National Green Tribunal
T.S. Singh vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 9 June, 2021
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Item No. 03 (Court No.1)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 490/2019
(With reports date 01.06.2021 and 08.06.2021)
T. S. Singh Applicant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh Respondent
Date of hearing: 09.06.2021
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER
Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Swami, Advocate for State of UP with Dr. Rajneesh
Dubey, Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development
Department, State of UP
Mr. Pradeep Misra with Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advocates for UPPCB
ORDER
1. Issue for consideration is prevention of discharge of untreated sewage into Sai River at Pratapgarh in Uttar Pradesh.
2. We may note brief background of the proceedings by referring to some of the earlier orders of the Tribunal. On 02.01.2020, the Tribunal considered the report dated 30.08.2019 filed by the UPPCB as follows:-
"1. District Pratapgarh has 9 towns out of them 7 are statutory towns and 2 Census towns. There are 533,546 households in the district accounting for 1.6 percent of the total households in the state. The average size of households in the district is 6.0 persons. Total population of the city Pratapgarh as per 2011 census is 76.133 and water consumption is 13.70 MLD. The total sewage generation of the city is 8.95 MLD.1
2. In Pratapgarh city main drain named City drain originates from Prayagpur Aurehta joins Sai River at Bela Pratapgarh. Distance covered by city drain from Prayagpur Aurehta to its meeting point to Sai River is approx 0.44 Km. City drain carries domestic waste water of habitations settled along the course of river Sai. Total sewage discharge from city drain to river Sai is 8.95 MLD which is untreated in nature. The city drain with a flow of 8.95 MLD will be intercepted and routed to under construction STP of 8.95 MLD at Pratapgarh city near Belhamai Bridge.
3. Above mentioned STP of 8.95 MLD capacity is based on Fluidized Aerobic Bed Reactor (FAB) technology whose main units are Screen & grit chamber, FAB reactor I & 11, tube settler, chlorine contact tank, Sludge thickner. sludge drying bed etc. At the time of inspection STP was found non- operational due to under construction of sewer lines and its connectivity with STP. At present sewage is directly discharged into river Sai.
4. It has been informed that STP was constructed in year 2009 by Thermax Ltd in Pratapgarh Jalotsaran Yojna Belha Pratapgarh city with total estimated cost of Rs. 1820.75 Crore in which 8.50 Crore for STP and rest for sewer line, main pumping station and intermediate pumping station. Summary of the Pratapgarh sewerage plan is attached herewith and marked as Annexure no.-1.
5. It has been informed by UP Jal Nigam, Pratapgarh that construction work of STP and main pumping station was started by July 2009 as the land for STP and MPS was made available by Nagar Palika Parishad, Pratapgarh. Later the work was delayed due to P1L in Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court lodged by Dr. R.K Singh owner of a hospital near STP campus.
6. It is informed by U.P. Jal Nigam Pratapgarh that the work of sewer laying etc. cannot be started timely because the funds released for construction was not equivalent to sanctioned amount, and the tender for construction was cancelled six times by competent authority due to different reasons. Later Forest Department imposed ban on laying of sewer and asked for permission of Govt. of India. Scheme where works are held up due to ban imposed by Forest Dept. Pratapgarh, is attached herewith and marked as Annexure no.-2.
7. It has been informed that total proposed sewer line for connection of drains to STP is 12.472 Kilometre in which approx. 9 Kilometres sewer line has been installed and rest 3.472 Km is under construction. Approximately 95% work of STP was completed in 2010 and its testing has been also done.
8. Regional office UPPCB Raebareli has been directed to EO Nagar Palika Parishad. Pratapgarh and Executive Engineer Jal Nigam Pratapgarh vide letter no. 1305/STP/2017-18 dated 18.01.2018 and 696/STP/P/18-19 dated 10.09.2018 for completion and operation of STP as soon as possible.2
9. The river Sai is also covered in the identified "Polluted river stretches" as Priority --V. In compliance of order passed by Hon'ble NGT on 20-09-2018 in OA no. 673/2018 in the matter of NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN "THE HINDU' AUTHORED BY SHRI JACOB KOSHY"
titled More river stretches are now critically polluted: CPCB, in this regard Pollution Control Board has prepared an Action Plan for rejuvenation of river Sai which has been duly approved by 'River Rejuvenation Committee, U.P."
3. The matter was last considered on 07.10.2020 in the light of status report filed by the Oversight Committee (OC)1 dated 28.08.2020 and action taken report filed by the UP Jal Nigam dated 07.10.2020.
The OC found that the projects are being delayed in the last 11 years and accountability needs to be fixed for continued pollution. There was misappropriation of funds warranting disciplinary and criminal action against concerned officers. The Jal Nigam raised the plea of lack of funds. The Tribunal accordingly directed the Principal Secretary, Urban Development, U.P. to ensure remedial action without waiting for NMCG approval. It was also directed to remain present in person (by video conferencing) with the compliance report. The operative part of the order is reproduced below for ready reference:
"3. The Tribunal noted the failure of the Principal Secretary, Urban Development in taking remedial measures in defiance of the directions of this Tribunal reproduced therein which are based on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (2017) 5 SCC 326. The observations are:
"6. Any failure to follow atleast the above minimum course which is easily available, the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department as well as Chief Executive Officers of the concerned Local Body and Jal Nigam or any other officers entrusted with this function must be held accountable personally by way of disciplinary action as well as requirement of payment of compensation on 'Polluter Pays' 1 constituted by this Tribunal for the State of UP, on suggestion of the State, headed by Justice SVS Rathore, former Judge of the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow 3 principle and making of entry in their ACRs to enforce the rule of law and to enforce citizens' right to clean environment.
7. This Tribunal has dealt with the matter while dealing with the pollution of rivers. Vide order dated 22.08.2019, in O.A. No. 200 of 2014 (River Ganga), it was observed:-
"16. ....... As already observed by this Tribunal including in the order dated 14.05.2019 that River Ganga being National River with distinct significance for the country, even a drop of pollution therein is a matter of concern. All the authorities have to be stringent and depict zero tolerance to the pollution of River Ganga. Wherever STPs are not operating, immediate bioremediation and/or phyto-remediation may be undertaken if feasible. To avoid procedural delay of tender processes, etc. specifications and norms for undertaking such activities may be specified in consultation with the CPCB as was earlier directed in our order dated 29.11.2018.
Performance guarantees may be required to be furnished for ensuring timely performance. It needs to be ensured that setting up of STPs and sewerage network to be completed and carried out so as to avoid any idle capacities being created. Performance guarantees may be taken for preventing such defaults.
