National Green Tribunal
Jagmohan Patidar vs Volkswagen Group India Private Limited on 26 July, 2021
Item No. 03
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL
(Through Video Conferencing)
Original Application No.160/2014 (CZ)
Jagmohan Patidar Applicant (s)
Versus
Volkswagen Group Pvt. Ltd. & 6 Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 26.07.2021
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER
For Applicant(s): None
For Respondent(s): Mr. Ayush Dev Bajpai, Adv.
Ms. Parul Bhadoria, Adv.
ORDER
1. Issue of violation of environmental norms as provided under the Air (Prevention & Control) Act, 1981, Water (Prevention & Control) Act, 1974, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 and notification issued from time to time are raised in this application.
2. Brief facts given rise in the present Original Application are that :
i. The Respondent no. 1, 2 and 3 operate Car service centre within the city of Bhopal and Indore. The aforesaid service stations are amidst residential areas and discharge enormous amount of used oil and spent oil in the land pits, nearby water sources and channels including drainage, as well as to various other unknown sources. The Respondent no. 1, 2 & 3 do not follow the procedure laid down by law to dispose and handle the Toxic Used/Spent oil generated by the company at its service stations, being generated from the servicing/changing of oil, of various automobiles at their service stations.1
ii. Used/Spent motor oil contains numerous toxic substances, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which are known to cause cancer. In addition, tiny pieces of metal from engine wear and tear, such a lead, zinc and arsenic, make their way into lubricants, further contributing to the polluting potential of used motor oil. Motor oil is exposed to heat and oxygen during engine combustion, which changes its chemical makeup and since spent motor oil is heavy and sticky, and contains an extensive concentrated cocktail of toxic compound, it can build up and persist in the environment for years.
iii. Used/spent oil of cars has the potential to travel long distances, and most used motor oil eventually makes its way into waterways in the form of runoff, motor oil is also toxic to plants and animals living in the water, and its film can impair natural processes, such as oxygen replenishment and photosynthesis. The studies show that, one drop of spent oil can not only destroy the eco-system but could also degrade and denude the soil an area of 2 sq. mts. to such an extent that would take atleast 100 years to restore it back.
iv. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the Civil Writ Petition No. 657 of 1995 pending before it, has observed that used motor oil is a threat to the environment and directed the state government to monitor the strict comopliance of the Hazardous Waste Rules and also implement the recommendations of the Prof M.K.G. Menon Committee report. It is also relevant to be mentioned here that used/spent oil has already been declared to be 'Hazardous Waste requiring registration for recycling/reprocessing' in the Entry 20 of the Schedule IV of the Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 by the Government of India.
v. Respondent No. 1, 2 & 3 have been violating the provision of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Water Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Rules made thereunder the said Acts, at the very threshold and the responsible authorities have not been paying any heed to the gross violation committed by the Respondent no. 1, 2 & 3. The 2 'used oil' which is being handled by Respondent No.1,2 & 3 is defined under rule 3(1) (ze)as under :
"(ze) used oil means any oil -
(a) Derived from crude oil or mixture containing synthetic oil including engine oil, gear oil, hydraulic oil, turbine oil..... from the above-mentioned definition it is clear that used engine oil, gear oil or hydraulic oil generally obtained from automobiles constitutes used oil which is covered by the Hazardous Waste (Management, handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008. Further the Schedule I of the Hazardous Waste (Management, handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 provides a list of 'Processing generating Hazardous Waste' in which the Entry 5 provides that any 'industrial operations using mineral/synthetic oil as lubricant or other applications' is the process which generates hazardous waste of 'Used/Spent Oil'.
Therefore, it is quite clear that the service stations of the respondent no. 1,2 & 3 fall within the process of generating hazardous waste; used/spent oil, which fall within the purview and compulsorily required to observe the mandate provided by the Hazardous Waste (Management, handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008.
vi. The Rule 5(1) of the said Rules provides that, every person who is engaged in generation processing, treatment, package, storage, transportation, use, collection, destruction, conversion, offering for sale, transfer or the like of the hazardous waste shall obtain an authorization from the State Pollution Control Board. But in the present case, the Respondent no. 1,2 and 3 have not obtained any such authorization requisite to from the Madhya Pradesh State Pollution Control Board.
vii. The Rule provides that the occupiers / operator of such service stations may store such hazardous waste for a period not exceeding 90 days as well as they are also required to shall maintain a record of sale, transfer, storage, recycling and reprocessing of such waste and make these records available for inspection. But the Respondent no. 1,2 & 3 have been violating such rule thereby storing the spent/used oil for a period exceeding 90 days without maintaining any of the abovementioned records and without keeping them available for inspection. It is also observed that the respondents are not 3 using environmentally sound technologies and processes to handle the aforesaid hazardous waste, grossly violating the provision of law.
3. The Original Application has been filed with the prayer :
1. To direct the perpetrator Respondents violating the provision of the Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Water Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 to pay for the pollution so done according the Polluter Pay Principal so laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in various matters. (Vellore Citizen's Forum vs. Union of India& Ors. [ (1996) 5 SCC 647] ), as well as in accordance with the Rule 25 of the Hazardous Waste ( Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement ) Rules, 2008.
2. To fix the responsibility on the responsible Public authority, which, in nexus with the Respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 has been allowing such illegal services / activities in their respective areas of administration.
4. The matter was taken up by this Tribunal on 05.09.2014 and the Tribunal observed as follows :
"This application was filed by the Applicant raising a second issue with regard to non-observance of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as well as the Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008 by the Respondents No. 1 to 3. It has been prayed that Respondent No. 4 to 7 be directed to ensure compliance of the aforesaid provisions as also in case of breach of such provisions, action in accordance with law may be ordered to be initiated against violators.
