National Green Tribunal
Mantu Soni vs Jharkhand Pollution Control Board on 9 December, 2025
Item No.08 Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA
(THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)
Original Application No.107/2025/EZ
(Earlier O.A. No.206/2025/PB)
(I.A. No. 113/2025/EZ)
Mantu Soni Applicant
Versus
State of Jharkhand Respondents
Date of hearing: 09.12.2025
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. ISHWAR SINGH, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant: Mr. Mantu Soni, the applicant in person (through VC).
Respondents:Mr. Ashok Prasad, Advocate for respondent no.1 (through VC).
Ms. Amrita Pandey, Advocate for respondent no.2 (through VC).
Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree, Advocate for respondents no.3, 5 and 6
(through VC).
Mr. Sanjay Jain, Senior Advocate, Mr. Adarsh Tripathi, Mr. Vikram
Singh Baid, Mr. Ajitesh Garg, Ms. Harshita Sukhija, Ms. Rishika
Agrawal (through VC), Mr. Uttam Kumar Mandal (physically in
EZB) and Ms. Udita Mandal (physically in EZB), Advocates for
respondent no.4.
Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate for intervenors (through VC).
ORDER
1. I.A. No. 113/2025/EZ has been filed by Mr. Abinash Kumar Parmar and Mr. Abhay Kumar Sinha, retired State Forest Service Officers seeking the following reliefs:-
"(A) Allow the present interlocutory application for intervention by Mr. Abinash Kumar Parmar and Mr. Abhai Kumar Sinha in O.A. No. 107/2025/ΕΖ.
(B) To allow the proposed intervenors to file the Interim Enquiry Report dated 27.02.2025 prepared by them detailing the violation of Condition No. 9 of Forest Clearance Stage 2 (F.No. 8-56/2009-FC) by the User Agency (NTPC) and further clarifications on the said report already submitted by the proposed intervenors on being 1 asked by the senior officers of the Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand to do so.
(C) Issue mandatory directions to the Respondent Authorities, including the State of Jharkhand and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest-cum-Head of the Forest Force, Jharkhand, Ranchi, to ensure that no adverse, punitive, or disciplinary action (victimisation) is initiated or carried out against the Proposed Intervenors for performing their statutory duties and submitting a true report confirming violations of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
(D) To allow the proposed intervenors to further file detailed affidavits in this matter in the interest of the environmental justice (E) Pass any other order or direction that this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the interest of environmental justice."
2. The intervenor-applicants are seeking their impleadment and directions for protection against department victimization and the relevant part of the above said I.A. reads as under:-
"2. Abhay Kumar Sinha, aged about 61 years, son of the late Maheshwar Prasad, resident of Hirabag, Morris Bungalow, Near Atal Chowk, Canary Road, Hazaribagh, P.O. + P.S. + District- Hazaribagh (Jharkhand)-825302.
II. PROCEDURAL GROUNDS FOR INTERVENTION (NGT RULES, 2011):
3. The proposed intervenors were granted the first extension of their services after superannuation from the post of the Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF), Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand, and were working under the Hazaribagh West Forest Division and Hazaribagh East Forest Divisions, respectively.
4. The proposed intervenors were jointly nominated/appointed vide memo no. 1897 dated 30.11.2024 of the Conservator of Forests, Territorial Circle, Hazaribagh, to conduct an inquiry into the complaint submitted by Shri Mantu Soni dated 14.10.2024.
5. This complaint was filed against the Divisional Forest Officer, Hazaribagh West Forest Division, for giving protection to the 2 violators of certain Forest Clearance conditions by NTPC for the Pakri Barwadih Coal Project in Hazaribagh.
6. That as per Rule 8(5) of the National Green Tribunal (Practice and Procedure) Rules, 2011, the Tribunal may permit the Proposed Intervenors to join this proceeding, even though they are not the original applicants, if satisfied that they have a common interest in the matter.
7. Their common interest lies in placing before the Tribunal the official findings of their inquiry concerning environmental law violations within their jurisdiction, which are material and necessary for the court's adjudication of the Original Application.
8. The proposed intervenors possess material facts, evidence, and professional knowledge crucial for the proper adjudication of the environmental violations alleged, particularly concerning the context of the Forest Clearance compliance.
III. SUBSTANTIVE FACTS AND FINDINGS (VIOLATION OF CENTRAL ACTS):
9. The original application addresses the violation of Forest Clearance (FC) conditions granted to NTPC for the Pakri Barwadih Coal Project.
10. Specifically, F.C. Stage 2 (F. No. 856/2009 FC) included Condition No. 9, which mandated coal evacuation via a high-
speed conveyor system to prevent obstruction in the movement of wildlife, especially elephants.