8. Vide order dated 28.08.2019 in O.A. No 593/2017, Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors., (dealing with Water pollution for compliance of order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2017) 5 SCC 326) it was observed:-
"17. As already noted, prevention of pollution of water is directly linked to access to potable water as well as food safety. Restoration of pristine glory of rivers is also of cultural and ecological significance. This necessitates effective steps to ensure that no pollution is discharged in water bodies. Doing so is a criminal offence under the Water Act and is harmful to the environment and public health. 'Precautionary' principle of environmental law is to be enforced. Thus, the mandate of law is that there must be 100% treatment of sewage as well as trade effluents. This Tribunal has already directed in the case of river Ganga that timelines laid down therein be adhered to for setting up of STPs and till then, interim measures be taken for treatment of sewage. There is no reason why this direction be not followed, so as to control pollution of all the river stretches in the country.4
The issue of ETPs/CETPs is being dealt with by an appropriate action against polluting industries. Setting up of STPs and MSW facilities is the responsibility of Local Bodies and in case of their default, of the States. Their failure on the subject has to be adequately monitored. Recovery of compensation on 'Polluter Pays' principle is a part of enforcement strategy but not a substitute for compliance. It is thus necessary to issue directions to all the States/UTs to enforce the compensation regime, latest with effect from 01.04.2020. We may not be taken to be the States/UTs themselves have to pay the requisite amount of compensation to be deposited with the CPCB for restoration of environment. The Chief Secretaries of all the States may furnish their respective compliance reports as per directions already issued in O.A. No.606/2018."
9. In O.A. No. 6 of 2012, Manoj Mishra Vs. Union of India & Ors. (dealing with river Yamuna pollution) vide order dated 11.09.2019, the Tribunal observed:-
"13. Priorities need to be planned. The first step is to ensure that no pollutant is discharged into the river or drains connected thereto. Projects of setting up and upgradation of STPs including setting up of interceptors, laying of sewerage line network etc. have to be completed within strict timelines. Pending such action, immediate bioremediation and/or phytoremediation or any other alternative remediation measure may be undertaken as an interim measure. Pollution of river or water bodies is a criminal offence which needs to be checked by setting up ETPs/CETPs/STPs. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed2 that establishment and proper functioning of ETPs/CETPs/STPs in the country be ensured. This is to enforce the right of access to water. It has been noted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that water pollution is the cause of various diseases and also affects food safety apart from affecting the environment as such. Following the said judgment, this Tribunal has directed3 that "All the local bodies have to ensure 100% treatment of the generated sewage and in default to pay compensation which is to be recovered by the States/UTs, with effect from 01.04.2020. In default of such collection, the States/UTs are liable to pay such compensation. The CPCB is to collect 2 (2017) 5 SCC 326 3 Order dated 28.08.2019 in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India &Ors., O.A No.593/2017 5 the same and utilize for restoration of the environment."
10. Again, vide order dated 06.12.2019, in O.A. No. 673/2018, News item published in "The Hindu" authored by Shri Jacob Koshy Titled "More river stretches are now critically polluted: CPCB" (dealing with 351 polluted river stretches), the Tribunal observed:-
"47. We now sum up our directions as follows:
i) 100% treatment of sewage may be ensured as directed by this Tribunal vide order dated 28.08.2019 in O.A. No. 593/2017 by 31.03.2020 atleast to the extent of in-situ remediation and before the said date, commencement of setting up of STPs and the work of connecting all the drains and other sources of generation of sewage to the STPs must be ensured. If this is not done, the local bodies and the concerned departments of the States/UTs will be liable to pay compensation as already directed vide order dated 22.08.2019 in the case of river Ganga i.e. Rs. 5 lakhs per month per drain, for default in in-situ remediation and Rs. 5 lakhs per STP for default in commencement of setting up of the STP."
11. We may also observe that apart from interim remediation as mentioned above, pending installation of STPs etc. another option is development of wetlands and bio- diversity parks for reducing the pollution loads on the recipient water bodies. Such directions have been issued by this Tribunal in dealing with the issue in other cases also. Reference may be made order dated 18.12.2019 in O.A. No. 125 of 2017, Court on its own Motion v. State of Karnataka:-
"28 (xii) Steps may be taken to explore development of wetlands and bio-diversity parks apart from other remedial action for reducing the pollution load on the recipient water bodies."
12. Since the above matter is already covered by directions of this Tribunal dealing with 351 polluted river stretches vide order dated 06.12.2019, in O.A. No. 673/2018, the directions with regard to compensation etc. will apply to the present case."
4. In view of above, the Oversight Committee, constituted by this Tribunal for the State of Uttar Pradesh, has given its report on 28.08.2020 followed by action taken report filed on 07.10.2020 by Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam, Pratapgarh. The Oversight Committee held meetings on 17.03.2020 and 25.08.2020 and noted that water sources cannot be contaminated under the garb of 6 pendency of a proposal before NMCG. The work must be executed by the State Government from its budgetary resources and the State PCB must take action for violation of statutory provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. The recommendations in the report are as follows:-
"1. This committee is of the view that this is an over delayed project where STP construction is going on for last 11 years. The State Govt must complete it along with its sewer lines in the next 6 months and should provide budgetary resources for it on priority.
2. The Committee felt that accountability must be fixed for causing pollution. Since this is a matter of misappropriation of funds, both disciplinary proceedings and criminal action should have been initiated against persons responsible for this. Secretary Urban Development has assured of satisfactory action against the guilty within 10 days.
3. As per Hon'ble NGT's directions, not a single drop of untreated water should be discharged into the river even during monsoon season. The issue of discontinuation of bioremediation during monsoons should be clarified in that context and CPCB should issue clear guidelines in that context.
4. It appears that future enhancement in generation of the sewage has not been taken into consideration while designing the STP. It is recommended that the department should conduct a study to evaluate the future growth of sewage in the city and design capacity of the STP should be increased as per the future demands.
5. The Department may also explore the possibility of creating bio-diversity park or new wetlands to reduce the load of pollution."
5. As regards the response of the Jal Nigam, unfortunately the same stand is repeated that the Jal Nigam is waiting for the approval of the NMCG. It is also mentioned that no action can be taken against the persons responsible as they have retired except that FIR has been lodged against four persons. The said response does not meet the recommendations of the Oversight Committee. Inspite of huge misappropriation, no stringent action has been taken against the guilty. Such huge misappropriation cannot be at the level of lower level officers, without involvement of higher level authorities, which may be considered at appropriate level and action taken for safeguarding public funds and enforcing rule of law.
6. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development (Nagar Vikas) must ensure initiation of remedial steps within one month, out of the State funds or fund collected as per rules from inhabitants, without waiting for the NMCG approval. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development may remain present in 7 person (by Video Conferencing) with the compliance report on the next date of hearing. The report may specifically mention water quality status of river Sai, further progress on laying of sewers, performance of in-situ remediation of four drains and operational status of STP.
7. The State PCB is at liberty to initiate prosecution and recover compensation following due process of law."
4. In view of above, the OC has filed its report dated 01.02.2021 followed by further report on 01.06.2021 about the status of compliance. The Department of Urban Development, U.P. has also filed an action taken report on 01.02.2021, followed by a further report filed on 08.06.2021. We may refer to the latest reports of the OC as well as the State of UP.
5. The compliance status as per OC report dated 01.06.2021 is as follows:
3. Compliance Report of UP Jal Nigam Shri. Sushil Patel JMD, Jal Nigam had presented the following compliances in the aforementioned issue on 25.01.2021:
S. No. Points of Discussion Action taken
1 Current status Pratapgarh sewerage scheme was sanctioned in the year
2009-10 under State Sector Programme. The major works included under the project and their present status is as follows:
S.no. Description Quantity Present
proposed Status
1 Sewer Line 12.47 Km 6.70 Km laid
2 Intermediate 1 No. Not
Pumping Station Constructed
3 Main Pumping 1 No. 90%
Station Complete
4 Sewage Treatment 8.95 MLD 90%
Plant Complete
8
Substantial work of construction of 8.95 MLD STP includeing installation of electrical and mechanical equipments were completed in year 2013. Power connection and other ancillary works of STP are impeded since 2013 due to diversion of funds to other works.
Further, it is to inform that 4 drains, namely Police line drain, Bholiyapur drain, Sardar drain and Ram Leela maidan drain are discharging 7.7 MLD of sewage into the river Sai. A DPR under Namami Gange Programme, amounting Rs. 33.91 cr., for construction of above 4 drains, including 15 years O&M was submitted to NMCG dated 28.08.2020.
Observations This project
on aforesaid DPRalso includes
were provisions for
communicated by
NMCG vide their letter dated 09.10.2020. After incorporating replies to these observations, revised DPR amounting to Rs. 32.56 cr., including 15 years O&M was submitted to NMCG vide letter dated 10.12.2020. In compliance of Hon'ble NGT order dated 07.10.2020 in the matter, request for allocation of funds against the aforesaid DPR was made by Joint Managing Director, UP Jal Nigam, Lucknow vide letter dated 19.10.2020 through State Govt.
Status of interim measures Interim measures i.e bio-remediation work are being taken by which has been taken Municipal Committee Belha, Pratapgarh for all the above four drains of Pratapgarh city. Photographs of the progress work are annexed as Annexure 1.
Status of work of sewer Sewer line connection with STP could not be completed due to line connection with STP unavailability of funds.
Status of action taken It was informed that the work on this project (sanctioned against the erring officers in year 2006) was started in year 2009 and continued upto 2013. The proposed work under the approved project could not be completed due to diversion of funds. The details of the officers responsible for it are as follows:
S.no. Name Designation
1 Sh. Rajesh Khare Executive Engineer
2 Sh. Rakesh Kumar Divisional Accountant
Srivastava
3 Sh. Rampal Ram Head Clerk
4 Late Sh.Satyendranath RGC (Expired in June,
Srivastava 2020)
5 M/s Thermax Ltd., Contractor Firm
Chinchwad, Pune
The above concerned persons retired during the years 2014- 2018. Further, as per clause 351 (A) of Civil Services Regulation Act, no proceedings can be initiated against the persons responsible after laps of 4 years period from the date of irregularity. As such, disciplinary proceedings could not be initiated.
An FIR had already been lodged against the following on 30.08.2020 under IPC section 409,419 and 420:
S.no. Name Designation
1 Sh. Rajesh Khare Executive Engineer
2 Sh. Rakesh Kumar Divisional Accountant
Srivastava
3 Sh. Rampal Ram Head Clerk
9
4 M/s Thermax Ltd., Contractor Firm
Chinchwad, Pune
A copy of compliance report of UP Jal Nigam is Annexed as Annexure 2.
The compliance report received from UP Jal Nigam on 24.05.2021 is as follows:
Sl. Points of Discussion Reply
1 What is the current status of the No, The STP is not operational.
Pratapgarh sewage treatment plant?
Is it operational or not.
2 What steps had been taken to A DPR under Namami Gange Programme, amounting to Rs.
make the STP operational? When 33.91 cr., for I&D of above 4 drains, including 15 years O & M,
will it be operational? was submitted to NMCG (Govt. of India) vide SMCG letter no.
882/SMCG-UP/0623/SMCG dated 28.08.2020. The project also includes provisions for making the STP operational.
Observations on aforesaid DPR were communicated by NMCG vide their letter no. TE- 12014/1/2020-Tech. Construction NMCG dated 09.10.2020. After incorporating the raised observations, revised DPR amounting to Rs. 32.56 cr., including 15 years O & M, was submitted to NMCG vide SMCG letter no. 1220/0623/SMCG-UP/04 dated 10.12.2020 and 276/0623/SMCG-UP/01 dated 15.03.2021.
Observations on the above DPR were again communicated by NMCG vide their office letter no. TE-12014/2020-TECH CONSTRUCTION NMCG dated 13.05.2021.
The STP will be made operational 24 months after the issuance of Letter of Award.
3 What is the current status of Sewer line connection with STP could not be completed due to work of sewer line connection with unavailability of funds. STP?
4 What is the status of interim Interim measures i.e. bioremediation work is being done by measures which have been NPP Belha, Pratapgarh for all the above four drains of taken/should be taken to prevent Pratapgarh city. the polluted discharge from the drains to enter into the river Sai.
A copy of compliance report of UP Jal Nigam is Annexed as Annexure 5.
4. Compliance report of UPPCB as on 25.01.2021:
Status of Environmental Compensation: Shri. P. K. Agarwal, CEO, UPPCB informed that they had issued show-cause notice to Municipal Committee Pratapgarh for environmental compensation of Rs 36.50 crores in consonance with the Hon'ble NGT's orders. UPPCB has also recommended prosecution against the erring officers and had sent it to the Urban Development Department but their response is still awaited.10
5. Suggestions from the Forest Department, Pratapgarh as on 31.01.2021:
During the meeting dated 25.01.2021 Shri Varun Singh, DFO Pratapgarh was directed to look into the possibilities of construction of wetland/biodiversity park in the area. Proceeding in the same direction he had presented a rejuvenation action plan for River Sai. The details of the action Plan are as follows:
1. Bioengineering (biological engineering) in context of water cleanup is the use of biological principles of thermodynamics, kinetics and toxicology for application to the design, management, monitoring and economic evaluation of engineered systems in order to protect public health and environment.