Notice of this application was issued vide order dated 07.07.2014. On 01.08.2014, the Respondents appeared and the Respondent No. 4, MPPCB through its Regional Office was directed to carry out the inspection of the premises of the Respondents No. 1 to 3.4
Today, the reply has been filed by the Respondent No. 4 duly supported by affidavit alongwith documents with the prayer for taking the same on record. Copy of the reply alongwith the annexed documents have been furnished to the Learned Counsel for the Applicant as well as for the Respondent No. 1 to 3. The Inspection Report in respect of Respondent No. 1 and 2 is at Annexure-1 and that of Respondent No. 3 is at Annexure-5. From what has been observed in the Inspection Report, it is apparent that compliance of the Air and Water Acts has not been made as also the necessary permissions and compliance under the Hazardous Waste Rules, 2008 has not been obtained. While, so far as the Respondents No. 1 to 3 are concerned, the Respondent No. 4 MPPCB shall take action in accordance with law including closure of the work distinct from sale outlet and the same shall be carried out till compliance is made by the Respondents. While the issue which has been raised duly in respect of the two such dealers in the city of Bhopal, we deem it proper that since it has been highlighted that such dealers of automobiles and workshops/service centres are carrying out such activities without due permissions and observance of the statutory provision, it is necessary to carry out such inspections of the workshops/ service centres within their respective jurisdiction to ensure that the workshops/service centres are allowed to run only after observance of the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as well as the Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2008.
Since, the issue involved would require sufficient time, we grant 8 weeks' time to the Respondent No. 4 MPPCB to carry out the aforesaid task, throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh. The aforesaid task shall be carried out by the PCB in respect of all types of automobiles workshops and service centres.
So far as Respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 are concerned, as soon as they comply with the requirement under the law and approach the SPCB for carrying out inspection to satisfy itself that the necessary compliance under the provisions of the concerned Acts has been made and if satisfied, the SPCB would be free to grant permission to the Respondent No. 1 to 3 to resume operations in their workshops/service centres.
List on 14th November, 2014."
5. Again the matter was taken up on 19.12.2014 and the Tribunal after considering the report submitted by the Respondent directed as follows "Respondents No. 1 and 2 as well as 3 have submitted proposals before the Tribunal with regard to the works akin to Corporate 5 Social Responsibility which they propose to undertake in collaboration with the Bhopal Municipal Corporation. The Respondent No. 1 and 2 wish to adopt Ward No. 22 and the Respondent No. 3 wishes to adopt Ward No. 52 in the city of Bhopal. It has been submitted that among other things, they would be taking up awareness programme for the residents of the respective Wards pertaining to segregation and disposal of domestic waste, setting up of dustbins in sufficient numbers for collection of biodegradable and non-degradable domestic waste separately at appropriate places. They also propose that they are willing to construct urinals at the places to be identified by the BMC in these wards for which they will be employing their own staff for maintaining and cleaning the same. It has also been proposed that they will carry out plantation of trees in sufficient number and provide tree guards for protection of the trees planted.
With regard to the aforesaid proposals, Shri Vivek Agrawal, Learned Counsel for the BMC was directed to apprise the BMC authorities in the respective Ward/Zone for identifying and preparing an action plan for the aforesaid works which the Respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 wish to take up as proposed in their proposal submitted before this Tribunal. The action plan along with the estimated amount which the Respondents wish to spend on a regular basis shall be submitted before this Tribunal on 07.01.2015.
In the meanwhile, the parties are directed to contact Shri Vivek Agrawal who in turn shall apprise the BMC authorities with regard to the same.
List on 7th January, 2015. "
6. After submission of the reply of the Respondent and State Pollution Control Board, the matter was taken up on 13.02.2015 and the Tribunal observed as follows :
"In the present application, the Applicant sought directions for payment of damages on account of the pollution caused by service stations operating in the State of MP, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh and for restoration of the environment damaged by such pollution.6
'Polluter Pays Principle' has been invoked to secure the relief prayed for.
The Applicant pointed out that the service stations of the Respondent No. 1, 2 & 3 were discharging trade effluents in the common sewers without treating them as required by law. It was also pointed out that consents to operate were not obtained by these Respondents. The Respondent No. 4 MPPCB was directed to carry out the inspection of the erring units including the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3. The Respondent No. 4 was also directed to take action in accordance with law including that of closure of work and the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 were directed to comply with the requirements under the law and on compliance, were permitted to resume operations pursuant to the permission granted by the MPPCB. Show cause notices were also issued to some more units asking the reasons as to why their service stations should not be closed and penalty imposed.
In the meanwhile, order dated 19.12.2014 reveals that the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 submitted proposals before the Tribunal with regard to the works akin to the discharge of Corporate Social Responsibility in collaboration with BMC. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 1 and 2 submits that such proposals were extended in lieu of the damages which ultimately they were expected to bear. Apparently, the proposals included setting up of common toilets, urinals, plantation of trees, provision of tree guards, setting up of dustbins and raising of such infrastructure in the given wards for the purposes of obtaining sanitary conditions. The BMC was directed to identify wards / zones and prepare an action plan in order to initiate the works as proposed by the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3. According to the BMC, the work of identification of such wards and preparation of action plan as desired is complete and the same has been communicated to the respective Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 1 & 2 submits that wards No. 22 is the ward which falls to their share for discharging the CSR. He submitted that the Respondent No. 1 & 2 are not averse to discharging their obligation as proposed but the estimate of Rs. 29,90,000/- for providing common toilets, urinals, containers is on the higher side i.e. not suiting their purse.7
Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 3 joined the contentions raised by the Respondent No. 1 and further pointed out that the facilities suggested by the BMC are not specific and well beyond the proposal which was voiced on 19.12.2014. According to him the proposal was only for setting up of dustbins, construction of urinals, plantation of trees, making provision for tree guards, conducting awareness programmes for the residents and nothing more.
From these submissions, it is obvious that the proposal given by the BMC is not specific and much beyond the proposal that was put forth by the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 vide proposals dated 19.12.2014. We therefore, direct the BMC to work out action plan giving specific rationale for each of the items in line with the proposals made by Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3. We also direct the Respondent No. 4 MPPCB to work out the details in the form of a chart for quantifying the damages required to be paid by the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3. Similar quantification may also be done by the Applicant. The details so worked out shall be placed before us on the next date.
