National Green Tribunal
Samita Rajendra Patil vs Jindal Steel Works Ltd. Through ... on 10 May, 2023
Item No.5 (Pune Bench)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE
[THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)]
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.122 OF 2015 (WZ)
Samita Rajendra Patil .... Applicant
Versus
Jindal Steel Works Ltd. & Ors. ....Respondents
Date of Hearing : 10.05.2023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant : Mr. Shriram Kulkarni, Advocate
Respondents : Mr. Abhishek Salian, Advocate holding for
Mr. Saket Mone, Advocae for R-1 and R-2
Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate for R-3 and R-4
Mr. D.M. Gupte, Advocate for R-6, R-7, R-15
and R-16
ORDER
1. This Original Application has been filed with the following prayers:
(a) Respondent Nos.3 to 20 authorities be directed to take necessary steps to restitute the environmental damage caused by respondent No.1 - Jindal Steel Works Ltd.
(b) The plant of respondent No.1 situated in village Dolvi, Taluka Pen, District Raigad, causing pollution and environmental damage, should be immediately closed down.
(c) Respondent Nos.3 to 20 authorities be directed to issue notification declaring the mangroves situated in Taluka Pen as well as in District Raigad as protected forest and the mapping be done of the area covered by the mangroves and also all steps be taken to restore the mangroves destroyed by respondent No.1. [NPJ] Page 1 of 4
(d) Respondent Nos.3 to 20 be directed to take necessary steps to stop dumping of any product/waste material generated out of respondent No.1 company in District Raigad, more particularly on agricultural lands and mangroves.
(e) Respondent Nos.3 to 20 be directed to conduct the joint survey with the applicants to earmark the places where the waste material is being dumped by respondent No.1 and to take all necessary steps to remove the same from the villages Gadab, Dolvi, Wave Wadkhal, Kolve, Beneghat, etc. situated in Taluka Pen, District Raigad and the entire cost thereof be recovered from respondent No.1.
(f) Respondent Nos.3 to 20 be directed to take steps to remove the Coke Oven Plant for causing pollution and environmental damage forthwith and further respondent No.1 be prohibited from constructing any conveyer belt upto jetty and further remove the entire construction of the same.
(g) Respondent Nos.3 to 20 be directed to take necessary steps to stop construction or expansion of jetty or constructing conveyor belt leading to the destruction of mangroves.
(h) The adequate compensation may be determined for causing environmental damage and for its restitution.
(i) Compensation be also directed to be accorded for causing damage to the agricultural lands, fishing activity and source of livelihood of the agriculturists of the villages mentioned in this application.
2. This matter was first considered on 01.10.2015. We do not find in the index the service affidavit to have been filed from the side of the applicant. We direct the learned counsel for the applicant to file the service affidavit on or before 07.07.2023.
[NPJ] Page 2 of 4
3. Today, from the side of respondent Nos.1 and 2 - Jindal Steel Works Ltd., learned counsel Mr. Abhishek Salian, holding the brief of Mr. Saket Mone, learned counsel has appeared and says that the reply- affidavits have been filed and further prays that time may be allowed for filing objection against the Joint Committee's additional report dated 31.01.2023.
4. From the side of respondent Nos.3 and 4 - Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB), learned counsel Mr. Mukesh Verma has appeared and states that the reply-affidavit has been filed.
5. From the side of respondent No. 5 - MoEF&CC, learned counsel Mr. Rahul Garg has appeared and says that he would seek instructions and file the reply-affidavit, if so required and for that purpose, he seeks fifteen days' time. The same is allowed.
6. From the side of respondent No.6 - Chief Conservator of Forest, respondent No.7 - Principal Secretary (Forest) and respondent No.15 - Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA), learned counsel Mr. D.M. Gupte has appeared and states that he has filed the reply-affidavit.
7. From the side of respondent Nos.8 to 14, none has appeared.
8. By order dated 04.03.2022, this Tribunal has considered the matter extensively and a detailed order has been passed wherein the first report filed by the Joint Committee has been considered. After taking into consideration the first report of the Joint Committee as well as objections of the applicant, further time was granted to the Committee with the direction that the Project Proponent shall take remedial measures in the light of report of the Committee forthwith and the statutory regulators were directed to fix the responsibility for the past violations on principle of "Polluter Pays". It was further directed that the compensation would cover the cost of remediation. The Committee was directed to verify the [NPJ] Page 3 of 4 factual position as pointed out by the applicant with liberty to the applicant to make further representations to the Committee. A direction was issued to the Committee to file latest compliance report for restoration of mangroves and its buffer zone, the creek and its banks. The Committee was further directed to find source of waste and purpose of dumping. A direction was also issued to take remedial action with respect to scientific dumping of hazardous waste and slag. The villages which were mentioned in the application were also required to be subjected to verification. In pursuance of the said order, the Joint Committee has submitted additional report dated 30.01.2023 against which the applicant has raised several objections by filing submissions and suggestions dated 26.03.2023 wherein in paragraph No.23, he has prayed in clauses (A) to (I) the points which require further directions to be issued by this Tribunal.
9. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that he is in U.S.A. and would be returning in mid-June, 2023. Therefore, he seeks adjournment as he does not have file papers with him. From the side of respondent No.1, the counsel seeks time to file objections against the additional report of the Joint Committee, which he may file within a period of two weeks.
10. Put up this matter for further consideration on 10.08.2023.
Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM May 10, 2023 O.A. No.122/2015 (WZ) npj [NPJ] Page 4 of 4