National Green Tribunal
Mohan Nanasaheb Kudale vs Pune Municipal Corporation on 7 September, 2022
Item No.8 (Pune Bench)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 14/2020(WZ)
(I.A. No. 122/2021 & I.A. No. 123/2021)
Mohan Nanasaheb Kudale
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Pune Municipal Corporation & Ors.
....Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 07.09.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICEDINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant(s) : Mr. Saurabh Kulkarni, Advocate
Respondent : Ms. Supriya Dangare, Advocate for R-1 (PMC)
Ms. Manasi Joshi, Advocate for R-2
Mr. Rahul Garg, Advocate for R-4
ORDER
1. This application has been moved, stating that the Respondent No. 1/Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) is running Incinerator plant situated at land bearing Survey Nos. 9 to 14/2 and Plot No. 272 to 275 situated at Keshavnagar, Mundhwa, Pune. The said Incinerator Plant constructed in absence of valid environmental clearance, capacity of which is 2000 kgs. (500 kgs/hr. burning rate) for the carcasses of the animals found in the Pune City. The Incinerator Plant was categorized under category 7(d) of the EIA Notification, 2006 which is commonly known as Common Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) under which "all integrated facilities having incineration & landfill or incineration alone" are included. Page 1 of 13
2. The Respondent No. 1 has incurred expenditure to the tune of Rs. 3 crores approximately in establishing this facility out of the public money. The TSDF (Incineration) also falls within the red category of Industries as classified by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). On account of commencing of the said facility, serious type of pollution is happening as well as hazardous conditions and also bad odour is also taking place. The Respondent No. 1 had commenced the said facility in the form of Industry upon the shed/structure, constructed over the above mentioned property against the basic and fundamental rules regarding permissible limit of 1-2 km. away from the Mutha River. The residents of the localities approached the authorities and pointed out that necessary permissions were not obtained for the said plant and was being run illegally, therefore, it should be ordered to be shut down.
3. It is further submitted that the Applicant is not against the project but the same should be operated with the requisite permissions in accordance with law. The Consent to Operate was accorded to the Respondent No. 1 on 20.01.2020 which was granted subject to the outcome of Writ Petition No. 5684/2013, which has been disposed of vide order dated 24.01.2020.
4. In Writ Petition No. 5684/2013, following direction has been given vide order dated 24.01.2020:-
"In view of the further development, the present writ petition need not be kept pending. It is disposed of. If the facility can be made operation pursuant to the consent of the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board dated 20th January, 2020, the order passed on 11th July, 2013 on this writ petition or any of the further orders, shall not preclude or prevent the Pune Municipal Corporation from operating this facility."Page 2 of 13
5. The Notice has been served upon all the Respondents. Out of them, from the side of Respondent No. 1/Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC)- Ms. Supriya Dangare, Learned Counsel has appeared, from the side of Respondent No. 2/Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB)- Ms. Manasi Joshi, Learned Counsel has appeared and from the side of Respondent No. 4/Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC)- Mr. Rahul Garg, Learned Counsel has appeared and their affidavits have already been filed.
6. None has appeared from the side of Respondent No. 3, hence, proceedings will go ahead against them ex-parte.
7. The stand taken by Respondent No. 1/Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) is as follows:-
(i). It is submitted that answering Respondent has been following the due process of law and had applied for Consent to Operate in the year 2019 and has denied any serious type of pollution and hazardousness causing serious health problems. The said incinerator plant is occupying a very small portion of the whole plot of Survey Nos. 6 and 9 to 14/2 as it is occupying only 10,000 sq. ft. area out of total area 58 H.57 R.
(ii). It is also denied that the project is located in close proximity to Mula Mutha River and the residential buildings under construction rather the same is located at an appropriate distance from the residential area.
(iii). It is further submitted that the land has been allotted for cattle-
shed where the Incinerator plant has been installed to provide the facility for the animals in the cattle-shed; approximately, 200-300 cattle are in the cattle-shed and in case of death of any Page 3 of 13 animal, this facility will make it easy to dispose of their dead bodies. Because of the said reason, the said Incinerator plant has been located at the present site. The technology which is being used in the Incinerator, is the latest and the details of which are given in para 9 from 'a to i'.