2. Bioremediation is an attractive remedial technique because it is a "NATURALPROCESS," a process through which contaminants are merely transformed from one environmental medium to another and it destroys the target chemical. Bioremediation is also have economic advantage in cleaning up of contaminated water because of low capital energy and material cost and also relatively low-tech required, does not have intensive labour requirement, does not require cost of transportation of hazardous contaminants, In Sai river it will be a best practice to get rid of polluted water.
3. In the same context. in district Pratapgarh, Forest Department planned to develop biodiversity park named as Ranjitpurchilbila Biodiversity Park Pratapgarh. The project area is almost 42.5 hectare . Duration is 2023 -2024. The legal status of the area is as reserve forest (where park area is proposed). It is located near chillbilla Pratapgarh and sai river flows west to east almost 0.5 km away from the proposed site.
The project is pending for final approval.
Detailed compliance report received from Divisional Director Forest And Wildlife Forest Division, Pratapgarh is annexed as Annexure 3.
6. Compliance report of CPCB as on 29.01.2021 During the meeting dated 25.01.2021, CPCB was directed to issue guidelines on the issue of bioremediation during monsoons in compliance to the directions of Hon'ble NGT order dated 07.10.2020. The CPCB informed that they have issued clear directions that not a single drop of untreated water should enter into the rivers even in monsoons. A copy of CPCB directions is annexed as Annexure 4.
7. Recommendations:
In view of the above we recommend as follows:
1. In the light of the compliance presented by UP Jal Nigam, this committee feels that no progress had been made in the 11 direction of completing the work on ground. This committee in its meeting dated 25.08.2020 had reminded "the officials that time and again it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble NGT that access to clean water is Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The water sources cannot be allowed to be contaminated because the STP has not come into operation for the last 11 years. It is the bounden duty of the State Government to provide for finances to complete the project. The Project cannot be allowed to be delayed under the garb of pendency at NMCG level.
In fact, in the last more than 6 months since the Hon'ble NGT order of 02.01.2020, the State Government has neither included it in the budget proposal nor sent the proposal to NMCG so far. The State Govt must complete it in the next 3 months from its budgetary resources if NMCG approval is taking time". However, no progress had been made in this direction. The Oversight Committee reiterated that State Govt should provide funds for this project on priority. If the funds approval from NMCG is taking time, as is evident from the progress in this case, the State Govt should make Budgetary allocations in its State Budget.
2. In the earlier meeting of oversight committee dated 25.08.2020 it was suggested that phytoremediation would be more cost-effective and sustainable way to treat the drains. Yet no progress had been made in adopting phyto- remediation as an in situ measure till the STP is operational.
3. In the earlier meeting of oversight committee dated 25.08.2020 it was noted that the total sewage generation in the city is 8.95 MLD and the proposed STP is 8.95 MLD. The State Govt could not explain as to why the future enhancement of amount in the total generation of the sewage has not been taken into consideration while designing the STP. The Oversight Committee reiterates that the future sewage generation requirements should be incorporated in the revised DPR to be submitted by Jal Nigam.
4. The DFO, Pratapgarh had made some useful suggestions to remediate the pollution in river Sai. It may be directed to use the above mentioned plan in cleaning up the drains with some modifications. The committee recommends that use of bio-engineered plants should be promoted in place of chemicals wherever possible.
5. Irrespective of so many reminders from Oversight Committee and strict direction of Hon'ble NGT, still UP Jal Nigam had not made the STP functional and polluted drains are being dumped into the river Sai. This type of negligence and delay in fulfilling its duty from UP Jal Nigam is not acceptable. It may be recommended that an Environmental Compensation should be imposed on UP Jal Nigam as per the norms of Hon'ble NGT.
12The UPPCB may be directed to calculate the amount of EC to be paid by UP Jal Nigam."
6. The action taken report filed by the Urban Development Department, U.P. is as follows:
" xxx..............................xxx...................................xxx In compliance of order dt. 07-10-2020 Department of Urban Development, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh has submitted detailed Action Taken Report vide letter dt. 01-02-2021 before Hon'ble Tribunal. In view of the Hon'ble Court's direction we, most respectfully submit the following updated Action Taken Report:-
CURRENT STATUS IN REGARD OF CONSTRUCTION OF STPs We, most respectfully submit to the Hon'ble Tribunal that the Pratapgarh Sewerage Scheme was sanctioned in the year 2009-10 under State Sector Program. The major works included under the project and present status is as under:
1. 6.70 km of the Sewer Line is laid out of the Quantity proposed 12.47 km
2. Intermediate pumping station 1 no. is not through the complete construction yet.
3. The work on the Main pumping station 1 no. has been completed to 90%.
4. In the 8.95 MLD Sewage Treatment Plant, 90% of the work has been completed Substantial work of construction of 8.95 MLD STP including installation of electrical and mechanical equipment was successfully completed in the year 2013 however it's unfortunate to inform that Power connection and other ancillary works of the STP are impeded since 2013 due to diversion of funds to other works for which an FIR has already been lodged against the erroneous officials.
DISCHARGE OF WASTE INTO THE RIVER SAI Further, it is to be informed to the Hon'ble Tribunal that 4 drains, namely Police line drain, Bholiyapur drain, Sadar drain, and Ram Leela Maidan drain, having a total discharge of 7.7 MLD, are being discharged into the river Sai. However, no direct discharges of the untreated thins are made into the water body as the drains are first treated by the means of Bio- remediation. This treatment is consistently being followed since March 2020.
STEPS TAKEN TO MAKE THE STP OPERATIONAL A DPR under Namami Gange Programme, amounting to Rs. 33.91 cr., for I&D of above 4 drains, including 15 years O & M, was 13 submitted to NMCG (Govt. of India) vide SMCG letter no. 882/SMCG- UP/0623/SMCG dated 28.08.2020 herewith attached as Annexure I. The project also includes provisions for making the STP operational.
Observations on aforesaid DPR were communicated by NMCG vide their letter no. TE- 12014/1/2020-Tech. Construction NMCG dated 09.10.2020 herewith attached as Annexure II. After incorporating the raised observations, revised DPR amounting to Rs.32.56 cr., including 15 years O & M. was submitted to NMCG vide SMCG letter no. 1220/0623/SMCG-UP/04 dated 10.12.2020 herewith attached as Annexure III and 276/0623/SMCG UP/01 dated 15.03.2021 enclosed as Annexure IV.
