National Green Tribunal
Vikas Kumar vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 25 May, 2023
Item No.4 (Court No. 2)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI.
(Through Physical Hearing with Hybrid VC Option)
Original Application No. 581/2022
(I.A. No. 594/2023 & I.A. No. 595/2023)
Vikas Kumar ...Applicant
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. ...Respondents
Date of hearing: 25.05.2023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant: None for the applicant.
Respondents: Mr. Rahul Khurana, Advocate for Respondents No. 1
to 4 alongwith Mr. Bijender, Engineer-in-Chief, Mr.
Mohan Lal, Chief Engineer and Mr. Sandeep, Chief
Engineer, Haryana
Mr. Pinaki Mishra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Narender Pal
Singh, Advocate for respondent no. 5.
Mr. Prasenjeet Mohapatra, Advocate for MoEF&CC
respondent no. 6.
Mr. Gi.Gi. George, Advocate for respondent-7.
Mr. Sanyat Lodha, Advocate for (I.A No. 594/2023).
Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saurabh
Rajpal and Mr. Vijay Singh, Advocates (I.A No.
595/2023).
Mr. Raj Panjwani, Senior Advocate, Amicus Curie with
Mr. Shreepurna Dasgupta, Advocate.
Application is registered based on a letter petition received by Post.
ORDER
1. The grievance in the present application is about illegal mining by the project proponent in the river bed of river Yamuna and diversion of course of the river by constructing illegal bridge on river Yamuna. O. A. No. 581/2022 Vikas Kumar vs. State of Haryana & Ors. -2-
2. Vide order dated 12.09.2022 this Tribunal constituted a Joint Committee with the direction to submit its report within one month with copy to the concerned project proponent and statutory authorities and notice was also ordered to be issued to the respondents.
3. In compliance thereof the Joint Committee filed report vide email dated 19.11.2022 and replies were filed by respondent no. 1 vide email dated 23.02.2023, respondent no. 2 vide email dated 18.11.20222, respondent no. 3 vide email dated 27.01.2023, respondent no. 4 vide email dated 30.01.2023 and respondent no. 5 vide email dated 19.11.2022.
4. Vide order dated 21.11.2022, Mr. Raj Panjwani, Senior Advocate was appointed as amicus curiae and he filed his report vide email dated 17.04.2023.
5. Respondents no. 6-Ministry of Environment & Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and respondent no. 7-Ministry of Jal Shakti (MoJS) were impleaded as respondents no. 6 and 7 and replies have been filed by respondents no. 6 and 7 vide emails dated 20.05.2023 and 18.04.2023 respectively.
6. Vide order dated 23.02.2023 interim injunctive order was issued that no permission for construction of any temporary bridge across river Yamuna for facilitating any sand mining and allied activities be granted in the State of Haryana.
7. Interim application no. 594/2023 has been filed by Mr. Prashant resident of 151, village Jainpur, District Sonipat, Haryana seeking intervention/impleadment on the ground that the final outcome of the O.A. has a direct bearing on the life, livelihood and prospects of the intervenor, his family/descendants and other villagers of village Jainpur in the short term as well as for generations to come. O. A. No. 581/2022 Vikas Kumar vs. State of Haryana & Ors. -3-
8. We have heard the applicant and the learned counsel for the respondents. This Tribunal took cognigence of the matter on the basis of a letter petition and we have already appointed Mr. Raj Panjwani, Senior Advocate as amicus curiae to assist this Tribunal for just and proper adjudication of the questions involved in the case. For verifying the credentials and bonafides of the intervenor applicant we asked learned Counsel for the intervenor applicant about his present occupation/present activities but learned counsel for the intervenor applicant could not furnish any meaningful information in this regard. On the other hand learned counsel for respondent no.5-project proponent has submitted that the applicant is acting at the instance of rival mining leaseholders. In the facts and circumstances of the case we do not consider impleadment/intervention of the applicant to be necessary for just and proper adjudication of the questions involved in the case and therefore, I.A. no. 594/2023 is dismissed.
9. I.A. No. 595/2023 has been filed by M/S Darsh Mineral Pvt. Ltd. for its impleadment as respondents on the ground that the applicant in I.A. No. 595/2023 is vitally interested in the issue of construction of temporary bridges which is pending consideration before this Tribunal as it is carrying on sand mining in the State of Haryana and permission is not being granted by the state authorities to construct temporary bridge due to interim order passed by this Tribunal in this case.
