National Green Tribunal
M C Mehta vs Union Of India on 4 February, 2015
Author: Swatanter Kumar
Bench: Swatanter Kumar
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL,
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
M.A Nos. 879 of 2014, 60 of 2015, 62 of 2015, 63 of 2015 & 67 of 2015 In Original
Application No. 196 of 2014; C.W.P. No. 3727 of 1985 In Original Application No. 200 of
2014; Original Application No. 204 of 2014; Original Application No. 205 of 2014;
Original Application No. 206 of 2014; Original Application No. 215 of 2014; Original
Application No. 218 of 2014; Original Application No. 219 of 2014; Original Application
No. 220 of 2014; Original Application No. 234 of 2014; Original Application No. 247 of
2014; Original Application No. 250 of 2014; M.A No. 137 of 2014 In Original Application
No. 64 of 2014; Original Application No. 251 of 2014; Original Application No. 253 of
2014; Original Application No. 254 of 2014; Original Application No. 259 of 2014;
Original Application No. 260 of 2014; Original Application No. 261 of 2014; Original
Application No. 265 of 2014; Original Application No. 266 of 2014; Original Application
No. 267 of 2014; Original Application No. 268 of 2014; Original Application No. 269 of
2014; Original Application No. 270 of 2014; Original Application No. 271 of 2014;
Original Application No. 272 of 2014; Original Application No. 273 of 2014; Original
Application No. 301 of 2014; Original Application No. 302 of 2014; Original Application
No. 303 of 2014; Original Application No. 304 of 2014; Original Application No. 307 of
2014; Original Application No. 312 of 2014; Original Application No. 313 of 2014;
Original Application No. 316 of 2014; Original Application No. 317 of 2014; Original
Application No. 318 of 2014; Original Application No. 319 of 2014; Original Application
No. 320 of 2014; Original Application No. 321 of 2014; Original Application No. 322 of
2014; Original Application No. 323 of 2014; Original Application No. 324 of 2014;
Original Application No. 325 of 2014; Original Application No. 326 of 2014; Original
Application No. 327 of 2014; Original Application No. 328 of 2014; Original Application
No. 329 of 2014; Original Application No. 330 of 2014; Original Application No. 331 of
2014; Original Application No. 332 of 2014; Original Application No. 333 of 2014;
Original Application No. 334 of 2014; Original Application No. 335 of 2014; Original
Application No. 336 of 2014; Original Application No. 337 of 2014; Original Application
No. 338 of 2014; Original Application No. 339 of 2014; Original Application No. 340 of
2014; Original Application No. 341 of 2014; Original Application No. 342 of 2014;
Original Application No. 343 of 2014; Original Application No. 344 of 2014; Original
Application No. 345 of 2014; Original Application No. 346 of 2014; Original Application
No. 347 of 2014; Original Application No. 348 of 2014; Original Application No. 349 of
2014; Original Application No. 350 of 2014; Original Application No. 351 of 2014;
Original Application No. 352 of 2014; Original Application No. 353 of 2014; Original
Application No. 354 of 2014; Original Application No. 355 of 2014; Original Application
No. 356 of 2014; Original Application No. 357 of 2014; Original Application No. 358 of
2014; Original Application No. 359 of 2014; Original Application No. 360 of 2014;
Original Application No. 361 of 2014; Original Application No. 362 of 2014; Original
Application No. 363 of 2014; Original Application No. 364 of 2014; Original Application
No. 365 of 2014; Original Application No. 366 of 2014; Original Application No. 367 of
2014; Original Application No. 368 of 2014; Original Application No. 369 of 2014;
Original Application No. 370 of 2014; Original Application No. 371 of 2014; Original
Application No. 372 of 2014; Original Application No. 373 of 2014; Original Application
No. 374 of 2014; Original Application No. 375 of 2014; Original Application No. 376 of
2014; Original Application No. 377 of 2014; Original Application No. 378 of 2014;
Original Application No. 379 of 2014; Original Application No. 380 of 2014; Original
Application No. 381 of 2014; Original Application No. 382 of 2014; Original Application
No. 383 of 2014; Original Application No. 384 of 2014; Original Application No. 385 of
2014; Original Application No. 386 of 2014; Original Application No. 387 of 2014;
Original Application No. 388 of 2014; Original Application No. 389 of 2014; Original
Application No. 390 of 2014; Original Application No. 391 of 2014; Original Application
No. 392 of 2014; Original Application No. 393 of 2014; Original Application No. 394 of
2014; Original Application No. 395 of 2014; Original Application No. 396 of 2014;
Original Application No. 397 of 2014; Original Application No. 398 of 2014; Original
Application No. 399 of 2014; Original Application No. 400 of 2014; Original Application
No. 401 of 2014; Original Application No. 402 of 2014; Original Application No. 403 of
2014; Original Application No. 404 of 2014; Original Application No. 405 of 2014;
Original Application No. 406 of 2014; Original Application No. 407 of 2014; Original
Application No. 408 of 2014; Original Application No. 409 of 2014; Original Application
No. 410 of 2014; Original Application No. 411 of 2014; Original Application No. 412 of
2014; Original Application No. 414 of 2014; Original Application No. 415 of 2014;
Original Application No. 416 of 2014; Original Application No. 417 of 2014; Original
Application No. 418 of 2014; Original Application No. 419 of 2014; Original Application
No. 421 of 2014; Original Application No. 422 of 2014; Original Application No. 424 of
2014; Original Application No. 425 of 2014; Original Application No. 426 of 2014;
Original Application No. 427 of 2014; Original Application No. 428 of 2014; Original
Application No. 475 of 2014
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Krishan Kant Singh V/s. M/s. Hindustan Cocacola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.,
Mehdiganj, Rajatalab, Varanasi
And
M.C. Mehta V/s. Union of India & Ors.