Observations of the above-revised DPR were again communicated by NMCG vide their office letter no. TE 12014/2020- TECH CONSTRUCTION 13.05.2021 hereby attached as Annexure V. A technical team of NMCG was required to visit the site. However, this visit could not be accomplished due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic situation.
After the site visit of the Technical Team of NMCG and their conclusive observations, a revised DPR will be submitted to NMCG for approval and allocation of funds. After the approval of the DPR, finalization of tender, and issuance of Letter of Award (LOA) to the qualified bidder, the project will be completed within 24 months after the issuance of LOA.
The STP will be made operational after sanctioning of the project and 24 months after the issuance of the Letter of Award. The components of work distribution of these 24 months are as follow:-
Interception & Diversion of 4 drains of Pratapgarh City Sl. Description of work Start Finish Duration Quantity Time remarks No. date date in months 1 Interception work From 6 months 6 months 4 Nos 6 Time has including approval of award months been taken drawing design etc. of in 2 Sewer carrying sewer tender 6 months 6 months 2.25 Km 6 anticipation line including main months of approval hole & reinstatement of project work and approval of and award drawing design of tender 3 Overhauling of 5 months 5 months 1 Job 5 existing STP months 4 Connection with STP 2 months 2 months 1 Job 2 and MPS Overhauling months 5 Power connection 2 months 2 months 1 Job 2 with MEP building. months 6 Testing, 3 months 3 months 1 Job 3 commissioning and months trial, run.14
ACTIONS TAKEN AGAINST ERRING OFFICERS It is to submit that the works on the project, sanctioned in the year 2006, were started in the year 2009 and continued up to the year 2013. The proposed works under the approved project could not be completed due to the diversion of funds. The persons responsible for the diversion of funds are as follows:
1. Sh. Rajesh Khare: Executive Engineer
2. Sh. Rakesh Kumar Srivastava: Divisional Accountant
3. Sh. Rampal Ram: Head Clerk
4. Late Sh. Satyendranath Srivastava: RGC (Expired in June 2020)
5. M/s Thermax Ltd. Chinchwad, Pune: Contractor Firm The above-concerned persons have retired during the years 2014-
2018. Further, as per clause 351 (A) of the Civil Services Regulation Act, no proceedings can be initiated against the persons responsible, after a lapse of 4 year period from the date of irregularity. As such, disciplinary proceedings could not be initiated.
Although, an FIR has already been lodged against the following persons responsible on 30.08.2020 under sections 409, 419, and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, hereby attached as Annexure VI:-
1. Sh. Rajesh Khare: Executive Engineer
2. Sh. Rakesh Ktunar Srivastava: Divisional Accountant
3. Sh. Rampal Ram: Head Clerk
4. M/s Thermax Ltd. Chinchwad, Pune: Contractor Firm INTERIM MEASURES TAKEN TO CURB POLLUTION OF WATER BODY Interim measures have been taken to prevent the polluted discharge from the drains to enter the river Sai. However, In order to ensure compliance with the orders of Hon'ble Tribunal, the Principal Secretary Urban Development has issued instructions vide Letter No:
142/Nine-9-2019-893/2001 Dated: 03.02.2020 to the concerned ULBs for taking up the interim measures for the treatment of drains till permanent infrastructure for treatment of sewage is created is herein attached as Annexure VII.
It is further to be informed to the Hon'ble Tribunal that as a remedial measure to curb water pollution was started in March 2020, by Bio-remediation of the 4 drains namely-Police line drain, Bholiyapur drain, Sadar drain, and Ram Leela Maidan drain all of which are discharged into the river Sai has been duly done. Time and again, water samples of these 4 drains have been collected by the UPPCB. The assessments of such samples have shown a reduction in BOD and COD levels. The reports of such remediation evaluations have been attached herewith attached as Annexure VIII."15
7. We have heard learned Counsel for the State of UP and also the Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development Department, U.P. present by video conferencing. We are in agreement with the report of the OC that there is no satisfactory progress. There is continued violation of directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.4 and orders of this tribunal. This is resulting in contamination of drains and then of River Sai, which later meets Ganga.
8. Contamination of water sources is a punishable offence under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 for the last 49 years. The stand of the State atleast since 30.8.2019 (when first report was filed by the PCB as noted earlier) is that the STP was started in 2009 and completed in 2010 to the extent of 95%. The same is not been made operational for the last 11 years. Earlier funds have been illegally misappropriated but no meaningful action is being taken against the violators. Action plan in terms of order of this Tribunal dated 20.9.2018 in OA 673/2018 was prepared which included requisite STP being operated within the timeline mentioned therein even though more than two years have passed. Repeatedly, plea is that unless NMCG funds are available from Central Government, the Municipal Council concerned and the Urban Development Department will not comply with the constitutional obligation of preventing discharge of pollution is being reiterated against the mandate of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Shri Virdhichand & Ors.5 as well as Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors., supra.4
(2017) 5 SCC 326 5 (1980) 4 SCC 162 16 This plea is being raised again inspite of its rejection by the Tribunal earlier. Non-availability of NMCG funds cannot be a justification for not stopping pollution. If funds are available from any source, the Tribunal has no objection to the same but in any case, the concerned authorities cannot avoid their responsibility under the public trust doctrine, if necessary, by raising funds, as per directions in the Supreme Court judgement.
9. We may refer to the specific directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal on the subject:
Extracts from the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti Vs. Union of India, supra "7. Having effectuated the directions recorded in the foregoing paragraphs, the next step would be, to set up common effluent treatment plants. We are informed, that for the aforesaid purpose, the financial contribution of the Central Government is to the extent of 50%, that of the State Government concerned (including the Union Territory concerned) is 25%. The balance 25%, is to be arranged by way of loans from banks. The above loans, are to be repaid, by the industrial areas, and/or industrial clusters. We are also informed that the setting up of a common effluent treatment plant, would ordinarily take approximately two years (in cases where the process has yet to be commenced).
The reason for the above prolonged period, for setting up "common effluent treatment plants", according to the learned counsel, is not only financial, but also, the requirement of land acquisition, for the same.
x..............................x.....................x....................
