National Green Tribunal
Suo Moto Proceedings Initiated Basedon ... vs State Of Kerala Rep. By Its ... on 4 February, 2020
Author: K. Ramakrishnan
Bench: K. Ramakrishnan
1
Item No.7
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
O.A.No.395 of 2013 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Suo motu proceedings initiated
based on the representation of
Justice R. Bhaskaran, Former Judge
State of Kerala and others ... Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 4.2.2020
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. SAIBAL DASGUPTA, EXPERT MEMBER
For Respondent(s) : . Mr. E.K. Kumaresan
Mr. G. Prabhu
Mr. T. John Alexander for R1 to R4 & R7
Mr. D.S. Ekambarm for R10
Mrs. Rema Smrithi for KSPCB
ORDER
After considering the pitiable condition of pollution caused to river Periyar, as per proceedings dated 23.9.2019, this Tribunal had analysed the progress to abate or remedy the pollution caused to river Periyar on the basis of the report given on several occasions, this Tribunal passed the following order:
"So under such circumstances, we direct the Chief Secretary, State of Kerala to look into the matter along with the Director of Urban Directorate and Panchayat Director and 2 the respective Principal Secretaries at the State Level and take appropriate action against those erring officers who are standing against the implementation of the Rules and delaying the implementation of rules so far. Even the Action Plan submitted by the State Government in this regard is not fully complied with and this Tribunal is not satisfied with the manner in which things are going on in respect of implementation of Solid Waste Management Rule as well. The Pollution Control Board is directed to submit a report showing the local bodies who are not complying with the Rules in spite of the direction given so that this tribunal can take appropriate action against the erring municipalities and local bodies to ensure that the rules are implemented by them.
The Chief Secretary and the concerned Principal Secretary of the local bodies urban development as well as rural development and Principal Secretary Environment of State of Kerala are directed to submit report as to why these rules are not implemented in Idukki district so far and the action taken by the authorities for implementation of the same within a period of thee months. They are directed to submit a status report of implementation of the Rules (Solid Waste Management Rules, Bio Medical Waste, etc) in Idukki District."
and posted this case to 23.12.2019. Since there was no sitting on that day, due to the non availability of Expert Member, the same was adjourned today.
2.Today, the Conveners of Joint Committee has filed report which is supposed to be the extract of the observations of the committee which reads as follows:
"In compliance with the order mentioned above, it is respectfully submitted that the compensation assessment in the case of Health Care Facilities (HCPs) already made and submitted before the Hon'ble Tribunal are reassessed. The reassessment was made in compliance with the order dated 12.3.2019 in O.A.No.710/2017 of the Hon'ble NGT. I may humbly submit that individual directions were issued to M/s. Al Azar Medical College, Thodupuzha-Ezhallur Road, Kumaramangalam, Thodupuzha, Idukki, M/s. St. Johns Medical Centre, Rajakkad and M/s. Rajkkad Medical Centre, Rajakkad. It is respectfully submitted that M/s. Rajakkad Medical Centre, Rajakkad has remitted 3 Rs.1,08,000/- towards environmental compensation since the assessed amount as per the calculation done on O.A.585/2018 which was reported, vide report dated 6 th September 2019 before the Hon'ble NGT. All other Health cases institutions were addressed through DMO, Idukki to remit environmental compensation assessed individually. District Medical Officer replied by letter dated 4.10.2019 and stated that directions have been issued to the healthcare facilities under the Health Department. It may humbly be noted that notices were issued as per the sections 5 of the Environment Protection Act 1986 by the Chairman. The follow up actions on these notices are now pending due to the Chairman's absence following his resignation on personal reasons before the Principal Secretary, Environment Department.
I may humbly submit that the assessment of compensation were made as per the guidelines published by the CPCB which was accepted by the Hon'ble Tribunal. It is understood that these guidelines are already made use of several SPCBs for environmental compensation assessment. Actually this guidelines include certain examples for calculation. The examples shown in the guidelines include local bodies having population more than 5 Lakhs.
