National Green Tribunal
News Item Published In Times Now Digital ... vs Unknown on 22 April, 2022
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Item No. 02 (Court No. 1)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 59/2021
In re: News item published in Times Now News dated 23.02.2021 titled
"Karnataka: Six killed in quarry blast in Hirenagavalli,
Chikkaballapur"
Date of hearing: 22.04.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE PROF. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER
Respondent: Mr. Darpan KM, Advocate for the State of Karnataka
Ms. Amrita Sharma, Advocate for Sree Shirdi Sai Aggregates & Shree
Bhramaravasini M-Sanders LLP
ORDER
1. Proceedings have been initiated in the present matter on the basis of the media report dated 23.02.2021 under the heading "Karnataka:
Six killed in quarry blast in Hirenagavalli, Chikkaballapur"1. It is reported that six people were killed in quarry blast in Hirenagavalli, Chikkaballapur on Monday night (22.2.2021). One was injured when the blast took place at the quarry. The incident happened due to large amount of explosives at the site. District In-charge, who visited the spot said that the explosives were illegally held. According to the preliminary information shared by the police, the quarrying work was stopped at the site on February 7 after local residents complained of rampant use of gelatin sticks. The work continued despite the ban, 1 https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/karnataka-5-killed-in-quarry-blast-in-
hirenagavalli-chikkaballapur-pm-modi-expresses-grief/723804 1 and another raid was conducted by the police, during which the contractor was warned not to use gelatin. The explosives went off when the men were trying to dispose them off.
2. The matter was dealt with exhaustively vide order dated 11.06.2021 in the light of report dated 17.05.2021 of the joint Committee comprising CPCB, State PCB, District Magistrate, Chikkaballapur, nominee of Director General, Mines, GoI, Chief Controller of Explosives, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Nagpur, and the Director, Mines, Karnataka, constituted by this Tribunal to ascertain cause of the incident, the extent of damage caused, the extent of compensation required to be paid for damage to the environment as well as for loss of lives, causing of injuries and steps required to be taken for preventing any such occurrence in future. Operative part of discussion and order of the Tribunal is reproduced below:-
"1to4...xxx............................................xxx...........................xxx
5. Inspite of notice to the State PCB, the Director, Mines, Karnataka and the District Magistrate, Chikkaballapur, none has put in appearance. Only appearance is on behalf of the CPCB. We have considered the report and heard learned Counsel for the CPCB. He submitted that there is no reason for not accepting the report. We have thus to proceed further in the matter based on the factual situation depicted in the report. There is no reason not to accept the observations on factual aspects by the independent credible Committee appointed by the Tribunal.
6. The questions to be gone into are:
Cause of incident Persons responsible - liability of the State for failure of regulatory regime Quantum of compensation - directions for payment Need for remedial measures Compliance
7. It is clear from the report that the cause of accident is the blast due to illegal possession and inappropriate handling of the explosive material in connection with the activities of M/s Shridi Sai Aggregates (Stone Quarry) and Shree Bhramaravasini M-Sanders LLP in Hirenagavalli village, Karnataka.2
8. The Committee has identified the persons responsible for the incident - illegal handling of explosives in violation of the Explosive Rules and the safety norms. M/s Shridi Sai Aggregates (Stone Quarry) and Shree Bhramaravasini M-Sanders LLP have been identified as violators. They are thus primarily responsible to pay the compensation assessed. The District Magistrate, Chikkaballapur may require them to pay the amount accordingly subject to their remedy of moving this Tribunal if they have objections to the findings in the report about their liability. The State has failed to put in appearance or give any explanation for its failure to protect lives of citizens by enforcing the law. The reason may be negligence of the concerned officers or incompetence. In such circumstances, liability is of the law violators as well as the State.
