National Green Tribunal
K.M.Rajis/O. Munuswamy vs Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board ... on 24 September, 2020
Author: K. Ramakrishnan
Bench: K. Ramakrishnan
Item No.05,06 & 07:
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No. 82 of 2016 (SZ) &
M.A. No. 141 of 2016 (SZ)
With
Original Application No. 173 of 2016 (SZ) &
M.A. No. 139 & 140 of 2017 (SZ)
With
Original Application No. 175 of 2016 (SZ) &
M.A. No. 141of 2017 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mr. A. Paramasivan ...Applicant(s)
Versus
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,
Chennai and others. ....Respondent(s)
With
K.M. Raji ...Applicant(s)
Versus
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,
Chennai and others. ....Respondent(s)
With
1
S. Srinivasan ...Applicant(s)
Versus
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,
Chennai and others. ....Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 24.09.2020.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. SAIBAL DASGUPTA, EXPERT MEMBER
O.A. No. 82/2016:
For Applicant(s) M/s. G. Stanly Hebzon Singh
For Respondent(s): M/s. C. Kasirajan through
M/s. Meena for R1 & R2.
M/s. S. Kamalesh Kannan for R3 R4, R5,
R6, R8 & R9.
M/s. Jeyanthi represented
M/s. K. Mahendiran for R10 to R12
O.A. No. 173/2016 & O.A. No.175/2016:
For Applicant(s) M/s. R. Saravanakumar
For Respondent(s): M/s. C. Kasirajan through
M/s. Meena for R1 & R2.
M/s. S. Kamalesh Kannan for R3 to R5
M/s. Jeyanthi represented
M/s. K. Mahendiran for R6 to R12.
ORDER
1. As per order dated 11.08.2020, this Tribunal had considered the status report submitted by the District collector in the form of an 2 affidavit and thereafter this Tribunal had directed the committee to submit a further report and also directed the District collector to submit an independent report and posted the case to today.
2. When the matter came up for hearing today through Video conference, Sri. G. Stanley Hebzon Singh represented the applicant in O.A. No. 82/2016, Sri. R. Saravanakumar represented the applicant in O.A. No. 173/2016 & O.A. No.175/2016, Sri. Kasirajan through M/s. Meena represented respondents 1 & 2 in all the cases, Sri. Kamalesh Kannan represented respondents 3 to 6, 8 & 9 in O.A. No. 82/2016 and respondents 3 to 5 in O.A. No. 173/2016 & O.A. No. 175/2016 and M/s. K. Mahendiran through M/s Jayanthi represented respondents 6 to 12 in O.A. 173/2016 and in O.A. No. 175/2016.
3. We have received an action taken report submitted by the District Collector, Thiruvallur District which reads as follows:
" 3) I humbly submit that, as directed b the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, the members of the committee have submitted their joint inspection report before the District Level committee, in which the following details are revealed:-
(i) The inspection has been made in Shrimp farm Culture in Kanchivoyal, Pakkam & Onpakkam village in Ponneri Taluk, in which, 13 Shrimp Farm Culture comes under the category of fresh water Shrimp Farm culture and 16 Shrimp Farm culture comes under the category of brackish water Shrimp Farm Culture.3
(ii) The 13 Shrimp Farm Culture is freshwater (Sl.No. 1 to 13 as mentioned in Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, southern Zone, Order, dated: 11.08.2020 in O.A. No. 82 of 2016 (SZ) and M.A. No. 141/2017(SZ), O.A. No. 173 of 2016 (SZ) of 2016 (SZ) and M.A. No. 139 & 140/2017 (SZ) and O.A. No. 175 of 2016 (SZ) and M.A. No. 141/2017 (SZ) have obtained permission from the District Fish Farmers Development Agency.
(iii) Out of 16 Shrimp Farm Culture in brackish water, 4 Shrimp Farm Culture have obtained permission from the Coastal Aquaculture Authority and one Shrimp Farm Culture has already been evicted. In the remaining, 11 Shrimp Farm Culture, 7 Shrimp Farm Culture owners have applied for permission before the CAA and the 4 Shrimp Farm Culture have not filed any application.