We had also issued notices to the 18 dealers/service stations in the city of Bhopal vide order dated 12.01.2015. We find from the report that 6 service centres i.e. M/s S.R.Car, M/s Manik Suzuki, M/s Star Automobiles, M/s Pushpa Automobiles, M/s Pahal TVS, M/s Piaggao Wheel have not been served with the notice. Notices to the rest of the service centres have been served. However, there is no response from them to the show-cause notice except from M/s Varenyam Motors vide M.A. No. 87/2015.
Matter to proceed on the basis of the responses, if any, filed. MPPCB shall effect the service of notice on the aforesaid 6 service centres by Dasti. Report of the service of notice will be tendered on the next date.M.A.No. 88/2015
This application filed by the BMC for placing on record the communication of the offers to Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 stands disposed of.
In view of the aforesaid directions list the matter on 16th March, 2015."8
7. Thereafter, the matter was taken up on 22.07.2015 and the Tribunal observed as follows :
"Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 / M/s Win Win Automobiles (Hoshangabad Road) who had undertaken to carry out the community work of putting 15 dustbin containers, constructing of 5 urinals as well as plantation of 500 trees in Ward No. 52, has submitted that in fact as of today, out of the 15 dustbin containers which were to be installed, they have put up 10 and the remaining 5 would be handed over to the Municipality to be placed at proper places within a week from today. As regards the Jan Suvidha Toilets, it is submitted that two toilets have already been constructed and are on the completion stage and the Municipality be directed to provide electricity and water connection to the same.
Shri Neel Choudhary, Learned Counsel appearing for the Bhopal Municipal Corporation (BMC) submitted that the staff of the Municipality would inspect the toilets and accordingly as soon as they are found to be operational, electricity and water connection to the same shall be provided.
Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 submitted that while two Jan Suvidha Toilets have already been constructed, they would install three more in Ward No. 52 at the sites shown by the BMC. In this behalf, it was submitted that they may be directed to install the Jan Suvidha Toilets as manufactured by M/s Shilpin, 104-A, Sector - F, Industrial Area, Govindpura, Bhopal designed by M/s Arvind Associates, E-1, Arera Colony, Bhopal. Learned Counsel for the BMC having been apprised by the Health Officer agrees that the design of the toilets manufactured and prepared by M/s Shilpin Bhopal are in conformity with the requirement of the area and the BMC has no objection to such toilets being installed in Ward No. 52. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 submits that within one month the remaining three toilets of the Shilpin design shall be installed and the municipality shall provide all necessary assistance including site allocation with electricity and water connection to the same.9
Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 further submitted that they have already placed the orders for 250 trees to be planted in Ward No. 52 along with protective tree guards and will ensure their survival by providing staff for maintenance and watering the same. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 frankly submits that these 250 trees they shall plant during the current monsoon season in the first phase and the remaining 250 trees, as per the direction of the Tribunal after seeing the survival of these 250 trees.
Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 / Win Win Automobiles (Govindpura Industrial Area) submitted that they are willing to provide 15 dustbins of the specifications as given out by the BMC and install 5 Jan Suvidha Toilets of the same specifications and quality of Shilpin design and carry out plantation of Ward No. 1. The Municipality shall prepare the sites for construction and installation of toilets. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3 is granted four weeks time to construct the necessary toilets, provide dustbin containers and plant 250 trees with tree guards in the first phase within the said period.
The Counsel for Respondent No. 1/ Volkswagen Group India submits that they have constructed two urinals and agree to install three more toilets of Shilpin variety on the sites to be pointed out by the BMC. Four weeks time is granted for the aforesaid purpose. It has been further submitted that they have placed 4 dustbin containers and shall install 11 more within four weeks within which period plantation of 250 trees in first phase shall also be carried out as already directed in Ward No. 22.M.A.No. 384/2015
Wherein the CI Finlease Ltd. have submitted that they have in the meanwhile installed the ETP as also their workshop was inspected and they have also been granted the authorisation with regard to Hazardous Waste Rules by the MPPCB Authorities. It is accordingly submitted that notice issued to them may be discharged. It is undisputed that authorisation, etc. has been obtained after the initiation of the proceedings. Therefore, they are required to furnish solvent security of Rs. 10 lakhs within one week and construct 5 urinals of Shilpin design, provide 15 dustbin containers and plant 250 trees with tree guards (in the first phase) within one month in Ward No.2.
M.A.No. 384/2015 stands disposed of.10
Shri Asad Ullah Khan appearing on behalf of M/s Varenyam Motors (Ward No. 67), M/s Hariom Yamaha (Ward No. 53), M/s Sai Honda (Ward No. 43), M/s Choudhary Agency (Ward No. 45), M/s Om Automobile & Sons (Ward No. 47) and M/s RMJ Motors (Ward No. 6) undertakes to provide 5 toilets of the Shilpin design, 15 dustbin containers and plant 250 trees with tree guards (in first phase) by each Respondent on the their respective wards allotted by the BMC within four weeks and submit the solvent security individually for Rs. 10 lakhs each within a week with MPPCB in the Wards allotted to them.
Shri C.B.Gorde, Advocate appearing on behalf of M/s Surjeet Hyundai Automobiles undertakes to furnish the solvent security of Rs. 10 lakhs with MPPCB within a week. They shall also provide 5 urinals of Shilpin Design, 15 dustbin containers and plant 250 trees with tree guards (in first phase) in Ward No. 65 and 66 each within a period of 4 weeks.
Representative for M/s Surjeet Bajaj is directed to furnish solvent security for Rs. 10 lakhs with MPPCB within one week. They shall also provide 5 urinals of Shilpin Design, 15 dustbin containers and plant 250 trees with tree guards (in first phase) in Ward No. 4 within a period of 4 weeks.
Shri Simran Singh appearing on behalf of Shree TVS Automobiles (Two-wheeler Division) is directed to furnish solvent security for an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs with the MPPCB within a week. They shall also construct 2 Urinals of Shilpin design, place 7 dustbins and plant 250 trees with tree guards in Ward No. 3 within four weeks.
On behalf of M/s Ranjeet Nissan it has been submitted they have now taken steps for installation of the necessary measures with regard to hazardous waste disposal rules. Learned Counsel appearing for the MPPCB pointed out that after inspection certain directions have been issued as they were found to be non-compliant. M/s Ranjeet Nissan shall carry out and comply with the directions issued by the MPPCB.