The same is joint and several. If the violators do not pay the compensation and the District Magistrate is unable to recover the same, the victims have to be compensated by the State and the State can recover the amount from erring parties. We have taken this view recently while dealing with another similar incident in Gujrat where hazardous activity was found to be operated illegally resulting in deaths and injuries and the violator did not appear to have known sources for payment of compensation. Vide order dated 23.03.2021 in O.A. No. 258/2020, In Re: News item published in the "Indian Express" dated 04.11.2020 titled "Ahmedabad: Nine killed as godown collapses after factory blast" this Tribunal held that the State will be liable to pay compensation to the victims except the victims who was responsible for the incident with liberty to recover from erring persons. Relevant extract from the order is as follows:-
"9. ......For death of all other persons and injured, the State will be liable to pay compensation, without prejudice to its right to recover the same from the violators of law or erring officers, following due process of law. The responsibility for compliance will be of the Chief Secretary, Gujarat, through the District Magistrate, Ahmedabad. In the light of directions already issued for preventive action by way of compliance of laid down safety norms, the State of Gujarat needs to take remedial measures to ensure that such incidents do not occur and hold accountable persons responsible for failure of the oversight. We also direct a joint Committee of Director, Industrial Safety and Health (DISH), Gujarat, and State PCB in coordination with respective Municipal Corporations and District Magistrates to conduct survey of the entire State to ascertain if any other such activities are going on, and if so to take remedial action by way of closing such illegal activities. The State PCB will be the nodal agency for coordination and compliance. The said Committee may give its report to the Chief Secretary, Gujarat within three months for further remedial action."
9. It is established law since MC Mehta (1987) 1 SCC 395 and later judgments that liability of the person undertaking hazardous activities for commercial gains for any accident and loss is absolute.
10. From the report, it is clear that six persons have died and one injured on account of the blast due to unscientific 3 handling of the explosive violation of law. We also find that scale of compensation based on restitution principle needs to be awarded. Procedure of this Tribunal is summary and akin to public law remedy. Compensation can be assessed on reasonable basis guided by restitution principle atleast at floor level, leaving other remedies of the victims open. Thus, broadly agreeing with the Committee, we uphold the compensation assessed by the Committee i.e. Sh Uma Mahesh - Rs. 15,12,450/-
Sh Ramu - Rs. 16,14,600/-
Sh Mahesh Singh Bora - Rs. 15,59,850/-
Sh Gangadhar Babu - Rs. 3569400/-
Sh Abhilash @ Abhinayak - Rs. 2074200/-
Sh Chikkodi Murali @ Muralikrishna - Rs. 2217000/-"
11. Accordingly, we hold that if the compensation assessed is not paid by the violators within one month, the same has to be paid by the State of Karnataka through the District Magistrate with right to recover the same from the violators. Compliance will be responsibility of the Chief Secretary. Payment be ensured within one month from today. We request the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority to provide legal aid to ensure that payment is made to genuine heirs of the deceased.
12. The Committee has recommended measures for avoiding such occurrences in future mainly by strict enforcement of the Explosive Rules. We accept the recommendations of the Committee and direct that necessary steps to be taken by the Chief Controller of Explosives, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Nagpur and Director Mines, Karnataka to take further follow up action. They may also coordinate with the concerned other concerned authorities, including the District Magistrate and the police authorities in respect of action under the criminal law. Mechanism may be evolved to provide information to all concerned about the mine operators procuring explosives, the area where they will use store and handle and safety aspects which are to be followed. Substance of relevant part of this order and other regulatory measures be duly published in vernacular for information of the inhabitants and for better compliance.
13. For this purpose, we direct the Chief Secretary, Karnataka to monitor remedial action in terms of the above order in coordination with other concerned Authorities, including the District Magistrate, Chikkaballapur and Director of Mines. The Chief Secretary may oversee taking of safety measures in the light of the report to prevent such occurrences not only at the place of occurrence but also any other location of the State where there is possibility of such occurrences. The Chief Secretary may send a status of compliance report within three months by e-mail at judicial- [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
14. We place on record our appreciation for the task executed by the Committee. CPCB may convey this observation to the members of 4 the Committee. The report of the Committee may be placed on websites of the State PCB and the CPCB for purpose of reference for six months."
