250 TPD (11.2%) of the waste is landfilled and the gap in solid waste management is 3018 TPD, which is 27.2% of the waste generated in the State.
iii. Door to door collection is initiated in 284 ULBs and in remaining ULBs door to door collection will be implemented by December 31, 2021. iv. Partial source segregation of waste is implemented in 144 ULBs and the remaining ULBs are to be covered by March, 2022. v. 217 Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) are there in 204 ULBs in the State with a combined capacity of 514 TPD, covering 64.5% of the ULBs.
vi. 217 Plastic waste recycling units are there in the State with a combined capacity of 310TPD in 204 ULBs, covering 64.5% of ULBs. vii. There are 216 composting units in the State with a combined capacity of 5834 TPD in198 ULBs, covering 62.65% of ULBs. viii. There are 15 bio-methanation facilities in the State with a combined capacity of 68 TPDin 11 ULBs, covering 3.4% of ULBs. ix. 217 RDF facilities are there in the State with a combined capacity of 215 TPD in 204 ULBs, covering 64.55% of ULBs.
x. Karnataka state doesn't have Waste to Energy facilities. 600 TPD (11.5 MW) Waste to Energy plant is being built by BBMP and Karnataka Page 16 of 22 Power Corporation Ltd (KPCL) at Bidadi and 200 TPD plant by NTPCL at Dharwad City Corporation.
xi. There are 52 landfill sites in the State in 52 ULBs with a capacity of 2680245 Tonnes. There are 191 dumpsites in the State with 1.5 Crore tons of waste dumped at these sites. Bio mining is commenced in 15 dumpsites. All the dumpsites are to be cleared by the year 2023.
xii. 8 Model Town/Cities and 90 Gram Panchayats have been identified in the State.
xiii. Environment cell has been created in the State. xiv. The combined waste processing capacity in the State is approximately 6631 TPD whichis about 60% of the generated waste. xv. City wise details have not been received from the State so far.
6. Under National Water Quality Monitoring Programme (NWMP), Ulsoor Lake is monitored at two locations with Station Code 3593 - Ulsoor lake Near temple and Station Code 1388 - Ulsoor lake near training centre of fish breeding. Based on the water quality monitored during 2020 and 2021 (up to August, 2021) both the locations are non- complying to the Primary Water Quality Criteria for Outdoor Bathing for all the 5 parameters viz, DO, pH, BOD, Fecal Coliform & Fecal Streptococci, notified under Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986. Water Quality data of Ulsoor Lake is appended as Annexure 3."
7. The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) had issued certain directions to the State Pollution Control Board to implement the same which was produced along with the report.
„
8. We have received said to be an action taken report filed by the Environmental Officer, Bengaluru City East, Regional Office of KSPCB Page 17 of 22 by way of an internal communication to the Member Secretary, KSPCB vide letter dated Nil, e-filed on 09.02.2022.
9. The practice of producing the internal communication as action taken report by the regulators was deprecated by this Tribunal in several matters including in some matters where the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board themselves had done the same mischief. They are expected to file the report signed by the concerned officer along with the notice or other proceedings issued as document to the report, instead of simply producing certain internal communication between the District Environmental Officer and the Member Secretary.
10. When this was pointed out, the learned counsel appearing for the State Pollution Control Board submitted that he will take care of this aspect and this will not be repeated in future and he will file a proper report as directed by this Tribunal, for which, he want some more time.
11. We are not satisfied with the manner in which the BBMP is acting for the purpose of protecting the environment. The matter is pending from 2016 onwards. Several types of irregularities in implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and treatment of sewage or sullage generated within their jurisdiction have been found by the CPCB and SPCB.
Page 18 of 22
12. It is also mentioned in the report submitted by the CPCB that the Under Ground Sewerage System (UGSS) has not been completed as undertaken by them and the slaughter houses are not properly functioning and they are not providing any mechanism for treating the waste generated before it is being discharged into the public drains which ultimately reaches the lake causing pollution.
13. It is also seen from the report that in spite of several directions issued and steps taken, the water quality of the Ulsoor Lake has not improved as expected. That shows the regulators including the BBMP has to travel a lot for the purpose of improving the water quality which is a primary responsibility of the State instrumentalities to protect the environment as contemplated under Article 48 A of the Constitution of India. Non availability of fund or work burden is not an excuse for discharging their constitutional obligation of protecting the environment. It is for the State Government to look into the gap of financial crisis of the local bodies in implementing the project and they will have to find out the solution for the same by providing financial as well as technical support in a timely manner. Anything done out of time, after damage being caused to the environment, will not serve the purpose. Wherever timely action is required, it will have to be ensured by the higher level officials of the State.
Page 19 of 22
14. In O.A. No.606 of 2018, several directions have been issued in respect of the responsibility of implementation of these statutory obligations including implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, establishment of STPs and treatment of sewage generated within the local bodies. But in spite of those aspects, the things are not happening to the expectation of the Tribunal and in the latest order passed by the Principal Bench in the above said case, after expressing its displeasure about the manner in which the review action is being undertaken by the Chief Secretaries, it was decided to call all the Chief Secretaries again and certain dates have been provided for that purpose. The Chief Secretaries of the States are also expected to review the action of implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 within their State and if there is any gap found, they are expected to intervene and coordinate with the respective officials and see that the gap is removed and implementation made smooth and effective. That only shows the expertise of governance by higher level officials.
15. However, considering the circumstances, we feel that some more time can be granted to the respective authorities to file their compliance report and also further action taken report in view of the directions issued by the CPCB by themselves as well as by the State Pollution Control Board and the remedial measures undertaken by the BBMP Page 20 of 22 (Lakes), BBMP and Executive Engineer, BBMP (Lakes) who is in charge of this lake to file their respective reports to this Tribunal and they are directed to file the same on or before 31.03.2022 by e-filing in the form of Searchable PDF/OCR Supportable PDF and not in the form of Image PDF along with necessary hardcopies to be produced as per Rules.
16. The Joint Committee is also directed to inspect the area in question again and report about the deficiency in the implementation of the directions issued earlier and further recommendations regarding the action to be taken, fixing the responsibility of the officials who are expected to carry out those recommendations with certain time line, so that this Tribunal can consider those aspects and pass appropriate directions/orders in this regard.
17. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the official respondents and members of the Joint Committee, apart communicating this order to the Chief Secretary - State of Karnataka, Special Chief Secretary for Environment, Secretary for Municipal Administration, Revenue, Public Works Department and Irrigation and Chairman - Karnataka State Pollution Control Board by e-mail for their information and compliance of direction of filing their reports about the review undertaken by them and the nature of directions given by them Page 21 of 22 to resolve the issue permanently from their side. They are also directed to file the respective reports at the higher level on or before 31.03.2022.
18. For consideration of further action taken report and progress report, post on 31.03.2022.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, JM Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM O.A. No.54/2016 (SZ), 10th February, 2022. Mn.
Page 22 of 22