In addition, Learned Counsel appearing for the Ranjeet Nissan submits that they are also willing to provide 5 toilets, place 15 dustbin containers and plant 250 trees in the Ward No. 5 allotted to them by the BMC within a period of 4 weeks. They shall also furnish solvent security of Rs. 10 lakhs with the MPPCB within a week.
11Counsel for the MPPCB shall give a list of the remaining workshops against whom directions have not been issued so far. Let the matter be listed after a week. In the meanwhile those workshops for whom directions have been issued hereinabove shall be required to be carry out the work within four weeks. They are not required to appear on the next date.
List the matter on 27th July, 2015."
8. Aggrieved by the order quoted above, one of the Respondent approached to the Hon'ble Apex Court by filing Civil Appeal No. 34742 of 2015 and an interim order was passed on 16.11.2015. Again in Civil Appeal No. 13551- 13563/2015, the matter was raised before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 04.12.2017 directed as follows :
"We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
It appears that the National Green Tribunal has been passing interim order in the case from time to time and we are told that more than 12 interim orders have been passed over the last three years.
Instead of passing interim orders from time to time, it might be more appropriate for the National Green Tribunal to finally dispose of the matter.
Under the circumstances, while maintain the interim order passed by this Court on 16.11.2015, we request the National Green Tribunal to dispose of the Original Application No. 160/2014 at the earliest subject to its convenience.
The appeal stands disposed of."
9. Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
10. Respondent No. 1 has submitted compliance report in the following manner :
"3. That, towards the proposal submitted by the answering Respondent and towards the effective compliance of the order dated 18.03.2015 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal, the answering respondent had carried out and executed following work in the 12 Ward no. 2 at Bhopal, in collaboration with the officials of the Bhopal Municipal Corporation."
a. Placed 15 Big size Dustbins of Green Colour comprising having 16 guage metal sheet with Wheels and Hook with Company's name branding, at different places in Ward no. 22 and other places in the City of Bhopal, duly approved by the Bhopal Municipal Corporation.
b. Placed, constructed and installed 5 Urinals duly approved by the Bhopal Municipal Corporation Opposite Gandhi Bhawan near TV station, Kamla Park, Karbala Road and near Hilton Hotel.
c.` Planted 250 trees along with Tree Guards on the near periphery of Hamidia School and the Office of Water Works Department.
4. That, it is significant to mention here that the Dustbins and Urinals were placed and installed at the places allotted by the officials of the Bhopal Municipal Corporation. Further, the Trees were also planted at the place allotted by the Bhopal Municipal Corporation.
11. Again respondent no. 1 & 2 have filed the proposal for protection and preservation of environment with the following terms :
"2. The Respondent no.1 and Respondent no. 2 are dealers of the Volkswagen Group India Pvt. Ltd. and has been dealing in the business of selling cars, parts, accessories, lifestyle items and servicing of passenger cars. It is significant to mention here that being the responsible civilized business venture, the respondents most respectfully submits that they are duly concerned with the Environment and had obtained all the necessary consents and permissions required under the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movements) Rules, 2008, which were already been brought on record.
3. The Respondent No. 1 & 2 towards the protection and preservation of Environment undertakes to safeguard and protect the environment, and further purpose following measures :
a. To clean the surrounding area where the work shop of Respondent no. 1 & 2 are situated, 13 under the Prime Minister Swach Bharat Abiyan.
b. To organize an awareness campaign to make people aware as to how to protect and save the environment.
c. To keep dustbins near the road side of Ward no. 22 in Bhopal i.e. the area near Rani Kamlapati Ward and Ward no. 37 in Indore, i.e. the area near Vijay Nagar.
d. To plant saplings of good quality in the above mentioned areas.
4. The above mentioned proposals would be implemented as and when this Hon'ble Court directs."
12. Respondent No. 3 has submitted a proposal as follows :
1. That the respond no. 3 hereby undertakes to safeguard and protect the environment within the surrounding and nearby areas, where the workshop of the dealer is located. For doing so, the following measures and suggested, which can be undertaken to be carried out by the dealer i.e. Respondent no.3.
a. To undertake and adopt ward no. 52 for cleaning purpose under Prime Minister Swachta Abhiyan. Cleaning of the ward shall be carried out by nearly 100 employees of the dealer.
b. That dealer shall organize awareness campaign as to how to protect and save the environment. This shall be done by holding camps at various places in ward no. 52, distributing pamplates and other environmental literature, fixing of banners and posters at important sites etc. c. To plant 500 good quality plants in the nearby areas in the monsoon season 2015.
d. To keep Dustbins besides the footpath and at various crowded places, near the bust stop and auto stands. To prove nearly 40 iron Dustbins.
e. To construct urinals at places suggested by the Municipal Corporation Bhopal. To paint slogans on the walls besides the roadside / National Highway.
2. The suggestions mentioned above shall be implemented as soon as suitable orders are passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal.
13. Respondent no. 3 has also submitted reply / written submission as follows :
"8. That after observing compliance of Air and Water Acts necessary permission to resume operations in the workshop / service stations, has been granted by the Respondent 14 No. 4 U/s 33 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, vide order dated 10.10.2014.
9.6 That in reply to para 4.8 of the petition it is to submit that the Respondent no. 3 has obtained due permission from the Respondent No. 4 to resume operations at their workshop. Therefore, there is no violation of any rule and proper authorization has been obtained by the Respondent no. 3. Further to this the answering Respondent has obtained the consolidated consent and authorization from the Board U/s 25 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, U/s 21 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and authorization under Rule 3 (C) and 5 (5) of the Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rule, 2008."
9.17 That since the Respondent No. 4 has granted due permission to start the operation of the workshop and after observing that requirement under law has been carried out by the Respondent No.3. Therefore, the petition at this juncture deserves to be dismissed.
14. M/s Choudhary has filed Reply/Compliance report with the facts as follows :-
"3. The answering respondent is in the business of sale of 2 wheeler Motorcycles and has got a very low Sale Rate in Bhopal. In the year 2013-14 only 486 motorcycles were sold and in the year 2014-15, 674 motorcycles were sold. Meaning by, not more than 2 motorcycles per day has been sold.