3. Aggrieved by the above order, Civil Appeal Diary No. 15266/2021, Sree Shirdi Sai Aggregates & Anr. v. CPCB & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.2897/2021) was filed by the Sree Shirdi Sai Aggregates and Shree Bhramaravasini M-Sanders LLP, mainly on the ground that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to proceed Suo Motu. The said appeal was finally disposed of vide order dated 25.10.2021, relegating the appellants to the Tribunal to file a formal application and raise all contentions, which are to be considered by the Tribunal.
4. Inspite of expiry of almost six months, no application has been filed by the said parties. However, we have heard learned counsel for the PP and also considered written note handed over during hearing, permitting the same to be placed on record by email. Only contention put forward is that since there are statutory provision of Explosive Substance Act, 1908 and Mines Act, 1952 dealing with the matter, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to go into the issue of violation of the said Acts. Initially notice was not issued to the PPs. There is no visible impact of damage to the environment. MSHIC Rules, 1989 and Chemical Accident Rules, 1996 are not covered by the NGT Act. Compensation of Rs.70 lacs has already been paid by the PP. It is further stated that investigation is pending in a criminal case and till same is concluded it will not be appropriate to determine liability under the NGT Act.
5. We do not find any merit in the objections raised. A credible Committee comprising statutory regulators and experts has visited the site and found violations by the PPs in conducting their operations which are not shown in manner to be erroneous. The PPs were also heard by 5 the Committee at the time of visit to the site. While the criminal investigation may determine the criminal liability and Mines Act and Explosive Act may deal with the subjects covered by the said statutes, Section 15 of the NGT Act enables award of compensation to the victims for violations of environmental safety norms resulting in damage to environment and public health. MSIHC Rules and Chemical Accident Rules are under EP Act which is one of scheduled Act and covered by the NGT Act. Though initially the PP may not have been put to notice, the Committee certainly visited the site and put the PP to notice. PP preferred appeal to hon'ble Supreme Court and is being given due opportunity now. The Tribunal has found that the PPs violated the safety norms in handling explosives used for mining which apart from being violations of norms under the Mines and Explosive Acts are also to be overseen by environmental regulators as held inter-alia in Goa Foundation v. UOI & Ors.2. Mining and safety norms are also covered by the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 are also attracted as consents are given under the said Acts which require safety norms to be followed. As held in M.C. Mehta v. UOI & Ors.3, a person undertaking hazardous activity for commercial gains is absolutely liable for any accident or loss to victims and the environment. Thus, principle of absolute liability applies though in the present case the PPs have been found to have violated safety norms which led to the incident.
6. With regard to quantum of compensation, the same has been fixed having regard to age of the deceased and loss of earning on the principle of restitution and considering Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 and 2 (2014) 6 SCC 590 3 (1987) 1 SCC 395 6 also. There is, thus, sound basis of quantum of compensation. We are, thus, unable to find any reason to take a different view. We reiterate order 11.6.2021 and direct that unpaid compensation amount may now be paid within two months, failing which the Authorities may take coercive measures as per law. We also reiterate the direction issued to the Chief Secretary, Karnataka to monitor remedial action for safety measures to prevent such occurrence in future. A compliance report in this regard may now be filed within two months with the Registrar General of this Tribunal by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF. If found necessary, the Registrar General may place the same before the Bench.
Subject to above, the application stands disposed of. A copy of this order be forwarded to the, Chief Secretary, Karnataka, Chief Controller of Explosives, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Nagpur, Director Mines, Karnataka, CPCB, State PCB, District Magistrate, Chikkaballapur and the Member Secretary, State Legal Services Authority, Karnataka, by e-mail for compliance.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Prof. A. Senthil Vel, EM Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM April 22, 2022 Original Application No. 59/2021 A 7