10. As already observed one of the grievances in the present case is regarding diversion of course of river Yamuna by construction of temporary bridge on the same illegally by the respondent no.8-project proponent.
11. In the course of hearing respondents no. 1,2 and 4 referred to Haryana Government Policy dated 19.10.2021 permitting construction of temporary bridges. Even though vide order dated 23.02.2023 this O. A. No. 581/2022 Vikas Kumar vs. State of Haryana & Ors. -4- Tribunal ordered that no permission for construction of any temporary bridge across river Yamuna for facilitating any sand mining and allied activities be granted but this Tribunal did not pass any order in respect of permissions already granted or temporary bridges already constructed.
12. Adjudication of the question as to impact of construction of any temporary bridge on river morphology, ecology, discharge and aquatic life is involved in the present case.
13. Learned senior counsel for respondent no. 5-project proponent has argued that construction of temporary bridge across creeks of river Yamuna for carrying out mining does not have any adverse environmental impact while learned counsel for respondent no. 7 has submitted that no temporary bridge can be constructed on river Yamuna without obtaining permission of National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG). However, learned counsels for respondents no. 6 and 7 have not objected to the same as being prohibited activity.
14. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we consider it necessary to constitute a Joint Committee to examine the issue and submit its report in this regard. Accordingly, we constitute a Joint Committee comprising of (i) Dr. Mukesh Kumar Sinha, Chairperson, Godavari River Management Board as Chairman; (ii) Representatives of Secretaries MoEF&CC and MoJS not below the rank of Joint Secretary/ Director as Member and (iii) The Member Secretary, CPCB as Member Secretary. The Joint Committee shall be entitled to seek/receive response from the applicant, project proponent, concerned departments of the Haryana Government and also to associate any other expert with it as may be considered necessary, undertake visits to the sites where bridges have been constructed/were constructed, carry out the requisite study and submit its report regarding the following aspects. O. A. No. 581/2022 Vikas Kumar vs. State of Haryana & Ors. -5-
a) Whether any mining activity be allowed across different streams of river, if more than one at any place and any temporary bridge be allowed to be constructed for facilitating extraction/transportation of the mined material and other allied activities;
b) Whether permitting such mining activity and construction of such temporary bridge has any adverse environmental impact on the river morphology, ecology, discharge and aquatic life, etc.;
c) Whether construction of any such temporary bridge across river for facilitating mining/allied activities be completely prohibited or permitted by imposing conditions to ensure minimum impact on river ecology and aquatic life, and
d) In case construction of any such temporary bridge is to be kept in the category of regulated activities, by which authority and in which manner the aspects of grant of permission ought to be dealt with.
15. The CPCB shall be the nodal authority for coordination and compliance and all the expenses of the Joint Committee shall be borne by the CPCB out of Environment Compensation Fund.
16. Report be submitted by the Joint Committee within three months by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR supported PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
17. In the peculiar facts and circumstances the interim injunctive order dated 23.02.2023 is modified to the extent that all temporary bridges already constructed may continue and temporary bridges may be allowed to be constructed on the basis of permissions already granted or on the basis of the applications submitted before or after this order by the concerned department(s) as may be warranted by the facts and circumstances of each case. Such permission, if applied for, be granted within three days. However, all such temporary bridges already O. A. No. 581/2022 Vikas Kumar vs. State of Haryana & Ors. -6- constructed or to be constructed after the date of this order as the case maybe/shall be removed on or before 05.07.2023 or as per directions of the irrigation department and no temporary bridge shall be allowed to continue after 05.07.2023 in any event. Therefore, no permission even shall be granted for construction of any temporary bridge on river Yamuna till further orders to the contrary. It is clarified that nothing in this order shall be treated as approval of construction of such temporary bridges or expression of any final opinion for the purpose of final adjudication of the questions involved in the case.
18. List for further consideration on 05.10.2023.
19. Arguments on I.A. no. 595/2023 will be also heard on that date.
20. A copy of this order be sent to the (i) Dr. Mukesh Kumar Sinha, Chairperson, Godavari River Management Board; (ii) Secretaries MoEF&CC and MoJS and (iii) The Member Secretary, CPCB by email for compliance.
Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM May 25, 2023 N