4. The answering respondent has obtained all mandatory permissions and consent as stipulated under Section 21 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and under 25/26 of the Water (Prevention & Control Pollution) Act, 1974. The consent and permission has been granted to the respondent by the M.P. Pollution Control Board vide their letter dt.10.12.14, wherein the respondent is authorized for servicing and repairing of 2 wheelers upto the production capacity of 1800 per year. The consent and permission given to the respondent is valid upto 25.12.15.
6. The BMC by issuing letter dt. 26.07.15 to the respondent for carrying out plantation, construction of toilets etc in ward no.45 15 is incorrect and wrong, because the answering respondent is already having all necessary and required permissions as required by the statute. Moreover, the works which have been directed to the complied by the other respondents cannot be applied in our case. Additional work, to be carried out by the Automobile Dealers can be undertaken by those who have been found violating the law and therefore the answering respondent cannot be clubbed in the same category and such conditions cannot be made applicable on M/s Choudhari Agency Bhopal."
7. In absence of any violation of the Statutory Provision the answering respondent should not be penalized and cannot be equated with the other Automobile Dealers/ Service Centers who are violating the mandatory provisions of law."
15. Respondent No. 4, State Pollution Control Board has submitted that Board issued show cause notice then the Respondent moved an application to issue consent/authorization and after adopting the due process the necessary authorization has been issued. Respondent no. 4, State Pollution Control Board has submitted latest compliance report as follows :-
"1.It is most respectfully submitted before the Hon'ble Tribunal that, the instant matter pertains to the service stations operated by Respondent no. l, 2 and 3. However, vide order dated 05.09.2014 the scope of the petition was enlarged to all the service stations operating in the State.
2.The interim orders passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal while adjudicating the matter, were challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 13551-13563 of 2015, M.P. State Automobile Association vs Jagmohan Patidar & Ors. Hon'ble Supreme Court Apex Court granted interim relief vide order dated 16.11.2015.
3.The civil appeals were disposed of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 04.l2.20l7 stating that "Under the circumstances, while maintaining the interim order passed by this court on 16.11.2015, we request the National Green Tribunal to dispose of the Original Application No. 160 of 2014 at the earliest subject to its convenience. The appeals stand disposed of."16
4.The abovementioned order was brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Tribunal on 11.01.2018. The Hon'ble Tribunal directed the answering respondent to inspect the automobile service stations in Bhopal and submit their current status report.
5.In compliance of the directions passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal, the answering respondent hereby submits the current status and inspection reports of 43 automobile service stations in Bhopal. The list of the service stations with the status of consent and ETP has been enclosed herewith.
6.All 43 service stations have installed adequate Effluent Treatment Plants [ETPs]. Out of 43, 35 service stations are having valid consent renewals and remaining 08 have applied for the renewal of their consents, these applications are under process."
The status of the polluting units as on the date of filing the report is given in Chart and it has been reported that all 43 Automobiles are now compliant and have taken the authorization. The Chart and the authorization status is reproduce below :-
Sl. N o Name of Service Status of ETP Annexure Page No Station Consent Adequacy
1. Win Win Automobile Granted Yes 1. 581-582 Pct Ltd.
Govindpura, Bhopal
2. GSurana Motors, Granted Yes 2. 583-584 Lalghati Halalpur Bhopal
3. Choudhary tractors Granted Yes 3. 585-586 Agency hamidia Road, Bhopal
4. Surjeet Bajaj Auto Granted Yes 4. 587-588 Agency, Kolar Road Bhopal
5. Surjeet Bajaj Auto Granted Yes 5. 589-590 Agency, 4,5,6, Lajpat Rai Society, Raisen Road, Bhopal
6. Om Auto & Sons, Applied Yes 6. 591-592 Prabhat Chouraha, raisen Road Bhopal
7. C.I. Finlies Ltd, Granted Yes 7. 593-594 Hoshangabad Road Bhopal
8. C.I. Finlies Ltd, Granted Yes 8. 595-596 Jinsi Jahangirabad Bhopal 17
9. Glaxy Bhopal Applied Yes 9. 597-598 Vehicles Pvt. Ltd.
Hoshangabad Road Bhopal
10. Satyam Motors Pvt Granted Yes 10. 599-600 Ltd. Misroad Hoshangabad Road Bhopal
11. Surjeet Bajaj, Granted Yes 11. 601-602 Berasia Road Bhopal
12. Sai Motors, Berasia Granted Yes 12. 603-604 Road Bhopal
13. Kohinoor Motors, Applied Yes 13. 6015-606 Berasia Road Bhopal
14. BGS Honda Berasia Applied Yes 14. 607-608 Road Bhopal
15. Surjeet bajaj raisen Granted Yes 15. 609-610 Road Bhopal
16. Surjeet Hyundi Granted Yes 16. 611-612 (Ishan Auto Corp) India Ltd.
Chunabhatti Bhopal
17. Abhkaran Honda Granted Yes 17. 613-614 J.K. Road Bhopal
18. Jeevan Motors pvt Granted Yes 18. 615-616 Ltd., Plot NO-74 Chunabhatti Bhopal
19. Landmark pvt Ltd Granted Yes 19. 617-618 Govindpura Bhopal
20. Sanghi Auto Mobile Granted Yes 20. 619-620 Kohefiza Bhopal
21. Varenyam motors Granted Yes 21. 621-622 Padamnabh nagar Raisen Road Bhopal
22. R.M. Auto Link Pvt Applied Yes 22. 623-624 Ltd., Zone - II MP Nagar Bhopal
23. C.I. Auto Motors, Granted Yes 23. 625-626 Jinsi Jahangirabad Bhopal
24. Win Win Automobile Granted Yes 24. 627-628 Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal
25. Jeevan Motors pvt Granted Yes 25. 629-630 Ltd., Govindpura Bhopal
26. Veer Motors Granted Yes 26. 631-633 Company hoshangabad Road Bhopal
27. Win Win Vehicles Granted Yes 27.
Car pvt Ltd.