(iv). It is further submitted that the Respondent No. 1 had earlier its own Carcass Utilization Plant at Devachi Uruli Garbage depot where dead animals used to be disposed. The answering Respondent is also having Incinerators for the animals at Naidu Hospital; but these are of old technology, hence, they are not effective. Presently, the Respondent No. 1 is using the technology, Hurikan 500, the details of which have been mentioned in para 11 of the affidavit. The said Incinerator is necessary considering the requirement of the City as it includes area of 24 villages.
(v). It is further submitted that two MRF (Waste Segration) plants are also located in the same place, processing 150 MTPD of solid waste. The answering Respondent has been deliberately applying for requisite permission from the Respondent No. 2/MPCB.
8. The stand of the Respondent No. 2/Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) is as follows:-
(i). It is submitted that answering Respondent has granted consent to the Respondent No. 1/PMC on 12.07.2017 for the Incinerator Unit at above survey numbers which was valid up to 30.06.2018. Later on, the same was renewed up to Page 4 of 13 31.01.2021. Thereafter the Respondent No. 1 has applied for renewal of Consent to Operate.
(ii). Further, it is submitted that there are no siting criteria for establishing Incinerator Unit (Carcass Disposal Plant) for Incineration of dead animals.
(iii). It is further submitted that in compliance of the Tribunal's order dated 26.11.2021, the Committee had carried out inspection of the animals' carcass disposal plant as well as RDF plant and it was found that plant was not in operation during the visit.
9. The stand of Respondent No. 4/Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC) is as follows:-
(i). There is no specific provision under the EIA Notification, 2006, requiring EC for running incinerator unit for the dead animals.
10. The Tribunal had constituted a committee vide its order dated 06.03.2020. In response to which, the joint committee report is filed on 29.07.2020 where-in the observations & conclusions of the committee are as follows:-
"a. Application of Environment Clearance:
Regional Office (WCZ), MoEF&CC, Nagpur vide letter dated 13.03.2020 requested the MoEF&CC, New Delhi to clarify whether the incinerator unit incinerating the dead animals requires prior environmental clearance under EIA Notification 2006.
MoEF&CC, New Delhi vide email dated 17.07.2020 sent following clarification w.r.t. applicability of EC:
That the issue involved in this instant matter i.e. ''incineration of dead animals'' was deliberated in the Ministry. Incinerator units in general could be used for activities covered under schedule 7 (d), 7(da) and 7(i) of the EIA Notification. However, incineration of dead animals would have similar environmental Page 5 of 13 impacts as for human electric crematoria, which do not have an express provision under any schedule of the EIA Notification, 2006.
b. Obtaining all permissions prior to the commencing of operations of the plant:
As per the information provided by the PMC, the incineration plant had been constructed in the year 2013.
As per the inspection report (dated 28.08.2013) of MPCB, the incinerator has already been installed without obtaining consent to establish. PMC has applied for consent to establish dated 24.11.2016, accordingly, consent to operate was granted vide consent no. RO- PUNE/CONSENT/1707000594 dated. 12.07.2017, which was valid for the period up to 30.06.2018. Then PMC has applied for renewal of consent to operate dated 14.12.2019 and renewal of consent is issued vide consent no. BO/JD(WPC)/PUNE/UAN No. 0000084842/O/CC- 2001001414 dated 20.01.2020, which is valid for the period up to 31.01.2021.
The Collector, Pune allotted the land to Pune Municipal Corporation for the development of cattle sheds. However dead animals incinerator had been established without obtaining necessary permission from the Collector, Pune for change in the purpose of utilization of the land.
