National Green Tribunal
Varun Gulati vs Central Pollution Control Board on 23 December, 2025
Item No. 20 Court No. 1
BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Original Application No. 589/2025
(IA No 733/2025, IA No 734/2025,
IA No 800/2025, IA No 801/2025)
Varun Gulati Applicant
Versus
Central Pollution Control Board & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 23.12.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant: Ms. Mansi Chahal & Mr. S.A. Zaidi, Advs. for Applicant
Respondents: Mr. Bhanwar Pal Singh Jadon, Ms. Atika Singh, Ms. Gargi Chaturvedi &
Ms. Anjali Sharma, Advs. for R - 2, 4, 5, 7 & 8
Ms. Priyanka Swami, Adv. for R - 3
Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Adv. for R - 6
Mr. Rahul Khurana & Mr. Hasil Jain, Advs. for R - 9
Ms. Suman Arora, Adv. for CPCB
Mr. Ankit Verma, Adv. for the State of UP (Through VC)
ORDER
1. The Tribunal by order dated 20.11.2025 had constituted the Joint Committee which has submitted the report dated 19.12.2025 disclosing the following status of compliance by the Respondent No. 9 unit:
"xxx ..................................xxx.............................................xxx e. The details of the inspections carried out by the Mining Department on the site of Respondent no. 9.
S. Date of Inspected By Observations Action Taken
No. Inspection
i. 31.5.2025 Mines Officer, • All the boundary pillars • Permit Holder was
Ghaziabad were found in their strictly instructed that
designated place. No in-stream mining
• Plantation, Dustbin and shall take place and
Water sprinkling at Mine mining should take
site in compliance with EC place in the designated
were observed at the site. area.
• CCTV and Weigh-bridge • That no Transportation
were found to be without valid e-MM-11
operational. or with overload vehicle
• No mining activity was shall take place from
observed at the time of the mining site. (Copy of
inspection. Joint inspection report
1
• Selling price of the mineral is annexed as Annexure
was displayed at the site. no.5)
• No evidence of illegal
mining was observed at
the site.
ii. 09.6.2025 Mines Officer, Surprise inspection on 9th • Show-cause notice
Ghaziabad June 2025 night was dated 16.06.2025 was
conducted and following issued by the Deponent.
observations were made: - (Copy of Letter dated
16.06.2025 & reply of
• Boundary pillar C and D respondent no.9 dated
were found missing. 24.06.2025 are
• Illegal mining to the tune of annexed as Annexure
200 cum was observed. no.6 (colly)
• Penalty amounting to
Rs. 5,78,000/- for
illegal mining as per
Rule 3 and 58 of
UPMMCR-2021 and
Section 21 of MMDR Act,
1957 and Rs. 25,000/-
for missing pillar as per
rule 36 (1) and 60 of
UPMMCR2021 was
imposed. (Copy of notice
dated 28.06.2025 is
annexed as Annexure
no. 7)
• An amount of
3,01,500/- has been
recovered and
3,01,500/- is pending
for recovery. (Copy of
challan amounting
3,01,500/- is annexed
as annexure no. 8)
• A letter dated
18.07.2025 was sent to
RO, UPPCB to recover
environmental
compensation for the
default. (Copy of letter
dated 18.07.2025 is
annexed as annexure
no. 9) (Copy of
inspection report is
annexed as Annexure
no.10)
iii. 09.7.2025 Joint Team of • No mining activity was (Copy of the inspection
officials from observed and no machines report dated 09.07.2025 is
Directorate of were found deployed in the annexed as Annexure no.
Geology & mining lease area as the 11)
Mining, mining activities were
Lucknow and suspended due to
Mines Officer, monsoon period.
Ghaziabad
iv. 27.10.202 Mines Officer, • No mining activity was • Representative of the
5 Ghaziabad started after monsoon leaseholder was
season due to sudden rise directed to start mining
in water level in October activity as per rules
Month and no only. Copy of the
Transportation took place inspection report dated
as per departmental portal. 27.10.2025 is annexed
as Annexure no. 12)
f. The details of the inspection carried out by the Mining Department in reference of complaints made for illegal mining in the village of Nauraspur.2
i. 11.10.2025 Mines Officer, • A surprise inspection of the Yamuna Ghaziabad and riverbed area was conducted based local Lekhpal on input of illegal mining.
• FIR No. 0488 dated 24.10.2025 was registered in connection to an illegal mining carried out by local villagers observed at adjoining Naursapur village.
(Copy of inspection report & FIR are annexed as Annexure no. 13 (colly) ii. 01.11.2025 Mines Officer, • 02 Tractors with Trolley were found Ghaziabad and transporting Ordinary sand in village local Police Nauraspur by Local Police.
• The above vehicles were seized and complaint dated 10.12.2025 was filed by Mines Officer with the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad as per provisions under rule 76 of UPMMCR, 2021.
(Copy of complaint dated 10.12.2025 is annexed as Annexure no.14) "
2. The Joint Committee has also found that the Respondent No. 9 is violating the EC conditions. The observations of the Joint Committee in this regard are as under:
"a. The respondent no. 9 is violating the conditions of EC. • It was observed that the lessee has constructed the ramp in the active channel of Yamuna River for approaching the mineral being extracted from the mid of the stream. For constructing this ramp, the lessee has excavated the farm fields for approx. 2 m deep at the bank of the river near their site office. It was also established from KML file and evidences at site that on the date of inspection, extraction of mineral was being undertaken outside the lease area. And this area falls in the middle of the riverbed of the Yamuna River, Google Earth image reflected that the Respondent no. 9 is executing mining activity approx... 110 meters toward the main stream of the River Yamuna. A copy of the Geotagged photo and photo taken during site inspection is annexed as Annexure no. 19.
