National Green Tribunal
T.S. Singh vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 7 October, 2020
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Item No. 04 Court No. 1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 490/2019
(With reports dated 28.08.2020 & 07.10.2020)
T. S. Singh Applicant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh Respondent
Date of hearing: 07.10.2020
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. P. WANGDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant: Mr. T.S. Singh, Applicant in person
Respondent(s): Mr. Pradeep Misra, Advocate for UPPCB
ORDER
1. Issue for consideration is prevention of discharge of untreated sewage into Sai River at Pratapgarh in Uttar Pradesh.
2. The matter was considered on 02.01.2020 in light of earlier proceedings and 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.
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 1 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.
29. 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 JA CO B KO SH Y" titl e d M ore r iver s tr e tc he s are n o w c r itic al l y po ll u te d: CP CB , 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 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' 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.3
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. 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 directed1 that establishment and proper functioning of ETPs/CETPs/STPs in the country be 1 (2017) 5 SCC 326 4 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 directed2 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 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."
2Order dated 28.08.2019 in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India &Ors., O.A No.593/2017 5
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 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."6
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 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.
List for further consideration on 05.02.2021.
A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary UP, the Principal Secretary, Urban Development (Nagar Vikas) UP and Justice VVS 7 Rathore, former Judge Allahabad High Court, heading the Oversight Committee constituted by this Tribunal, by e-mail for compliance.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP S. P. Wangdi, JM Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM October 07, 2020 Original Application No. 490/2019 SN 8