Hoshangabad Road,
Bhopal
28. Sagar Auto Tech Pvt Granted Yes 28. 634-635
Ltd. Jinsi
jahagirabad Bhopal
29. Bycon Motor Pvt Applied Yes 29. 636-637
Ltd. Near ITI Misrod
Bhopal
18
30. Ananya Auto Applied Yes 30. 638-639
Padamnabh Nagar
Raisen Road Bhopal
31. Sanghi Auto Mobile Granted Yes 31. 640-641
Zone -I MP Nagar
Bhopal
32. Seturn Hero MP Granted Yes 32. 642-643
Nagar Bhopal
33. Sangi Brothers Applied Yes 33. 644-645
(Indore) Pvt. Ltd.
halalpur Lalghati
Bhopal
34. My Car Bhopal Pvt. Granted Yes 34. 646-647
Ltd. Jinsi
Jhangirabad Bhopal
35. Sai Chhaya Pvt Ltd Granted Yes 35. 648-649
JK Road Bhopal
36. Saturn Auto Link Granted Yes 36. 650-651
Pvt. Ltd. 11 Mill
Tirah Hoshangabad
Road Bhopal
37. Win Win Automobile Granted Yes 37. 652-653
Pvt. Ltd. New Jail
Krond By pass,
Bhopal
38. Sujit Auto Pvt Ltd Granted Yes 38. 654-655
JK Road Bhopal
39. M/s Power Auto Granted Yes 39. 656-657
Dealer Ltd.
Hoshangabad Road
Bhopal
40. C.I. Auto Motors Granted Yes 40. 658-659
Pvt. Ltd. New Jail
Krond By pass,
Bhopal
41. Rajpal Abikaran Granted Yes 41. 660-661
Bhopal Pvt. Ltd.
Hoshangabad Road
Bhopal
42. C.I. Hyundi Granted Yes 42. 662-663
Kohefiza Bhopal
43. R.M.J Motors Pvt. Granted Yes 43. 664-665
Ltd. JK Road
Bhopal
16. So far as the discharge of untreated water/Sewage water into the open land or the municipal drain is concerned, the matter was taken up on 14.07.2021 in Original Application No. 11 of 2020 and the Tribunal observed :-
"16. It is to be noted that well known causes of pollution of water bodies, underground water is discharge of untreated water by the industries and dumping of untreated sewage and diversion to river/water bodies. Inspite of the directions to install Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs), Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPs), Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) 19 and adopting other anti pollution measures, satisfactory situation has not been achieved. Tough Governance is the need of the hour. If pollution does not stop, it is high time to take strong remedial action including penal action and even stoppage of industries, if human beings are to survive. If sewage dumping does not stop, local bodies have to made accountable and their heads are to be prosecuted.
17. We may refer to the observation of this Tribunal passed in O.A. 148/2016 Mahesh Chandra Saxena vs. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors. where considering the report of the CPCB, the Principal Bench of this Tribunal issued certain guidelines for assessment and realization of Environmental Compensation (EC). The Relevant paras are quoted here below :-
II. Environmental Compensation to be levied on all violations of Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) in NCR.
Table No. 2.1: Environmental to be levied on all violations of Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP) in Delhi-NCR.
Activity State Of Air Quality Environmental
Compensation ()
Industrial Emissions Severe +/Emergency Rs 1.0 Crore
Severe Rs 50 Lakh
Very Poor Rs 25 Lakh
Moderate to Poor Rs 10 Lakh
Vapour Recovery System (VRS) at Outlets of Oil Companies i. Notin Target Date Rs 1.0 Crore stalled ii. Non functional Very poor to Severe + Rs 50.0 Lakh Moderate to Poor Rs 25.0 Lakh Construction sites Severe +/Emergency Rs 1.0 Crore Severe Rs 50 Lakh (Offending plot more Very Poor Rs 25 Lakh than 20,000 Sq.m.) Moderate to Poor Rs 10 Lakh Solid waste/ garbage Very poor to Severe + Rs 25.0 Lakh dumping in Industrial Estates Moderate to Poor Rs 10.0 Lakh Failure to water sprinkling on unpaved roads Very poor to Severe + Rs 25.0 Lakh
a) Hot-spots
b) Other than Hot- spots Very poor to Severe + Rs 10.0 Lakh II. Environmental Compensation to be levied in case of failure of preventing the pollutants being discharged in water bodies and failure to implement waste management 20 rules:
Table No. 3.3: Minimum and Maximum EC to be levied for untreated/partially treated sewage discharge Class of the City/Town Mega-City Million- Class-I plus City City/Town and others Minimum and Maximum Min. 2000 Min. 1000 Min. 100 values of EC (Total Capital Cost Component) Max. 20000 Max. 10000 Max. 1000 recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs.) Minimum and Maximum Min. 2 Min. 1 Min. 0.5 values of EC (O&M Cost Component) Max. 20 Max. 10 Max. 5 recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs./day) Table No. 3.4: Minimum and Maximum EC to be levied for improper municipal solid waste management Class of the City/Town Mega-City Million- Class-I City/Town plus City and others Minimum and Min. 1000 Min. 500 Min. 100 Maximum values of EC Max. 10000 Max. 5000 Max. 1000 (Capital Cost Component) recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs.) Minimum and Min. 1.0 Min. 0.5 Min. 0.1 Maximum values of EC Max. 10.0 Max. 5.0 Max. 1.0 (O&M Cost Component) recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs./day) 3.3 Environment Compensation for Discharge of Untreated/Partially Treated Sewage by Concerned Individual/ Authority:
BIS 15-1172:1993 suggests that for communities with population above 100,000, minimum of 150 to 200 lpcd of water demand is to be supplied. Further, 85% of return rate (CPHEEO Manual on Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Systems, 2013}, may be considered for calculation of total sewage generation in a city. CPCB Report on "Performance evaluation of sewage treatment plants under NRCD, 2013", describes that the capital cost for 1 MLD STP ranges from 0.63 Cr. to 3 Cr. and O&M cost is around Rs.