• The Joint Committee observed that out of six, only two boundary pillars were found intact, except that four were submerged in the river/washed away and were not visible. • The Joint Committee observed that the complete lease area can be mined out, no encroachment etc. has been observed. • Respondent No. 9 has established a weighing bridge along with the office, around 100-200 meters from the lease boundary.
• In the project site office, one acoustic-type DG of 10 KVA has been found with proper stack height; however, CTO permits only a 7.5 KVA DG set for this lease.
• Respondent No. 9 has installed a PTZ camera near the weighbridge, which has been found working during inspection.3
• Respondent No. 9 has commissioned one bore well near the office/weighbridge area, which is found working. The bore well has been found in a local farmer's field, • Respondent No. 9 has deployed two tractor-mounted water sprinkling systems at the site office.
• Respondent No. 9 has a First-Aid facility in the site office. • PP has not planted any tree, etc., near the office area (weighbridge area) of the project or lease area, • Respondent No. 9 has not yet made an all-weather road from the site office to the main road.
• Respondent No. 9 has not yet installed a solar-mediated lighting system in the site office.
• Respondent No. 9 has not conducted an Environmental audit so far.
• Respondent No. 9 has not submitted any six-monthly compliance report to the concerned organisation. • Significant evidence has also been found in the lease area that the Respondent No. 9 has conducted mining at night. • Respondent No. 9 has not properly constructed a septic tank for collection of sewage from toilet room.
b. The respondent no. 9 is carrying out the mining in the middle of the river with heavy machines and excavating up to 15-20 feet deep in the middle of the river flow.
• As mentioned in response to point (a) above, the lessee has violated the conditions of the Environmental Clearance (EC) & Sustainable Sand Mining Guidelines, 2016. However, the mining depth could not be ascertained as the extraction was being carried out in the active channel/mid of the stream and approx... 110 meters away from the lease boundary.
c. No plantation was done by the respondent no. 9.
• The lessee submitted that for the plantation of 1800 plants as per the condition of Environmental Clearance, they have submitted funds to the Forest Department, but could not produce the receipt for the same. Besides, respondent no. 9 has not planted a single tree in the lease area, near the site office area, etc. d. No water sprinkling was done by respondent no. 9.
• On the day of the site visit, water sprinkling was observed.
e. The respondent no. 9 does not install a Continuous Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Station.
• May not be required as the mining activities are to be carried out in the permit period of 06 months only."
3. The Joint Committee has also noticed violation of GRAP-III order by observing as follows:
"f. Violation of GRAP-III order issued by CAQM.4
• As per the GRAP schedule issued by the Commission on 13.12.2024, which has further been revised on 21.11.2025, point no. 3 Stage-III provides to "close down all mining and associated activities in the entire NCR." The Commission had invoked actions under Stage III of GRAP on 11.11.2025, which was revoked on 26.11.2025, and the complainant had informed CAQM about the ongoing mining activities on 15.11.2025. Thus, violation of Stage III of GRAP is established. This has also been established by e-MM11 provided by the Mining department."
4. The recommendations of the Joint Committee are as under:
"4.0 Recommendation:
• As the above lease has been granted very close to the state boundary of Uttar Pradesh (Ghaziabad) and the NCT of Delhi. Therefore, it is required to control illegal mining and related activity by both the state government and its respective concerned departments.
• The Mining Department, Ghaziabad, Govt. of UP, may take necessary action on the mining done outside the lease area. • In view of the above, the Regional Office, UPPCB, Ghaziabad, and the Mining Department, Ghaziabad, may take necessary action against the mining done during the GRAP-III period. • The Mining Department, Ghaziabad, may be requested to discourage granting sand mining leases with less than two years.
• The SEIAA-UP/SEAC-UP may be requested to impose conditions (Continuous Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Station, solar power, self-environmental audit, EMC cell, GHG inventory, etc.), which are practically not feasible to comply with within the very short period of six months. • Local administration through the Mining Department and the Regional Office, UPPCB, shall ensure the compliance of all commitments made by PP during the appraisal of the project on-site.
• DM through the Mining Department shall ensure that no mining is carried out in the main stream of the River Yamuna."
5. It will be open to all the concerned parties to file objection to the report of the Joint Committee within four weeks.
6. Let the reply be also filed by the concerned parties within the same period.
7. Rejoinder, if any, can be filed by the Applicant within eight weeks. 5
8. IA No. 800/2025 has been filed by the Applicant seeking police protection.
9. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that for filing the OA before the Tribunal, the Applicant is being unnecessarily harassed and a false FIR has been registered against the Applicant.
10. If the Applicant receives any threat on the ground of filing of this petition by the Respondent No. 9 or any other connected person, it will be open to the Applicant to approach the Respondent No. 8, who, after verification, will take steps to provide adequate police protection to ensure that the Applicant is not harassed for filing this OA before the Tribunal.
11. IA No. 800/2025 is accordingly disposed of.
12. IA No. 801/2025 was filed by the Applicant seeking early hearing of the IA No. 800/2025.
13. In view of the order passed in IA No. 800/2025 today, IA No. 801/2025 has become infructuous which is accordingly disposed of.
14. List on 17.03.2026.
Prakash Shrivastava, CP Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM December 23, 2025 Original Application No. 589/2025 (IA No 733/2025, IA No 734/2025, IA No 800/2025, IA No 801/2025) dv 6