National Green Tribunal
Anumula Revanth Reddy vs Ministry Of Environment Forest And ... on 10 March, 2022
Bench: K. Ramakrishnan, Satyagopal Korlapati
Item No.4:
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No. 189 of 2020 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Anumula Revanth Reddy,
Telangana
...Applicant(s)
Versus
Union of India and Ors.
...Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 10.03.2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): Mr. Sravankumar.
For Respondent(s): Mrs. M. Sumathi for R1.
Mrs. H. Yasmeen Ali for R2, R3, R6 to R8.
Mr. T. Sai Krishnan through
Ms. J. Dayana for R4.
Mr. D. Srinivasan for R5.
Mr. Disha Jain represented
Mr. Rahul Balaji for R10.
Page 1 of 4
ORDER
1. As per order dated 28.09.2021, this Tribunal had considered the Joint Committee report dated Nil, e-filed on 14.08.2021 and extracted in Para (5) of the order and then, passed the following order:-
"6. It is seen from the Joint Committee report at para 9 that "however, as per the map, a raw water channel from Usman Nagar to Asif Nagar is passing through the northern boundary of the project site, and 30 meters is left which includes the green belt, shoulders, carriageway, footpath and buffer zone". The allegations in the application was that prior to the construction project of the 9th and 10th respondent, no flood occurred in that area and it is after the construction made by respondents 9 and 10, during the monsoon period of 2020, heavy flood occurred in that area which resulted in inundation of large extent of area affecting the life of the people in that area. This aspect has not been considered by the Joint Committee and that aspect has not been answered as well. Further prior to the construction by respondent 9 and 10 what was the condition of the land in that area and how water was flowing during rainy season without flooding the area and which ultimately reached any waterbody through this property and whether this flow of water has been obstructed due to the construction as that aspect was not considered and mentioned in the report.
7. It is also seen from the para-4 of the report that as per Google 2003 image, an agricultural outlet channel from Sy. No. 272 and 273 passes are feeding the agricultural fields. However, in Google image of 2008, there appears a drastic change in the land use pattern and the water drain coming from Sy. No. 272 and 273 are not seen in map no. 4 and 5. Probably this outlet channel may be was acting as a drainage channel of excess rain water during rainy seasons through agricultural land which has been encroached and closed due to conversion of agricultural land and construction was made.
8. If that be the case, when conversion of the agricultural land was permitted what is the precautionary principle that has been applied by the authority granting permission to regulate the rain water through this channel which was found in Google 2003 map and how the water collected during rainy season in that area is being drained out without causing any flood in that area till 2020.
9. The report of the District Collector also gives a different picture about the existence of water body in that survey numbers. So, the Joint Page 2 of 4 Committee and also the District Collector are directed to file further reports explaining these aspects. Since, the construction has already been taken place from 2008 onwards in those areas, they must also find out alternate passage for drainage of rain water which is likely to be collected in that area so as to avoid floods in future during monsoon season. For this the developers must also cooperate with the Administrators as it may be beneficial to the occupants of their flat as well to avoid inundation of those areas during monsoon season.
10.The District Collector and the Joint Committee are directed to inspect the area in question and explore this possibility and file further remedial measures to mitigate the situation.
11.They are directed to submit the report to this Tribunal on or before 09.11.2021 by e-filling 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.
12.The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the members of the Committee, official respondents and also to the District Collector for their information and compliance of the direction."
2. The case was originally posted to 09.11.2021 for consideration of further report. Thereafter, the matter has been adjourned from time to time by successive notifications and lastly, it was adjourned to today by notification dated 16.02.2022.
3. When the matter came up for hearing today through Video Conference, Mrs. M. Sumathi entered appearance for the MoEF&CC/1st Respondent in the place of Mr. M.R. Gokulkrishnan.
4. Mrs. H. Yasmeen Ali, the learned counsel appearing for the State Departments wanted some time to file the report, as the Joint Page 3 of 4 Committee has already inspected the area and the report is under preparation.
5. Considering the circumstances, we feel that some time can be granted to them to file a report. They are directed to file the report to this Tribunal on or before 12.04.2022 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.
6. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the members of the Joint Committee and also to the official respondents by e-mail for their information and compliance of directions.
7. For consideration of further report, post on 12.04.2022.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, JM Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM O.A. No.189/2020 (SZ) 10th March 2022. Mn.
Page 4 of 4