11. The proposed intervenors jointly submitted the Interim Enquiry Report dated 27.02.2025, which confirmed that the User Agency (NTPC) is violating Condition No. 9 by transporting coal via road, despite the construction of the conveyor system in a substantial portion of the area.
12. The inquiry report highlights that the failure to comply with Condition No. 9 leads to violations under the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and impacts wildlife movement.
13. These findings are corroborated by external expert assessments, specifically the Site Inspection Report prepared by the Integrated Regional Office of the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC), Ranchi, dated 25.11.2022, which confirmed the user agency was transporting coal by road in violation of Condition No.9. IV. GROUNDS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST VICTIMISATION:
14. The submission of this factual and adverse report has resulted in direct victimisation and administrative harassment against the proposed intervenors by the respondent authorities.
15. The proposed intervenors, who are retired ACFs of the Jharkhand Forest Service, were specifically directed by the Conservator of Forest to enquire into the complaint against the 3 Divisional Forest Officer for failing to take action against the User Agency for Forest Clearance violations.
16. The victimisation is primarily manifested through:
(A) Initiation of Departmental Proceedings: The Conservator of Forests (CF), Territorial Circle, Hazaribagh, issued Office Order No. 45 dated 14.08.2025, directing the respective Divisional Forest Officers (DFOs) to frame the Memo of Charges against both Proposed Intervenors based on grave allegations of professional misconduct, indiscipline, and collusion.
(B) The attempt to initiate departmental proceedings is maintained by the proposed intervenors to be mala fide and legally unsound, as the order to frame charges was issued by the Conservator of Forest/Regional Chief Conservator of Forests instead of the legally competent authority (Secretary, Department of Forests, Environment and Climate Change).
(C) The truthfulness and accuracy of the report submitted by the proposed intervenors, which supports the applicant's complaint in O.A. No. 107/2025, are intrinsically linked to the administrative action taken against them. (D) Judicial intervention is necessary to protect honest forest officers from arbitrary or mala fide disciplinary proceedings instigated solely due to their compliance with their public duty and for exposing illegalities in their enquiry reports. Protection is sought to ensure the integrity of the enforcement mechanism and allow the proposed intervenors to assist this Hon'ble Tribunal without the fear of retaliation or prejudice to their service record."
3. Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate for the intervenors appeared before this Tribunal through VC but despite repeated directions, learned Counsel for the intervenors did not turn on his audio due to which submissions made by learned Counsel for the intervenors were not audible to this Tribunal.
4. We have gone through the I.A. filed by the intervenors and also the Original Application and other material on record.
5. The applicant raised the grievance that Forest Clearance was granted by Government of India to NTPC Pankri Barwadih Coal Project in village Badkagaon District, Hazaribagh of Jharkhand imposing the 4 condition number 9, wherein, NTPC was allowed to transport coal from the Conveyer System Banadag Railway Siding to prevent the obstruction in the movement of wildlife, especially Elephants but the said condition is being violated by transporting coal by road passing through the forest to Banadag Railway siding which is causing damage to the environment and endangering wildlife and damage to property, life and agriculture due to wildlife interference to human settlement.
6. No doubt, the substantial questions arising for adjudication on the present Original Application relate to environmental law violations but the reliefs of protection from victimization and issuance of directions for not taking of any adverse punitive or disciplinary action against the intervenor-applicants as claimed by the intervenor-applicants will change the nature and widen the scope of inquiry/adjudication qua aspects which are not only inconsistent with the reliefs sought in the Original Application but are also beyond environmental jurisdiction of this Tribunal as no direction against taking of any adverse or punitive action or initiation of continuation of departmental proceedings can be passed by this Tribunal in the proceedings of the present Original Application and it will be for the intervenor-applicants to avail other appropriate remedies in accordance with law.
7. In view of the above discussion, I.A. No. 113/2025/EZ filed by the intervenor-applicants for their impleadment and protection against victimisation is accordingly dismissed.
8. No response has been filed by respondent no. 1-JSPCB so far. 5
9. Learned counsel for respondent no. 1-JSPCB has submitted that respondent no. 1-JSPCB adopts the affidavits filed by respondents no. 5 and 6 and respondent no. 1 does not want to file any separate affidavit.
10. List on 08.01.2026 for final hearing.
11. Brief written submissions may also be filed by the applicant and respondents, if so desired at least three days before the next date of hearing fixed.
Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Ishwar Singh, EM December 09th, 2025 Original Application No.107/2025/EZ (Earlier O.A. No.206/2025/PB) (I.A. No. 113/2025/EZ) R 6