And
Other Connected Matters
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SWATANTER KUMAR, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE U.D. SALVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. DR. D.K. AGRAWAL, EXPERT MEMBER
HON'BLE PROF. A.R. YOUSUF, EXPERT MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. BIKRAM SINGH SAJWAN, EXPERT MEMBER
Present Applicant : Mr. Rahul Choudhary, Advs.
Mr. M.C. Mehta and Ms. Katyani, Adv.
Ms. Panchajanya Batra Singh, Adv. for MoEF
Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Vikas Malhotra and Mr. M.P. Sahay, Adv.
for MoEF Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Raj Kumar, Adv. with Mr. S.L. Gundli, SLO, CPCB Respondent No. 4 : Dr. Abhishek Atrey and Mr. Himanshu Mehra, Advs.
Respondent No. 5: Ms. Savitri Pandey, Adv. for State of U.P. Respondent No. 6 : Mr. Pradeep Misra and Mr. Daleep Kr. Dhyani, Avs.
Respondent No. 18: Mr. Devashish Bharuka and Ms. Anu Tyagi, for State of Jharkhand Respondent No. 19: Mr. Jayesh Gaurav for JSPCB Mr. Mukesh Verma, Adv.
Mr. Raman Yadav and Mr. Dalder Singh, Advs. For U.P. Jal Nigam Mr. Sirikanth Nayak, Mr. Subhir K., Adv. for Dabur India.
Mr. P.K. Agarwal, Adv. for Superio Ind. Ltd. Item. No. 57 Mr. Sanjeev Ralli, Adv. and Mr. Prem Grover, Adv. with Mr. Dinesh Jindal, LO, GNCTD & DPCC Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Advs. For M/o Water Resource Mr. H.P. Sharma and Mr. Ajay Sharma for VRS & Vedraun Son Mr. Ishwer Singh, Adv. for MoEF & CC Mr. B.V. Niren, Advs. For M/o. Water Resources and CGWB Mr. Rajul Shrivastav for MPPCB Mr. K. Krishna Kumar, Adv. for Stanlite Bruchans Ltd.
Mr. S.P. Singh, Sr. Adv. and Mr. Keshav Choudhary, Advs.
Mr. Rudreshwar Singh & Gopal Jha, Advs. For State of Bihar & BPCB Ms. Vanita Bhargava, Mr. Anun Khandelwal and Ms. Suveni Bhagat for Item No.14,15&56 United Spirits Ltd.
Mr. C.D. Singh, AAG, Mr. Apoorv Kurup and Mr. V.C. Shukla, Adv. with for State of Chhattisgarh Item NO. 14 Mr. Anil Grover, AAG with Mr. Rahul Khurana, Adv. - State of Haryana Mr. Sanjay Upadhyay and Mr. Salik Shafique, Advs. R-1, in Item No. 52 OA 319/14 Mr. A.A. Arun, Adv. in Item Nos. 71, 72, 67, 68, 69, 70, 63, 65, 58, 55, 51, 59, 153, 53 and 60.
Mr. Atul Batra, Adv. For Mother Dairy Dr. Yashpal Singh and Ms. Antima Bazaz, Advs. in Item, No. 16,,17, 142, 148, 141 and 150. Dr. Chaudhary Shamsuddin K., Adv. in Item No. 157 in OA 427/14 Mr. Rajendra Sharma, Adv. for VRS Foods Ltd. In Item No. 14 & 20 Mr. Bhavya Bharti, Adv. and Mr. Ranjana Roy Gawai, Adv. for Bhushan Steel Mr. Rahul Aggarwal, Adv. for Item No. 156. Ms. Yogmaya Agnihotri, Adv. for CECB in Item No. 14 Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi for Diesel Locomotive Item No. 49 Mr. Amit Sibal Sr. Adv. and Mr. Manu Aggarwal, Adv. OA 196/2014 Mr. Vishesh Thakur, Assistant Managr, Dalmia Chini Mills in OA 321 of 2014 in Item No. 54.