No information provided regarding other statutory permissions (if any) obtained from the other authorities Details of reply submitted by PMC, MPCB site inspection report, letter of the Collector, Pune are enclosed.
c. Provisions for the Post-facto environmental clearance:
Clarification provided by MoEF&CC is already discussed in observation a.
d. Serious environmental destruction and health hazardous to the citizens residing in Keshavnagar, Mudhwa, Pune:
During the site inspection it was observed that the project is located in close proximity (within 300 meters) of Mula Mutha River (one of the most polluted River in Maharashtra) and the residential buildings under construction. The project is surrounded by the residential projects. No buffer zone with thick green belt had been provided between the incinerator and residential buildings.
The Engineer of the Incinerator during the site inspection submitted that a stack of 10 meters height had been provided and the incinerator will not emit any smoke during the operation. Project proponent did not monitor the stack emissions till date.Page 6 of 13
No information has been provided on storage of dead animal bodies before incineration as the plant requires sufficient quantity of material for carrying out the operation.
The Incinerator is having only 2 burner chambers. There is no system for trapping of ash particles to restrict the emissions through the stack. As the plant is located in close vicinity of buildings and once buildings are occupied, there may be public complaints in the future due to emissions and odour problems.
As per the information provided, only 42 dead animals have been incinerated from July 2020 to 07.10.2020. Remaining dead animals have been regularly incinerated in incinerator provided at Naidu Hospital in PMC area Pune.
The installation of additional incinerator within close vicinity of residential buildings/ River even when the load is very less may not be justifiable.
e to g. Already covered in a to d.
Representation submitted by Advocate Saurabh Kulkarni (Advocate of Applicant) during the site inspection:
Points of the representation Observations of the
Committee
Incinerator plant was installed Already covered in point no. b of
and was ready for operations page 2.
without obtaining any
permission.
The Pune Municipal Upon the scrutiny of the
Corporation had also informed documents submitted, it was
to the Urban Development observed that Urban
Department, Government of Development Department,
Maharashtra by its letter Government of Maharashtra
dated 30/10/2013 that in vide letter dated 03.05.2014
case permission is not granted rejected the incinerator
for installation of Incinerator application as the same had
Plant at the aforesaid site been constructed without
PMC will dismantle the unit obtaining consent from MPCB
and shift it somewhere else. and the plant is located within
On 03/05/2014 Urban 300 meters of the Mula Mutha
Development Department, River. Copy of the letter is
Government of Maharashtra enclosed as Annexure-4. The rejected the application dated Department also directed the 02/01/2014 made by Pune Pune Municipal Corporation to Municipal Commissioner for shift the plant to another installation of Incinerator Plant appropriate location.
at the aforesaid site. Urban Development Department, Government of Maharashtra stated that the said project was constructed without prior permission from MPCB, project Page 7 of 13 is located just 300 meters away from Mula Mutha River.
On 03/05/2019 Hon'ble Copy of the Collector's letter Bombay High Court passed (dated 26.12.2019) addressed an order in PIL 189/2015 to Revenue and Forest whereby Collector Pune was Department is enclosed as directed to conduct a hearing Annexure-5. after giving an opportunity to PMC regarding the land use of the aforesaid site. Collector has sent a representation to the state government in relation to the land use of the aforesaid site which is still pending for the decision of the State Government. Therefore there is no clarity on the land use of the aforesaid side admittedly the said site is surrounded by Residential Areas.
The Pune Municipal Already covered in point no. a of Corporation intends to operate page no.2. incinerator plant at the site for disposal of animal carcasses.
The said incinerator plant is installed without a prior Environmental Clearance as mandated under category 7
(d) of the EIA Notification of 2006, which is commonly known as the Common Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDF) under which "all integrated facilities having incineration & landfill or "incineration alone" It is very important to note that Project Proponent's first application for Consent to establish was under Rule 5 of Hazardous Waste Rules, 2009 which clarifies the fact that the said Incineration Plant will treat Hazardous Waste even otherwise EIA Notification 2006 clearly states that even in case of facility only of Incineration prior EC is mandatory. Admittedly, no Environmental Clearance is obtained. The EIA notification mandates that incineration requires clearance under the notification. There was no Public Hearing conducted prior to installation of the plant in a Page 8 of 13 residential zone. The said act is thus in violation of the EIA Notification and the judgment of the Supreme court in Hanuman Aroskar vs Union of India dated 29th March 2018, which mandates that Public Hearing is an integral part of the EIA Notification.