3. It is respectfully submitted that this respondent also assessed environmental compensation according to this guidelines and already submitted before the Hon'ble Tribunal. I may humbly submit that the rates assessed on that occasion were according to those calculations and the rates were above one crore for every local bodies. Thereafter the committee in its 3rd sitting discussed this issue in detail while the Board raised some clarifications regarding exorbitant rates assessed for certain local bodies. It is respectfully submitted that this respondent also assessed environmental compensation according to this guideline where maximum population observed for Thodupuzhas Municipality having population 52,045 and the quantity of waste 20.82 MT/day and minimum population of Edamalakudy Grama Panchayath having population 2236 with a population density of 21.09 sq.km, a declared backward Local Body where quantity of waste obtained was 0.22 MT/day only. Also considering that the area is main Forest land, where plastic is strictly banned, bio degradable solid waste alone is creating pollution problems and the installation, operation and maintenance of a 4 centralized system for the waste management is not practical, hence decentralized solid waste management facilities such as Thumboormuzhi model composting plants may be sufficient for this local body. I may respectfully submit that there are lot of difference of opinion from different sectors against such assessment made during submission of earlier report while the capital cost component assessed was a minimum of "One Crore"
which is seems to be unrealistic.
4. It is respectfully submitted that during the last meeting of the Joint Committee, the Regional Officer (The Environmental Engineer, District Office, Idukki) was also invited to explain the follow up actions initiated by him and was reported that though some of the local bodies have not intimated the details of solid waste management in their area as asked as per the direction of the Chairman (SLMC), all of them were inspected individually to identify the actions taken by them for the safe management of solid waste. In his report also it was intimated that some of the local bodies complained about the exorbitant assessment f environmental compensation. Hence this issue was discussed in detail in the joint committee meeting and decided to request the Hon'ble Tribunal to give a chance to once again reassess the compensation amount of at least for small Grama Panchayath where the theoretical quantity of waste is below 5 MT/day for which obtaining of authorization is not mandatory. Also it has noted that the guidelines further refers that the solid waste generation per capita for class II towns are 0.3 - 0.4 Kg/day and for class III is 0.1 Kg/day only. I may respectfully submit that since the guidelines does not mentioning anything about Class IV and Class V, the committee remodified the assessment as explained in the document prepared. Copy of the document explaining the criteria for environmental compensation is produced herewith and marked as Annexure 2.
I may humbly submit that the rate of solid waste generation of 0.4 Kg/day/capita is considered for Thodupuzh Municipality, where population is greater than 50,000 and 0.3 Kg/day/capita is considered for the other one Municipality and panchayaths identified as tourism places such as Kumily, Munnar, Adimali, Peerumedu, Vannappuram and Elappara where pollution from floating population is a usual phenomena. For all other local bodies i.e., the population range as per latest census is well below a certain limit 5 and can be termed as Class III/IV/V where theoretical waste generation will be 0.3/0.2/0.1 Kg/person respectively.
6. I may humbly submit that the assessment is little delayed due to some unavoidable reasons viz, lot of reassessment for environment compensation etc. Hence some time may kindly be allowed to submit the consolidated report before the Hon'ble Tribunal. In the report submitted dated7.6.2019 on which hearing of the Hon'ble Tribunal was done on 10.7.2019, detailed compensation assessment with respect to local bodies also were done in addition to HCPs and accepted by the Hon'ble Tribunal. It may be pertinent to note that some local bodies submitted replies to the notice issued and inspections were conducted to all local bodies to verify the actual situation. The report of the Regional Officer was self explanatory that none of them has obtained authorization of the Board as per relevant sections of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. The methodology followed for assessing their percentage achievement in solid waste management is by considering factors such as formation of Harithkarmasena, door to door collection etc. A total score of 100 is given for different activities and percentage achievement is calculated based on data sheet which is produced herewith and marked as Annexure - 3. It is also highly important to note that though the Chairman SLMC during the meeting convened at Idukki Head quarters on 3.4.2019 specifically insisted all the local bodies to submit details of facilities provided and detailed action plan for environmental management in the prescribed format, most of them have not submitted any reply. However, the joint committee reassessed the environmental compensation by strictly following the formula derived by the CPCB except for "minimum capital cost" which is seems to be realistic for local bodies and submitting before the Hon'ble Tribunal for kind approval and favourable orders.