10. Given the responsibility vested in municipalities under Article 243-W of the Constitution, as also, in Item 6 of Schedule XII, wherein the aforesaid obligation, pointedly extends to "public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management", we are of the view that the onus to operate the existing common effluent treatment plants, rests on municipalities (and/or local bodies). Given the aforesaid responsibility, the municipalities (and/or local bodies) concerned, 17 cannot be permitted to shy away from discharging this onerous duty. In case there are further financial constraints, the remedy lies in Articles 243-X and 243-Y of the Constitution. It will be open to the municipalities (and/or local bodies) concerned, to evolve norms to recover funds, for the purpose of generating finances to install and run all the "common effluent treatment plants", within the purview of the provisions referred to hereinabove. Needless to mention that such norms as may be evolved for generating financial resources, may include all or any of the commercial, industrial and domestic beneficiaries, of the facility. The process of evolving the above norms, shall be supervised by the State Government (Union Territory) concerned, through the Secretaries, Urban Development and Local Bodies, respectively (depending on the location of the respective common effluent treatment plant). The norms for generating funds for setting up and/or operating the "common effluent treatment plant"
shall be finalised, on or before 31-3-2017, so as to be implemented with effect from the next financial year. In case, such norms are not in place, before the commencement of the next financial year, the State Governments (or the Union Territories) concerned, shall cater to the financial requirements, of running the "common effluent treatment plants", which are presently dysfunctional, from their own financial resources.
11. Just in the manner suggested hereinabove, for the purpose of setting up of "common effluent treatment plants", the State Governments concerned (including, the Union Territories concerned) will prioritise such cities, towns and villages, which discharge industrial pollutants and sewer, directly into rivers and water bodies.
12. We are of the view that in the manner suggested above, the malady of sewer treatment, should also be dealt with simultaneously. We, therefore, hereby direct that "sewage treatment plants" shall also be set up and made functional, within the timelines and the format, expressed hereinabove.
13. We are of the view that mere directions are inconsequential, unless a rigid implementation mechanism is laid down. We, therefore, hereby provide that the directions pertaining to continuation of industrial activity only when there is in place a functional "primary effluent treatment plants", and the setting up of functional "common effluent treatment plants" within the timelines, expressed above, shall be of the Member Secretaries of the Pollution Control Boards concerned. The Secretary of the Department of Environment, 18 of the State Government concerned (and the Union Territory concerned), shall be answerable in case of default. The Secretaries to the Government concerned shall be responsible for monitoring the progress and issuing necessary directions to the Pollution Control Board concerned, as may be required, for the implementation of the above directions. They shall be also responsible for collecting and maintaining records of data, in respect of the directions contained in this order. The said data shall be furnished to the Central Ground Water Authority, which shall evaluate the data and shall furnish the same to the Bench of the jurisdictional National Green Tribunal.
14. To supervise complaints of non-implementation of the instant directions, the Benches concerned of the National Green Tribunal, will maintain running and numbered case files, by dividing the jurisdictional area into units. The abovementioned case files will be listed periodically. The Pollution Control Board concerned is also hereby directed to initiate such civil or criminal action, as may be permissible in law, against all or any of the defaulters.
x........................x........................x.................
16. It however needs to be clarified, that the instant directions and time lines, shall not in any way dilute any time lines and directions issued by Courts or Benches of the National Green Tribunal, hitherto before, wherein the postulated time lines would expire before the ones expressed through the directions recorded above. It is clarified, that the time lines, expressed hereinabove will be relevant, only in situations where there are no prevalent time line(s), and also, where a longer period, has been provided for."
(emphasis supplied) Extracts from orders of this Tribunal in OA 593/2017 :
Order dated 21.05.2020
26. Summary of directions:
i. All States/UTs through their concerned departments such as Urban/Rural Development, Irrigation & Public Health, Local Bodies, Environment, etc. may ensure formulation and execution of plans for sewage treatment and utilization of treated sewage effluent with respect to each city, town and village, adhering to the timeline as directed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. STPs must meet the prescribed standards, including faecal coliform.19
CPCB may further continue efforts on compilation of River Basin-wise data. Action plans be firmed up with Budgets/Financial tie up. Such plans be overseen by Chief Secretary and forwarded to CPCB before 30.6.2020. CPCB may consolidate all action plans and file a report accordingly.
Ministry of Jal Shakti and Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs may facilitate States/UTs for ensuring that water quality of rivers, lakes, water bodies and ground water is maintained.
As observed in para 13 above, 100% treatment of sewage/effluent must be ensured and strict coercive action taken for any violation to enforce rule of law. Any party is free to move the Hon'ble Supreme Court for continued violation of its order after the deadline of 31.3.2018. This order is without prejudice to the said remedy as direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be diluted or relaxed by this Tribunal in the course of execution. PCBs/PCCs are free to realise compensation for violations but from 1.7.2020, such compensation must be realised as per direction of this Tribunal failing which the erring State PCBs/PCCs will be accountable."
Order dated 21.09.2020 "11. The Tribunal has already issued directions vide orders dated 28.08.2019 and 21.05.2020 for ensuring that no untreated sewage/effluent is discharged into any water body and for any violation compensation is to be assessed and recovered by the CPCB so that the same can be utilized for restoration of the environment, complying with the principle of 'Polluter Pays' which has been held to be part of 'Sustainable Development' and part of right to life. Control of such pollution is crucial for environment, aquatic life, food safety and also human health. .."
From OA 673/2018:
Order dated 06.12.2019:
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court noticed the level of degradation of rivers in India and apathy of the authorities as follows:
"58. Rivers in India are drying up, groundwater is being rapidly depleted, and canals are polluted. Yamuna in Delhi looks like a black drain. Several perennial rivers like Ganga and Brahmaputra are rapidly becoming seasonal. Rivers are dying or declining, and aquifers are getting over pumped. Industries, hotels, etc. are pumping out groundwater at an alarming rate, causing sharp decline in the groundwater levels. Farmers are having a 20 hard time finding groundwater for their crops e.g. in Punjab. In many places there are serpentine queues of exhausted housewives waiting for hours to fill their buckets of water. In this connection John Briscoe has authored a detailed World Bank Report, in which he has mentioned that despite this alarming situation there is widespread complacency on the part of the authorities in India.6 "4. We see Yamuna river virtually turned into a sullage.
We take judicial notice of this situation. Similar is the position with Ganges. As it proceeds, industrial effluents are being poured in rivers. Sewage is also being directly put in rivers contributing to the river water pollution. We direct the Pollution Control Boards of the various States as well as the Central Pollution Control Board and various Governments to place before us the data and material with respect to various rivers in the concerned States, and what steps they are taking to curb the pollution in such rivers and to management as to industrial effluents, sewage, garbage, waste and air pollution, including the water management. We club the ending case of water management with this matter.7 xxx.........................................xxx..........................xxx
11. In spite of above, in flagrant violation of law of the land, polluted water in the form of sewage, industrial effluents or otherwise has continued to be discharged in the water bodies including the rivers or the canals meeting the rivers. Violation of law is not only by private citizens but also statutory bodies including the local bodies and also failure of the regulatory authorities in taking adequate steps. There is no corresponding coercive action posing danger to rule of law when large scale violation of law is not being remedied. This leads to lawlessness.