The location of the plant is in As per the available information, close proximity of just 300 project did not obtain the meters of the river Mula Mutha consent to establish prior to and thus there will be starting construction and discharge and the river water installation of the plant. PMC is likely to be polluted. The has applied for consent to MPCB has directly issued establish dated 24.11.2016, Consent to Operate and there accordingly, consent to operate was no Consent to Establish is granted vide consent no. RO- issued prior to installation of PUNE/CONSENT/1707000594 the plant and hence the dated. 12.07.2017, which was violations remain unchecked. valid for the period up to 30.06.2018. Then PMC has applied for renewal of consent to operate dated 14.12.2019 and renewal of consent is issued vide consent no.
BO/JD(WPC)/PUNE/UAN No. 0000084842/O/CC-
2001001414 dated 20.01.2020, which is valid for the period up to 31.01.2021.
The Hon'ble NGT in the case of As per the information provided, Satpal Singh vs Municipal the plant is located within the Council Gardhiwala dated municipal limits of the Pune 25th April 2013 has laid down Municipal Corporation. The the guidelines in case of project is in the close proximity disposal of animal carcasses. of Mula Mutha river and the The Hon'ble NGT has held residential buildings. In future that the said process shall be there may be nuisance due to done outside the Municipal the generation of odour from the limits by constructing incineration activities as there is boundary walls and ensuring no buffer zone of thick green belt compliance of all rules. The between the residential present plant is located within buildings and the plant. Municipal Limits and in a residential zone. No public hearing was conducted and hence the residents were not aware of the project coming up. There is tremendous odour which has spread in the locality and is causing hardships to the residents.
As per the judgment of the The joint committee received the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the representation during the site case of Sarang Yadwadkar vs inspection. Pune Municipal Corporation Page 9 of 13 dated 15th February 2019 passed in Civil Appeal No.1054 of 2019, it is mandatory for the Committee to consider the submissions of the Applicant and incorporate them in the report. Hence it is requested to accept the present representation and consider the points highlighted.
Other observations:
1. During the site inspection, it was observed that PMC installed one waste segregation plant (capacity 50 Tonnes Per Day) and same is under operation. Also one RDF plant of capacity 100 Tonnes Per Day is under installation. Waste segregation plant has been installed opposite to Incinerator.
RDF plant is adjacent to waste segregation plant. PMC did not submit any documents pertaining to these plants. PMC has applied for authorization from MPCB for the installation/operation of the waste segregation and RDF plants.
Photographs are enclosed as Annexure-6.
2. No thick green belt had been provided as buffer zone between the plants and residential buildings. Conclusion:
1. MoEF&CC, New Delhi informed that incineration of dead animals would have similar environmental impacts as for human electric crematoria, which do not have an express provision under any schedule of the EIA Notification, 2006.
2. Selection of the site for the installation of 3 plants in questionable as the same are close vicinity (within 300 meters) of the residential areas and Mula Mutha River. No green belt had been developed as a buffer zone between the plants and residential areas/River. Once the residential building around these plants are occupied, there will complaints due to the odour emitted from the plants.
3. The land was allotted to PMC for developing the cattle sheds in the area. However, PMC installed animal carcass incinerator, waste segregation plant and RDF plant in the area without obtaining permission from the Collector, Pune for changing purpose of usage of the land."
11. As per the said joint committee report, it is apparent that the unit being run by the Respondent No. 1, is found to be in the vicinity (within Page 10 of 13 300 meters) of the residential area and Mula Mutha River, where no green belt had been developed as a buffer zone between the plants and residential areas/River. There were complaints due to odour emitting from the plants. The said facility was instituted without obtaining permission from the Collector, Pune, for changing purpose of usage of the land. Pollution is taking place in the locality which may cause health problems to the local residents.