7. I may humbly submit that the local bodies had not been keen in managing solid waste scientifically as per the provisions of Rules and this was the reason the Board had issued Urban Directorate and Panchayath Directorate served with notices asking them to show cause why action should not be imposed for environmental compensation from the local bodies. Now the joint committee recommended the Board to immediately initiate necessary follow up actions to levy the environmental compensation from all 6 defaulting local bodies. It is expected that the Board will initiate follow up actions as and when a new Chairman/authorize officer assumed charge of the office.
1. The methodology for damage assessment in line with the World Bank method has been developed by this joint committee and suggestion on improvements and implementations has been sought from a panel of experts appointed for this purpose. This was detailed in the earlier report submitted before the Hon'ble Tribunal. Three meetings were already been convened by the committee and certain decisions were taken to initiate speedy action for the same. During several meetings which were convened to evolve a methodology for damage assessment, the experts as well as joint committee were of the opinion that following assumptions may be made for the ease of damage assessment.
a) HCFs can be classified into different groups for assessing the intensity of environment damage caused due to the operation of such facilities. This is specifically mentioned by the experts since some of the HCPs are not supposed to pollute the environment at higher intensities and the damage assessment in such cases are seems to be a herculean task as mentioned in the order by Hon'ble Tribunal. Hence the committee suggested that HCFs where violations have created negligible pollution only to the environment such as Small clinics/laboratory/non bedded hospitals may be exempted from imposing penalties. Also the committee suggested penalties in the cases where environmental damage is negligible but neglected the order of the regulatory body in implementing the rule, may be limited to imposing environmental compensation only.
b. In the case of local bodies the damage assessment need be done if the local bodies are satisfying following stipulated conditions.
i.The population less than 10000 Nos ii. The population densities well below 100.
iii. Where decentralize solid waste management facilities at least for market area.
7I may respectfully submit a favourable order may kindly be given by the Hon'ble Tribunal in this regard.
c. Hence the committee opined that the process of imposing environment compensation and damage assessment could be done separately in a phased manner and may be as follows:
i.Environmental compensation shall be imposed as per the formula derived by CPCB, the method by which was already accepted by Hon'ble Tribunal and the Joint Committee reassessed the same and directions were to the Board accordingly.
ii. Environmental damage assessment need be done following the World Bank method of assessment some may be exempted from damage assessment based on the above suggestions but may be imposed environmental compensation.
I may humbly once again submit that the assessment is little delayed due to some unavoidable reasons viz., lot of reassessments for.
I may humbly once again submit that the assessment is little delayed due to some unavoidable reasons viz., lot of reassessments for environment compensation considering the ground realities and from field experience. Hence some more time may kindly be allowed to submit the consolidated report before the Hon'ble Tribunal. Also the modification made in the cases compensation assessment may kindly be approved by the Hon'ble Tribunal. It may humbly be noted that the reporting official and the Joint Committee had carried out the duties assigned and continuing to ensure that all the HCPs and local bodies mentioned are complied with relevant provisions of the Bio Medical Waste Management Rule 2016 & the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 respectively and respective pollution control activities."
3. It is mentioned in the culmination portion of the action taken report that they require some more time to submit a consolidated report and the modification made in the cases of compensation assessment. It is not known from the report as to whether any of the Health Care Facilities have been closed for non compliance of the provisions 8 of the Bio Medical Waste Management Rules, 2016. It is also mentioned that notices have been issued for imposing environmental compensation to the Health Care Facilities, which are not having the required consent/authorization. It is not mentioned as to what are the steps taken by them for recovery of the amount from others, if they did not comply with the same.