(iv) In due compliance of the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Southern zone, order dated 11.08.2020 in O.A. No. 82 of 2016(SZ) and M.A. No. 141/2017 (SZ) and O.A. No. 173 of 2016 (SZ) and M.A. No. 141/2017 (SZ), the District Level Committee have inspected the Shrimp Farm in Pakkam, Thirupalaivanam - 1 (Kanchivoyal) and Thirupalaivanam - 2 (Onpakkam) villages, Ponneri Taluk. The committee observed that all the following 11 Shrimp Farm Culture were culturing Shrimp Farm in brackish water without obtaining permission from the Coastal Aquaculture Authority.
Sl. Village Prawn Pond S.F. No. Extent Remarks
No. Owner
1. Onpakkam Raji 186/2,3 1.43.5 Power Supply to the
S/o 194/1,2, Shrimp farm was
Ramachandran 3,4,5 Disconnected
4
2 Onpakkam Ganesan 162/2 0.81.5 Power Supply to the
Shrimp farm was
Disconnected
3. Onpakkam Arul 194/6,7, 1.12.5 Power Supply to the
S/o Alaiyapan 8, 9,10 Shrimp farm was
Disconnected
4 Onpakkam Kabali 191 Govt. Power Supply to the
S/o Sivalingam Land Shrimp farm was
1.98.0 Disconnected
5 Pakkam Seenivasan 119/1 1.11.30 Power Supply to the
Shrimp farm was
Disconnected
6 Pakkam Baskaran 142/1,2, 0.39.5 Power Supply to the
S/o 3 Shrimp farm was
Rathinapandian Disconnected
7 Pakkam Renuka 141/1,2 1.33.0 Power Supply to the
W/o Shrimp farm was
Sakthikumar Disconnected
8 Pakkam Rajkumar S/o 142/6 0.40.5 Power Supply to the
Rathinapandian Shrimp farm was
Disconnected
9 Pakkam Sakthikumar 141/2A 0.44.0 Power Supply to the
S/o. Shrimp farm was
Rathinapandian Disconnected
10 Pakkam Shanmugasakila 142/5 0.41.0 Power Supply to the
S/o Shrimp farm was
Sakthikumar Disconnected
11 Pakkam Sivachira 142/7 0.43.5 Power Supply to the
W/o. Shrimp farm was
Ramkumar Disconnected
5
5. I humbly submit that, as per the order of Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, south Zone, Chennai and decision made by the District Level Committee, direction has been given to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ponneri and Assistant Director of Fisheries, Ponneri for closure of above said 11 Shrimp farm culture in brackish water and also further direction given to the Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Ponneri to disconnect the EB connection of above said 11 Shrimp Farm Culture who were running without permission. Accordingly, the Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Ponneri have disconnected the power supply in the above said 11 Shrimp Farm Culture.
6. I humbly submit that in order to assess Environmental compensation, a direction has been given to the committee, for assessing the Environmental Compensation. Accordingly, the Committee has submitted the report as detailed below:
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPENSATION:
A. SHRIMP FARM CULTURE WITHOUT OBTAINING LICENCE FROM COASTAL AQUACULTURE AUTHORITY:
I submit that as per the direction of Hon'ble NGT (SZ) order dated 11.08.2020 in O.A. No 82/2016 & O.A. No. 173 & 175 of 2016 cited above, the committee has assessed the Environmental Compensation to be levied on the 11 Shrimp farms as stated therein as per the CPCB Guidelines following Environmental Compensation formula (EC)=P1x N x R x S x LF based on the pollution index.6
PI: Pollution Index for orange category as per the CPCB guidelines 50 N: No. of days for which violation took place 63 Days (From the date of inspection of the Shrimp farm culture on 22.07.2020 to the date of disconnection of power supply on 22.09.2020 by TANGEDCO. R: Factor in Rupees - Rs. 250/-
S: Scale of operation 0.5 LF: Population is less than one million, hence the location factor - 1 Environmental Compensation (EC) : Pl x N x R x S x LF : 50 x 63 x 250 x 0.5 x 1 : Rs. 3, 93, 750/-
Hence, the Environmental Compensation calculated by the committee is Rs. 3, 93, 750/- for each unit, totally Rs. 43, 31,250/- for 11 units.