30,000 per month. After detail deliberations, the Committee suggested to assume capital cost for STPs as Rs. 1.75 Cr/MLD (marginal average cost). Further, expected cost for conveyance system is assumed as Rs. 5.55 Cr./MLD (marginal average cost) and annual O&M cost as 10% of the combined capital cost. Population of the city may be taken as per the latest Census of India. Based on these assumptions, Environmental Compensation to be 21 levied on concerned ULB may be calculated with the following formula:
EC= Capital Cost Factor x [Marginal Average Capital Cost for Treatment Facility x (Total Generation- Installed Capacity) + Marginal Average Capital Cost for Conveyance Facility x (Total Generation - Operational Capacity)] + O&M Cost Factor x Marginal Average O&M Cost x (Total Generation- Operational Capacity) x No. of Days for which facility was not available + Environmental Externality x No. of Days for which facility was not available Alternatively;
EC (Lacs Rs.)= [17.S{Total Sewage Generation - Installed Treatment Capacity)+
55.S {Total Sewage Generation - perational Capacity)] + 0.2(Sewage Generation-Operational Capacity) x N + Marginal Cost of Environmental Externality x (Total Sewage Generation-
Operational Capacity) X N Where; N= Number of days from the date of direction of CPCB/SPCB/PCC till the required capacity systems are provided by the concerned authority Quantity of Sewage is in MLD Table No. 3.5: Sample calculation for EC to be levied for discharge of untreated/partial treated Sewage City Delhi Agra Gurugram Ambala 17,60,285 Population (2011) 1,63,49,831 8,76,969 5,00,774 Class Mega-City Million-plus City Class-I Class-I Town Town Sewage Generation 4195 381 486 37 (MLD) (as per the latest data available with CPCB) Installed Treatment 2500 220 404 45.5 Capacity (MLD) (as per the latest data available with CPCB) Operational Capacity 1900 140 300 24.5 (MLD) (as per the latest data available with CPCB) Treatment Capacity 2295 241 186 12.5 Gap (MID) Calculated EC (capital 29662.50 2817.50 1435.00 0.00 cost component for STPs) in Lacs Rs.
22Calculated EC 127372.50 13375.50 10323.00 693.75 (capital cost component for Conveyance System) in Lacs. Rs.
Calculated EC (Total 157035.00 16193.00 11758.00 693.75 capital cost component) in Lacs Rs.
Minimum and Min. 2000 Min. 1000 Min. 100 Min.
Maximum values of Max. 20000 Max. 10000 Max. 1000 100 EC (Total Max. Capital Cost 1000 Component) recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs.) Final EC (Total 20000.00 10000.00 1000.00 693.75 Capital Cost Component) in Lacs Rs. Calculated EC 459.00 48.20 37.20 2.50 (O&M Component in Lacs Rs./day Minimum and Min. 2 Min. 1 Min. 0.5 Min. Maximum values of Max. 20 Max. 10 Max. 5 0.5 EC (O&M Cost Max. 5 Component) recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs./day) Final EC (O&M 20.00 10.00 5.00 2.50 Component) in Lacs. Rs./Day Calculated 2.0655 0.2049 0.1395 0.0094 Environmental Externality (Lacs Rs .Per Day) Minimum and Min. 0.60 Min. 0.25 Min. 0.05 Min. Maximum value of Max. 0.80 Max. 0.35 Max. 0.10 0.05 Environmental Max. Externality 0.10 recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs. Per Day) Final Environmental 0.80 0.25 0.10 0.05 Externality (Lacs Rs. Per day)
3.4 Environment Compensation to be Levied on Concerned Individual/Authority for Improper Solid Waste Management:
Environmental Compensation to be levied on concerned ULB may be calculated with the following formula:23
EC = Capital Cost Factor x Marginal Average Cost for Waste Management x (Per day waste generation-Per day waste disposed as per the Rules) + O&M Cost Factor x Marginal Average O&M Cost x (Per day waste generation-Per day waste disposed as per the Rules) x Number of days violation took place + Environmental Externality x N Wh e r e ;
Waste Quantity in tons per day (TPD) N= Number of days from the date of direction of CPCB/SPCB/PCC till the required capacity systems are provided by the concerned authority Simplifying;
EC (Lacs Rs.) = 2.4(Waste Generation - Waste Disposed as per the Rules) +0.02 (Waste Generation - Waste Disposed as per the Rules) x N + Marginal Cost of Environmental Externality x (Waste Generation - Waste Disposed as per the Rules) x N Table No. 3.6: Sample calculation forEC to be levied for improper management of Municipal Solid Waste of Illegal Extraction of Ground Water City Delhi Agra Gurugram Ambala Population (2011) 1,63,49,831 17,60,285 8,76,969 5,00,774 Class Mega-City Million-plus Class-I Town Class-I City Town Waste Generation (kg. 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.4 per person per day) Waste Generation (TPD) 9809.90 880.14 350.79 200.31 Waste Disposal as 2452.47 220.04 87.70 50.08 per Rules (TPD) (assumed as 25% of waste generation for sample calculation) Waste Management 7357.42 660.11 263.09 150.23 Capacity Gap (TPD) Calculated EC 17657.82 1584.26 631.42 360.56 (capital cost component) in Lacs.
Rs.
Minimum and Min. 1000 Min. 500 Min. 100 Min. 100 Maximum values of EC Max. 10000 Max. 5000 Max. 1000 Max. 1000 (Capital Cost Component) recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs.) 24 Final EC (capital 10000.00 1584.26 631.42 360.56 cost component) in Lacs. Rs.
Calculated EC 147.15 13.20 5.26 3.00 (O&M Component) in Lacs.
Rs./Day Minimum and Min. 1.0 Min. 0.5 Min. 0.1 Min. 0.1 Maximum values of Max. 10.0 Max. 5.0 Max. 1.0 Max. 1.0 EC (O&M Cost Component) recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs./Day) Final EC (O&M 10.00 5.00 1.00 1.00 Component) in Lacs. Rs./Day Calculated 2.58 0.18 0.03 0.02 Environmental Externality (Lacs Rs. Per Day) Minimum and Max. 0.80 Min. 0.25 Min. 0.01 Min. 0.01 Maximum value of Max. 0.35 Max. 0.05 Max. 0.05 Environmental Externality recommended by the Committee (Lacs Rs. per day)
18. After considering the report of CPCB, the Tribunal directed as under:
"Directions
21. We may now sum up our directions:
(i) The Environmental compensation regime fixed for industrial units, GRAP, solid waste, sewage and ground water in the report dated 30.05.2019 is accepted and the same may be acted upon as an interim measure.
