National Green Tribunal
Shailesh Singh vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 13 July, 2018
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL,
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Original Application No. 333/2016
(M.A. Nos. 441/2017 and 612/2017)
Shailesh Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHUVENDRA S. RATHORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAWAN SINGH GARBYAL, EXPERT MEMBER
Present: Applicant:
Respondent no. 2: Mr. Dileep Poolokkot and Ms. Resmitha R. Chandran,
Advs.
Respondent no. 2: Mr. Balendu Shekhar, Adv. Respondent no. 5: Mr. Pradeep Misra and Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advs.
Mr. B. V. Niren, Adv.
State of Uttar Pradesh: Dr. Sandeep Singh, Adv. CPCB: Mr. Rajkumar, Adv. with Ms. Niti, LA MOEF&CC: Mr. Attin Shankar Rastogi, Adv. with Ms. Harshita Sharma, Adv.
Date and Orders of the Tribunal
Remarks
Item No.
12 1. Allegation in this application is that Respondent July 13, No. 2 is a large fertilizer industry and it extracts large 2018 ss quantity of groundwater illegally. It also discharges hazardous effluent waste directly into the river Ganga resulting in contamination of the groundwater.
2. Reply has been filed by Respondent No. 2 stating that the groundwater has been taken after obtaining consent from the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (UPPCB). There is no requirement of consent from CGWA. The discharge of effluent by the industry has been monitored.
3. Its stand has been summed up as follows:-
"a) The ETP installed at the plant/facility of the Respondent No. 2 at Piprola is the most frequently visited industrial unit in this area by the UPPCB & also by CPCB and no violation of any nature was even observed during such visits.
b) Water being extracted is with the approval of U.P. Ground Water Department and application has also been made to CGWA for 1 grant of approval.
Item No. 12 c) This area falls under safe category as per classification of CGWA and water level July 13, replenishes to its original level whenever there 2018 is monsoon.
ss
d) Since expansion of the plant has not been given effect to be implemented by the Respondent No. 2, no action is required to be taken with respect to the compliance for environmental clearance granted by MoEF in 2008.
e) As stated herein above only fraction of permitted effluents is being discharged by the Respondent No. 2 and its effluents also meets all the specified norms of UPPCB.
f) All the conditions of water consent issued in the year 2014 have been fully complied with by the Respondent No. 2.
g) Design of this plant take due care that no harmful gas are released in the atmosphere. Moreover, the heights of stacks provided are as per the standard norms and meets the statutory requirements.
h) No sludge/solid waste are generated in the production of Ammonia and Urea and accordingly allegations of the Applicant are fictional and vehemently denied.
i) Flow Meters have been installed in all the Bore wells and at the point of discharge and their readings have been regularly checked by UPPCB and data in this regard also furnished to the UPPCB on monthly basis, as explained herein above."
3. Learned Counsel for Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board has stated that Respondent No. 2 has complied with the environmental norms. The stand of Central Pollution Control Board is as follows:-
"7. That the Central Pollution Control Board, the answering Respondent No. 06 submits that directions under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 have been issued on 24.07.2015 regarding installation of online effluent and emission monitoring system. In compliance of the directions of the CPCB, the Respondent No.02 M/s. Kribhco Shyam Fertilizers Ltd. has informed vide their letter, dated 15.10.2015 the unit has installed the online monitors and provided the connectivity to the CPCB. The copies of the directions, dated 24.07.2015 issued by 2 the CPCB and copy of the letter, dated 15.10.2015 of Item No. M/s. Kribhco are enclosed as Annexure-I & 12 Annexure-II respectively.
July 13, 8. That the CPCB submits that the compliance 2018 statement, dated 02.07.2014 wherein the water ss consumption of M/s. Kribhco Shyam Ltd., the Respondent No. 02 is indicated as 24000 KLD, was prepared in accordance with the information provided by the UPPCB, the Respondent No.03 in consultation with the MoEF & CC, the Respondent No. 08."
4. The Central Ground Water Authority has stated that online monitoring system has been installed and the industry was drawing 24,000 KLD of water since 2008. The consent of Central Ground Water Authority was sought only on 10th November, 2014 which was granted on 03rd October, 2016 (As stated in the Rejoinder at para 6).
5. In view of the above as at present the requisite permission for drawing of the groundwater has been taken and online mechanism also has been installed to monitor the discharge of the industry.
6. Learned Counsel for Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board states that even though at present the industry is compliant, there was illegal discharge of effluents and drawing of groundwater. Therefore, the industry is liable to pay compensation.
7. Since the industry is presently complying with the norms, we do not consider it necessary to keep the matter pending. However, it is open to the concerned Authorities to take such action that may be considered necessary for alleged damage to environment.
3 The Original Application No. 429 of 2016 is disposed of. Item No. 12 July 13, 2018 ss .........................................., CP (Adarsh Kumar Goel) ........................................., JM (Dr. Jawad Rahim) ........................................., JM (Raghuvendra S. Rathore) ........................................., EM (Dr. Satyawan Singh Garbyal) 13.07.2018 4