B. SHRIMP FARMS OBTAINED LICENCE FROM COASTAL AQUACULTURE AUTHORITY AND WERE DISCHARGING THE WASTE WATERWITHOUT TREATMENT:
Sl. Village Prawn Pond S.F. No. Extent Remarks No. Owner
1. Onpakkam Thirisangu 195, 2.71.5 Registered Under S/o/ Natarajan 196, Coastal Aquaculture 197 Authority.
Registration no.
TN-11-2017-(1806)
7
2 Onpakkam Sriramulu 189/2A, 1.47.0 Registered Under
S/o Rathinam 2B, 2C, Coastal Aquaculture
2D, 2E, Authority.
2F Registration no.
TN-11-2017-(1800)
3 Pakkam Arun 145, 4.84.5 Registered Under
S/o. 146, Coastal Aquaculture
Venkatakrishnan 147,148 Authority.
Registration no.
TN-11-2017-(0193)
4 Pakkam Anand Registered Under
Coastal Aquaculture
Authority.
Registration no.
TN-11-2017-(0033)
Environmental Compensation (EC) : Pl x N x R x S x LF : 50 x 63 x 250 x 0.5 x 1 : Rs. 3, 93, 750/-
Hence, the Environmental Compensation calculated by the committee is Rs. 3, 93, 750/- for each unit, totally Rs. 15, 75, 000/- for 4 units.
It is therefore humble prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept the action taken report and thus render justice."
4. It is seen from the report that as far as Kanchivoyal is concerned almost all the Shrimp Farm Culture have obtained necessary permission from the concerned authorities and one who has not obtained have already been evicted and they have also assessed environmental compensation in respect of 15 such units at Pakkam 8 & Onpakkam, but no environmental compensation is seen assessed in respect of Shrimp Farm Culture units in Kanchivoyal, though they have mentioned that some of them had applied at the time when the application was filed, but till then they were conducting without getting permission and during the period for which they were running the units without getting permission, has to be treated as unauthorised functioning of the units and for that period, environmental compensation has to be fixed by them which has not been done.
5. The counsel appearing for the State Government submitted that they are in the process of issuing notices for recovery of environmental compensation for the 15 units and they require some more time for complying the same.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the applicants in both the cases submitted that they have not received the report. They also submitted that the observation made by the committee, that there is no possibility of any damage to soil is not correct and they have got soil analysis report done by them, which will go to show that there is degradation of soil fertility on account of these activities and if some time is granted, they may be able to produce those documents along with their objections.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant also submitted that they have not traced all such illegal Shrimp cultivation units 9 and they have only identified some of them alone and large number of such units are still functioning in those areas against whom no action was taken.
8. The learned counsel also submitted that they have not taken action against all such unauthorised units, but they have only disconnected electricity in some of them and others are still doing the illegal activity.
9. The applicants are directed to submit their objection to the report within 10 days with copy to the counsel appearing for the State Government, so that they can look into those aspects as well and come with the further report.
10. So we feel that some opportunity can be given to the applicant to submit their objections to the report and thereafter, it will be better to pass further orders in this regard. In the meantime the District Collector as well as the committee can proceed with the further action to be taken on the basis of the present report against those persons whom they found to be conducting the units illegally and submit the further action taken report as directed in the earlier paragraphs.
11. The committee as well as the District Collector is directed to submit the report to this Tribunal on or before 13.10.2020 by e- filing along with required hard copies to be produced as per rules. 10
12. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the members of the committee as well as to the District Collector immediately through e-mail, so as to enable them to comply with the direction.
13. For further action taken report and also objection if any to the committee report, post on 13.10.2020.
...................................J.M. (Justice K. Ramakrishnan) .............................E.M. (Shri. Saibal Dasgupta) O.A. 82/2020 24th September, 2020.
Sr. 11