12. It will be appropriate to note the crisis situation in the country on the subject of availability of potable water. The matter has been considered in the report of Niti Aayog on Composite Water Management Index (CWMI).8 Following further information also needs to be noted:
(i) India is suffering from the worst water crisis in its history and millions of lives and livelihoods are under threat. Currently, 600 million Indians face high to extreme water stress and about two lakh people die every year due to inadequate access to safe water9. The crisis is only going to get worse. By 2030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions 6 State of Orissa v. Govt. of India, (2009) 5 SCC 492 7 M.C. Mehta Vs Union of India- W.P. (Civil) No. 13029/1985 dated 25.11.2019 8 Niti Ayog on "Composite Water Management Index", June 2018, https://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/document_publication/2018-05-18-Water-Index-
Report_vS8-compressed.pdf.
9 Source: WRI Aqueduct; WHO Global Health Observatory 21 of people and an eventual ~6% loss in the country's GDP10. As per the report of National Commission for Integrated Water Resource Development of MoWR, the water requirement by2050 in high use scenario is likely to be a milder 1,180 BCM, whereas the present-day availability is 695BCM. The total availability of water possible in country is still lower than this projected demand, at 1,137BCM. Thus, there is an imminent need to deepen our understanding of our water resources and usage and put in place interventions that make our water use efficient and sustainable.
(ii) India is undergoing the worst water crisis in its history.
Already, more than 600 million people11 are facing acute water shortages. Critical groundwater resources - which account for 40% of our water supply - are being depleted at unsustainable rates.12
(iii) Most states have achieved less than 50% of the total score in the augmentation of groundwater resources, highlighting the growing national crisis--54% of India's groundwater wells are declining, and 21 major cities are expected to run out of groundwater as soon as 2020, affecting ~100 million people13.
(iv) With nearly 70% of water being contaminated, India is placed at 120th amongst 122 countries in the water quality index.
13. As per statistics mentioned before the Lok Sabha on April 6, 2018, waterborne diseases such as cholera, acute diarrhoeal diseases, typhoid and viral hepatitis continue to be prevalent in India and have caused 10,738 deaths, over the last five years since 2017. Of this, acute diarrhoeal diseases caused maximum deaths followed by viral hepatitis, typhoid and cholera.14
14. As per 'National Health Profile' published by Central Bureau of Health Investigation, Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, a total of 1535 Deaths due to Acute Diarrhoeal Diseases was reported during the year 2013.15 Main Causes of Pollution of Rivers
15. As already noted, well known causes of pollution of rivers are dumping of untreated sewage and industrial waste, garbage, plastic waste, e-waste, bio-medical waste, municipal solid waste, diversion of river waters for various purposes affecting e-flow, encroachment of catchment areas and floodplains, over drawl of groundwater, river bank erosion on account of illegal sand mining. Inspite of directions to install Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs), Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPs), Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs), and adopting other anti-pollution measures, satisfactory situation has not been achieved.
10Source: McKinsey & WRG, 'Charting our water future', 2009; World Bank; Times of India 11 Source: World Resource Institute 12 Source: World Resource Institute 13 Source: UN Water, 'Managing water under uncertainty and risk', 2010; World Bank (Hindustan Times, The Hindu).
14https://www.indiaspend.com/diarrhoea-took-more-lives-than-any-other-water-borne- disease-in-india-58143/ 15 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=106612 22 As per CPCB's report 201616, it has been estimated that 61,948 million liters per day (mld) sewage is generated from the urban areas of which treatment capacity of 23,277 mld is currently existent in India. Thereby the deficit in capacity of waste treatment is of 62%. There is no data available with regard to generation of sewage in the rural areas.
xxx.........................................xxx..........................xxx
33. We may note the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court:
"26. Enactment of a law, but tolerating its infringement, is worse than not enacting a law at all. The continued infringement of law, over a period of time, is made possible by adoption of such means which are best known to the violators of law. Continued tolerance of such violations of law not only renders legal provisions nugatory but such tolerance by the enforcement authorities encourages lawlessness and adoption of means which cannot, or ought not to, be tolerated in any civilized society. Law should not only be meant for the law- abiding but is meant to be obeyed by all for whom it has been enacted. A law is usually enacted because the legislature feels that it is necessary. It is with a view to protect and preserve the environment and save it for the future generations and to ensure good quality of life that Parliament enacted the anti- pollution laws, namely, the Water Act, Air Act and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. These Acts and Rules framed and notification issued thereunder contain provisions which prohibit and/or regulate certain activities with a view to protect and preserve the environment. When a law is enacted containing some provisions which prohibit certain types of activities, then, it is of utmost importance that such legal provisions are effectively enforced. If a law is enacted but is not being voluntarily obeyed, then, it has to be enforced. Otherwise, infringement of law, which is actively or passively condoned for personal gain, will be encouraged which will in turn lead to a lawless society. Violation of anti-pollution laws not only adversely affects the existing quality of life but the non-enforcement of the legal provisions often results in ecological imbalance and degradation of environment, the adverse effect of which will have to be borne by the future generations.17 xxx.....................xxx.................................xxx "61. ..... If the laws are not enforced and the orders of the courts to enforce and implement the laws are ignored, the result can only be total lawlessness. It is, therefore, necessary to also identify and take appropriate action against officers responsible for this state of affairs. Such blatant misuse of properties at large-scale cannot take place without connivance 16 http://www.sulabhenvis.nic.in/Database/STST_wastewater_2090.aspx July 16, updated on December 6, 2016 17 INDIAN COUNCIL FOR ENVIRO-LEGAL ACTION Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (1996) 5 SCC 281 23 of the officers concerned. It is also a source of corruption. Therefore, action is also necessary to check corruption, nepotism and total apathy towards the rights of the citizens."18 xxx.........................................xxx..........................xxx
35. Vide order dated 22.08.2019 in Original Application 200/2014, dealing with the pollution of river Ganga, the Tribunal issued directions and laid down coercive measures to be taken for discharge of untreated sewage in river Ganga:-
"16. xxx.....................xxx.................................xxx
17. Wherever the work has not commenced, it is necessary that no untreated sewage is discharged into the River Ganga. Bioremediation and/or phytoremediation or any other remediation measures may start as an interim measure positively from 01.11.2019, failing which the State may be liable to pay compensation of Rs. 5 Lakhs per month per drain to be deposited with the CPCB. This however, is not to be taken as an excuse to delay the installation of STPs. For delay of the work, the Chief Secretary must identify the officers responsible and assign specific responsibilities. Wherever there are violations, adverse entries in the ACRs must be made in respect of such identified officers. For delay in setting up of STPs and sewerage network beyond prescribed timelines, State may be liable to pay Rs. 10 Lakhs per month per STP and its network. It will be open to the State to recover the said amount from the erring officers/contractors.