4. The State Government filed statement which reads as follows:
"Setting up of Modern Slaughter House with waste treatment facility is a permanent solution for safe disposal of slaughter house waste. State Government had issued administrative sanction for an amount of Rs.100 crore for the setting up of Modern Slaughter Houses in Local Self Government Sector in the State with the financial assistance from Kerala Infrastructure Investment fund Board (KIIFB). The estimate cost of Modern Slaughter House proposed to be established in the Local Self Government Sector with the financial assistance from KIIFB is given below.
1.Thiruvalla Municipality ..10.36 crore
2.Kanur District Panchayat ..11.92 crore
3. Palakkad Municipality ..11.51 crore
4. Panalur Municipality ..10.95 crore
5. Perinthalmanna Municipality ..11.01 crore
6. Attingal Municipality .. 3.60 crore
7.Kozhikode Municipality .. 8.90 crore
8.Thrissur Municipality .. 15 crore
9. Kayamkulam Municipality .. 7 crore
10.Irinjalakkuda Municipality .. 8 crore
11. Kasaragod District Panchyat .. 15 crore Among the above, Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board and approved the Detailed Project Reports submitted by Thiruvalla Municipality, Kanur District Panchayat 9 and Perinthalmanna Municipality. Construction works will be started soon on receipt of necessary statutory clearances from regulatory authorities and concerned departments. Detailed Project Reports submitted by other Local Self Government Institutions mentioned above are under various stages of scrutiny/verification of KIIFB.
Bio medical Waste Treatment Plant Setting up of more Bio medical Waste Treatment Plants in the State is the only possible remedy to address the environmental issue relate to Bio medical Waste. 3 acres of land belongs to Kochi Municipal Corporation at Brahmapuram in Survey No.31/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 19, 32/10, 11 in Puthencruez Village has been allotted to Indian Medical Association for the setting up of a Bio Medical Waste Treatment Plant as per G.O.(Rt) No.295/2015LSGD Dated 23.9.2015. The said land has been handed over to Indian Medical Association for the setting up of a Bio Medical Waste Treatment Plant vide Proceedings No.L7-8708/19 dated 31.1.2020 of the District collector Ernakulam. It has also been decided to establish more Bio Medical Waste Treatment Plants in the State as combined project of Health Department and concerned Local Self Government Institutions."
5. It is unfortunate that both the regulating authorities and the State Government authorities are slow in implementing the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and taking action against those persons who are not complying with the provisions. It is evident that the impact of damage on account of environment on Periyar river is more and it is likely to continue which we cannot allow. Government and Regulating Authorities are also not very serious about the strict implementation of these Rules as well. It is quite clear from the displeasure expressed by the Principal Bench, while passing order in O.A.No.681 of 2018 dated 24.12.2019, where the Principal Secretary of Housing and Urban Development was directed to appear before the Principal Bench to apprise the concrete steps taken by the State of Kerala in implementing the Solid 10 Waste Management Rules, 2016 and also the steps taken to fill up the gap in the implementation of the said Rules and posted the case to 28.2.2020 for this purpose.
We feel it appropriate to post this case also beyond that date for further consideration.
6. In the statement filed by the State it is not mentioned the time line within which these facilities will be established to meet the situation. The Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal is directed to ascertain the number of STPs installed in Periyar river stretch and whether they are functioning properly and meeting the norms provided for the discharge from the STPs into river Periyar or its tributaries which ultimately leads to Periyar and if they are not functioning properly, what is the action taken by Pollution Control Board against the persons who are responsible to maintain the same. The State Government is also directed to prepare an action plan with effective time line within which this proposal will be completed and the proposed units made operational.
They can also come with some action plan in cases where there is no land available for waste management by establishing cluster management for this purpose and implement the same in an effective manner. Pollution Control Board is also directed to complete the follow up action taken on the basis of notification issued and come with complete action taken report. The State Level Monitoring Committee is also directed to supervise the functioning of the joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal to remediate the situation created and its compliance by the regulating authority.
7. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the State Level Monitoring Committee and also to the Chief Secretary for further compliance within a period of two months.
11Post on 8.4.2020 .........................................J.M. (Justice K. Ramakrishnan) .........................................E.M. (Saibal Dasgupta) O.A.395/2013 4.2.2020 kkr .