(ii) SPCBs/PCCs may ensure remedial action against non- compliant CETPs or individual industries in terms of not having ETPs/fully compliant ETPs or operating without consent or in violation of consent conditions. This may be overseen by the CPCB. CPCB may continue to compile information on this subject and furnish quarterly reports to this Tribunal which may also be uploaded on its website.
(iii) All the Local Bodies and or the concerned departments of the State Government 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, 25 the States/UTs are liable to pay such compensation. The CPCB is to collect the same and utilize for restoration of the environment.
(iv) The CPCB needs to collate the available data base with regard to ETPs, CETPs, STPs, MSW facilities, Legacy Waste sites and prepare a river basin-wise macro picture in terms of gaps and needed interventions.
(v) The Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs may furnish their respective compliance reports on this subject also in O.A. No. 606/2018.
List for further consideration on 21.05.2020, unless required earlier. A copy of this order be placed on the file of O.A. No. 606/2018 relating to all States/UTs and be sent to Chief Secretaries of all States/UTs, Secretary MoEF&CC, Secretary Jal Shakti and Secretary, MoHUA.
(emphasis supplied)
8. Before proceeding further, we may also note further order of this Tribunal dated 06.12.2019 in O.A. No. 673/2018 directing as follows:
"XII. Directions:
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 26 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.
ii. Timeline for completing all steps of action plans including completion of setting up STPs and their commissioning till 31.03.2021 in terms of order dated 08.04.2019 in the present case will remain as already directed. In default, compensation will be liable to be paid at the scale laid down in the order of this Tribunal dated 22.08.2019 in the case of river Ganga i.e. Rs. 10 lakhs per month per STP.
iii. We further direct that an institutional
mechanism be evolved for ensuring
compliance of above directions. For this purpose, monitoring may be done by the Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs at State level and at National level by the Secretary, Ministry of Jal Shakti with the assistance of NMCG and CPCB.
iv. For above purpose, a meeting at central level must be held with the Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs atleast once in a month (option of video conferencing facility is open) to take stock of the progress and to plan further action.
NMCG will be the nodal agency for
compliance who may take assistance of
CPCB and may give its quarterly report to this Tribunal commencing 01.04.2020.
v. The Chief Secretaries may set up appropriate monitoring mechanism at State level specifying accountability of nodal authorities not below the Secretary level and ensuring appropriate adverse entries in the ACRs of erring officers. Monitoring at State level must 27 take place on fortnightly basis and record of progress maintained. The Chief Secretaries may have an accountable person attached in his office for this purpose.
vi. Monthly progress report may be furnished by the States/UTs to Secretary, Ministry of Jal Shakti with a copy to CPCB. Any default must be visited with serious consequences at every level, including initiation of prosecution, disciplinary action and entries in ACRs of the erring officers.
vii. As already mentioned, procedures for DPRs/tender process needs to be shortened and if found viable business model developed at central/state level.
viii.Wherever work is awarded to any contractor, performance guarantee must be taken in above terms.
ix. CPCB may finalize its recommendations for action plans relating to P-III and P-IV as has been done for P-I and P-II on or before 31.03.2020. This will not be a ground to delay the execution of the action plans prepared by the States which may start forthwith, if not already started.
x. The action plan prepared by the Delhi Government which is to be approved by the CPCB has to follow the action points delineated in the order of this Tribunal dated 11.09.2019 in O.A. No. 06/2012.
xi. Since the report of the CPCB has focused
only on BOD and FC without other
parameters for analysis such as pH,
COD, DO and other recalcitrant toxic
pollutants having tendency of bio
magnification, a survey may now be
28
conducted with reference to all the said parameters by involving the SPCB/PCCs within three months. Monitoring gaps be identified and upgraded so to cover upstream and downstream locations of major discharges to the river. CPCB may file a report on the subject before the next date by e-mail at [email protected] xii. Rivers which have been identified as clean may be maintained."
19. The natural source of Air, Water and Soil cannot be utilized, if the utilization results in irreversible damage to environment.
There has been accelerated degradation of the environment, primarily on account of lack of effective enforcement of environmental laws and non- compliance with statutory norms. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the right to live is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and it includes the right to enjoyment of pollution free water and air for full enjoyment of life."
17. In light of the above facts, the matter with regard to the discharge of untreated water into the open land, legal necessary action for recovery of compensation, calculation of Environmental Compensation and prosecution has already been directed by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal and the State Pollution Control Board is directed to follow the guidelines as issued above.
18. Since all the units are functioning and as per report submitted by the State Pollution Control Board, authorization has been issued according to the Rules, we need not go into the legality of the functioning of industrial units in residential area because it is governed by the Local Law. It is for the Municipal Corporation to examine and to ensure that no industrial unit 29 should be permitted to function against the Municipal Laws. Accordingly we direct :
1. To comply the provisions contained in Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the Water (Prevention & Control Pollution) Act, 1974, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989.
2. The plan which has been submitted by the respondent with regard to the sanitation, washroom, and plantation of trees may be complied with in accordance with the relevant rules and their undertakings. State Pollution Control Board is directed to monitor all such units which are not complying or violating the environmental norms i.e. Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the Water (Prevention & Control Pollution) Act, 1974 and in case if it is found that any unit is violating the environmental norms, necessary legal action with realization of environment compensation and prosecution must be initiated according to law.
19. Functioning of the industrial unit in residential area or demarcation of industrial area shall be governed by the order passed by Principal Bench of this Tribunal in Original Application No. 608 of 2018 or regulation made by the State.
Original Application No. 160 of 2014 is finally disposed of.
Sheo Kumar Singh, JM Arun Kumar Verma, EM July 26th July, 2021 O.A. 160/2014 (CZ) PN & K 30