36. Vide order dated 28.08.2019, the Tribunal held:-
"15. xxx...............xxx.......................................xxx "16. xxx.....................xxx.................................xxx
17. As already noted, prevention of pollution of water is directly linked to access to potable water as well as food safety. Restoration of pristine glory of rivers is also of cultural and ecological significance. This necessitates effective steps to ensure that no pollution is discharged in water bodies. Doing so is a criminal offence under the Water Act and is harmful to the environment and public health. 'Precautionary' principle of environmental law is to be enforced. Thus, the mandate of law is that there must be 100% treatment of sewage as well as trade effluents. This Tribunal has already directed in the case of river Ganga that timelines laid down therein be adhered to 18 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (2006) 3 SCC 399 - Public functionaries 24 for setting up of STPs and till then, interim measures be taken for treatment of sewage. There is no reason why this direction be not followed, so as to control pollution of all the river stretches in the country. The issue of ETPs/CETPs is being dealt with by an appropriate action against polluting industries. Setting up of STPs and MSW facilities is the responsibility of Local Bodies and in case of their default, of the States. Their failure on the subject has to be adequately monitored. Recovery of compensation on 'Polluter Pays' principle is a part of enforcement strategy but not a substitute for compliance. It is thus necessary to issue directions to all the States/UTs to enforce the compensation regime, latest with effect from 01.04.2020. We may not be taken to be condoning any past violations. The States/UTs have to enforce recovery of compensation from 01.04.2020 from the defaulting local bodies. On failure of the States/UTs, the States/UTs themselves have to pay the requisite amount of compensation to be deposited with the CPCB for restoration of environment. The Chief Secretaries of all the States may furnish their respective compliance reports as per directions already issued in O.A. No. 606/2018."
10. We confronted the Additional Chief Secretary present that justification forwarded by him was against the law of land and against earlier order of this Tribunal. No meaningful action was taken against persons who misappropriated funds and failed to prevent pollution inspite of clear directions of this Tribunal. Thus, he was liable to be proceeded against for such conduct. On time being granted for filing any further affidavit, following further affidavit has been filed:
"1 to 2. xxx...........................xxx............................xxx
3. That soon after his joining he had reviewed the case and the concerned Urban Local Body was directed to ensure that proper Bio-Remediation of the 4 polluted drains is carried out. The assessment of these drains by the State Pollution Control Board after the process has shown considerable improvement in the BOD and COD levels.
4. The DPR for completion of the STP project and Interception & diversion work of the 4 drains is under advance stage of consideration for sanction by NMCG. A technical team of NMCG was to visit the site last month for the assessment of the condition of the existing infrastructure and finalization of the scope of work to be done, however this visit could not be accomplished due to 25 the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic situation. The visit is being rescheduled in near future. The sanction of the project from NMCG is expected in 45 days.
5. That the undersigned undertakes to expedite the process of making the concerned STP fully operational within twelve months from the date of issuance of the Letter of Award by the UP Jal Nigam.
6. That the present Deponent assures the Hon'ble Tribunal to ensure effective action in pursuance of the FIR lodged at Pratapgarh against the erring Jal Nigam officers and Contractor firm- M/s Thermax Ltd. Chinchwad.
7. That the deponent prays for one last opportunity and a time of 2 months to expedite the whole process and comply with the previous order and I offer my unconditional apology for the delay in compliance due to ongoing pandemic situation."
11. Thus, even after all possible opportunities, there is either inability to understand simple legal position or unwillingness to comply with the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal out of defiance. Above statement shows that for making STP, which is said to have been 95% complete 11 years back, and allotted funds having been misappropriated, operation will require 12 months after award of work. There being no firm date of award of work, timeline given has no practical meaning. It is also not being delinked from NMCG. Thus, in effect the stand is that it will never be done as NMCG has no fixed commitment of providing funds sought within reasonable time. Already 11 years have gone by. In our view this is irresponsible behaviour of the officer who perhaps knows nothing about the value of environmental norms and effect of violation on public health, food safety, aquatic life and over-all environment. The river stretch is loaded with daily disposal of 8.5 MLD sewage effluent causing septicity of the river on account of high fecal coliform and BOD. Inspite of mandate of the Water Act, 1974 and the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran 26 Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors, supra, fixing deadline of 31.3.2018 for taking all necessary steps to ensure treatment of sewage before discharge in water bodies, there is no willingness of some officers to even take small step to prevent discharge of pollution in water sources and untenable excuses are raised. This attitude has led to large number of water bodies, including most revered river Ganga remaining polluted. As already mentioned, River Sai involved in the present case is also a tributary of Ganga. The stretch of river Sai between Unnao to Jaunpur is falling under category P-V. UP PCB has not provided feed-
back to the OC on formulation of Sai Action Plan and functioning of RRC. Further, PCB has failed to provide water quality data of river Sai, as directed vide order dated 07.10.2020.
12. The above serious defiance may call for stringent action when violation of order of the NGT itself is criminal offence under Section 26 of the NGT Act, 2010 punishable with sentence upto three years and fine upto rupees ten crore. It is also executable as decree of Civil Court under Section 25 of the NGT Act read with Section 51(d) CPC, including by civil imprisonment.
13. Taking a lenient view in the matter and giving last opportunity for remedial action, factoring in the pandemic and the plea that the officer has been given this charge since February, 2021, but to uphold public interest and rule of law, we direct imposing of cut of Rs. 1,000/- per month from the salary of the officer till compliance, with further warning of more stringent action unless there is compliance and change in attitude towards compliance of law. If compliance is ensured and affidavit filed to the satisfaction of this Tribunal before the next date, 27 the Tribunal may consider restoring the cut and refunding the deducted amount. The Member Secretary, UP PCB may explain why action be not taken for failure of the PCB pointed out hereinabove - not providing water quality data of Sai, functioning of RRC and reporting the progress to the Chief Secretary. The PCB may also report further progress in the matter of recovery of compensation assessed and initiation of prosecution proposed.
List for further consideration on 27.10.2021.
A copy of this order be forwarded to the Chief Secretary, UP, Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development, U.P. and Member Secretary, UP PCB by e-mail for compliance.
The Additional Chief Secretary may remain present through Video Conferencing on the next date.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP Sudhir Agarwal, JM M. Sathyanarayanan, JM Brijesh Sethi, JM Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM June 09, 2021 Original Application No. 490/2019 DV 28