12. In pursuance of this Tribunal's order dated 06.03.2020, another joint committee report dated 19.07.2022 has been filed. The recommendation of which are made as follows:-
"5.1 Pune Municipal Corporation should obtain approval from competent authority for change in land use immediately for Survey No. 6 and 9 to 14/2, Keshawnagar, Mundhwa, Pune.
5.2 PMC should follow the applicable CPCB guidelines on carcass disposal (2020) including measures for transportation of carcass to disposal site and incineration plant.
5.3 PMC should provide Air Pollution Control System (APCS) and stack monitoring facility to Animal Carcass Incineration Plant. The aforesaid APCS and Incineration System should meet emissions norms as mentioned in CPCB Guideline for Carcass Disposal i.e. norms specified for Solid Waste Incinerators in SWM Rules, 2016. MPCB should grant the CTO accordingly, as consent to establish and 01st consent to operate was issued prior to CPCB guidelines (November 2020).
5.4 Cattle sheds which are not following distance criteria as specified in revised CPCB Guidelines for the Environmental Clearance Management of Dairy Farms and Gaushalas (July 2021) may be immediately shifted to other locations within the specified land for cattle shed. Even Cattle sheds should apply for CTE/CTO to MPCB and MPCB to issue CTE only if these cattle sheds and associated facilities meet aforesaid revised CPCB guidelines including STP.
5.5 Though, there is no distance criteria for buffer zone in the Guideline for Carcass Disposal (2020) for MRF facilities for dry solid waste and cattle sheds (dairy farm & Guashalas), PMC shall develop green belt of 10 m along the periphery of the earmarked site/land for cattle sheds. Carcass Plant, MRFs and other facilities so as to minimize cumulative effect of these facilities in the surroundings. The said 10 m green belt has been referred in the part of buffer zone specified for solid waste processing and disposal facilities as per CPCB guideline. Page 11 of 13 However, these aforesaid facilities/plants does not fall under any of the Solid waste processing & disposal facilities. 5.6 Pune Municipal Corporation should carried out the survey of cattle sheds and implement the revised guidelines issued by CPCB including common, collection, treatment and disposal for the solid waste and liquid waste generated from cattle sheds. 5.7 PMC and operators of existing MRF plants should take necessary precautions so as to avoid any smell nuisance to nearby areas."
13. Heard the arguments of the Learned Counsels for the parties and perused the materials on record.
14. During arguments, the Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 2/MPCB has provided guidelines for carcass disposal which has been issued by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) on November, 2020, which has been taken on record and attention is drawn to the guideline 5.0, relating to the role of concerned organisations where at 5.1 (2), following point is relied upon:-
"the local authorities and Panchayats shall make an application, obtain authorisation and consent for setting up carcass disposal facility from the State Pollution Control Board or the Pollution Control Committee."
15. Having drawn attention to it, it has been argued that the said facility should be allowed to be run, subject to the authorisation and consent for setting up of the same, being obtained from the State Pollution Control Board and this is further strengthened by the recommendations made by the committee in its report dated 19.07.2022 stated above where-in the recommendations are that Air Pollution Control System should be established as well as green belt of 10 meters along with the periphery of the earmarked site/land should be established. Page 12 of 13
16. We direct that the facility which is being run, will continue, subject to the conditions that it obtains the consent to operate from the MPCB as per the guidelines for the carcass disposal issued in November, 2020 and also in the light of the recommendations dated 19.07.2022 made by the joint committee, which have been reproduced above.
17. During arguments, it has been brought to our notice by the Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1 that renewal of Consent to Operate, is still pending with the MPCB.
18. We direct the Respondent No. 1/PMC that the facility should be made functional in accordance with the guidelines framed by CPCB as well as, as per the recommendation by the Joint Committee in its report dated 19.07.2022, within a period of 15 days and thereafter, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) shall take a decision upon the consent to operate in next 15 days.
19. With these directions, we dispose of this application.
Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM September 07, 2022 Original Application No. 14/2020(WZ) (I.A. No. 122/2021 & I.A. No. 123/2021) P.Kr Page 13 of 13