Mr. M.Z. Chauaturrey and Mr. S.A. Zaidi, Adv. in Item No. 46 Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv. for Item No. 153
Date and Orders of the Tribunal Remarks Item No. 14-159 Perused. Heard. February 04, 2015 Despite our specific requests, now it is third day no
senior officer from the State of Uttar Pradesh is present. Learned Counsel appearing for the State submits that she had communicated the order of the Tribunal to the state. This is a matter relating to cleaning of River Ganga and free her from the pollutants part of which (Industrial effluent pollution) has even been transferred by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India for expeditious disposal to the Tribunal. We find that the attitude of State of UP has been very un-cooperative before the Tribunal and the details necessary for passing of the appropriate order for preventing and controlling of pollution of River Ganga have been unnecessarily obstructed from surfacing. We are therefore, of the considered view that the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Principal Secretary, Industries & Department of State of UP should be present before the Tribunal.
In exercise of our powers and in terms of the provision of Section 19 (4) (a) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 read with Order XVI Rule 10(3) and Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, we issue bailable warrants against the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Principal Secretary, Industries & Department of State of UP in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer for securing their presence before us. The bailable warrants shall be executed by the SHO, PS, Hazarat Ganj, Lucknow, Bailable warrants made returnable on 11th February, 2015. In the event of default, the SHO himself will be present before the Tribunal on that day.
In furtherance to the orders of the Tribunal the Additional Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Uttarakhand is present. He submits that inspection of 46 industries were conducted, however, the complete survey of the industrial cluster could not completed. He further state that Government is committed to the cause of environment and would like to clear the entire pollution of River Ganga particularly the one resulting from the industrial effluent.
Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties in relation to the State of Uttarakhand we pass the following directions:-
1. The representatives of the CPCB, Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board, State Government and Jal Nigam, (each of them should be Senior Officers) would conduct an inspection of all the industrial clusters in Kashipur, Roorkee including Haridwar, Pant Nagar including Bajpur and Sitarganj and Doiwala in Dehradun;
2. The inspection would be conducted, effluents collected from the outlets of the industrial complexes as well as random effluent samples from each of the industries therein and analysed, the analysis reports of which should be submitted to the Tribunal;
3. It shall be reported as to how many points of discharge emptying in the river Ram Ganga, Kaali and River Ganga directly are in existence with details of their locations and answer:-
i. How many CETPs are in operation and whether they are operating to their optimum capacity or not.
ii. Whether CETPs established are having requisite capacity and capability of treating the effluents that is being discharged from these complexes or not.
iii. Whether the drains are also carrying sewage iv. Whether any STPs have been established at the outlets of these industrial complexes;
4. And Recommend:
i. The proposed number of CETPs/STPs required to be established/constructed to ensure that the trade or the domestic effluents which are being discharged conform to the prescribed standards and release treated water of bathing standard in the environment.
5. It has also been brought to our notice that large quantity of sewage and other effluents are being discharged from various Ashrams, Hotels, buildings located at the bank of River Ganga particularly in Haridwar and Rishikesh. We direct the Committee to conduct an inspection and report to the Tribunal in this regard. The inspection report shall specifically mention the buildings which have installed STPs plants and whether such plants are operational and meet prescribed standards for bathing quality water or not and the points of discharge from the buildings directly or through the STPs.
6. List of all industries particularly polluting industries or non-complying industries, operating without consent of the Board even on other tributaries of Ganga may also be submitted.
The report shall be submitted to the Tribunal within three weeks from today.
We make it clear that the quantities of high polluting heavy metals and even the pollutants which may not be specifically stated in relation to the prescribed parameters would also be stated in the report.
List this matter on 10th March, 2015.
This case has been heard continuously for three days. Lengthy submissions have been made by the learned counsel appearing for various parties as well as the Officers and Technical personnels present on behalf of the U.P. Jal Nigam, Municipal Corporation Kanpur, State of Uttar Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board, some of the Tannery owners, Applicants and Mr. M.C. Mehta. We would be dealing with the respective submissions made at subsequent point but in view of the emergent and compelling circumstances appearing in this case and in light of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India we found/find it necessary to pass certain directions.
However, before we proceed to record the directions, we may notice that the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board has closed the operation of the 98 tanneries industries in the industrial clusters at Jajmau. According to the Board these industries have started their operations in violation of the orders passed by the Tribunal. These industries were operating without valid consent which however on their application in some cases had been granted but was subject to grant of permission to operate by the Tribunal. Only 7 out 98 fall in this category. Other 91 industries were operating and are found to be operating without consent of the Board and causing pollution, are voluntarily being closed. It would be necessary for the Tribunal even to pass certain directions in this regard in order to avoid undue hardships to the tannery industries. Another factor which is required to be noticed by the Tribunal is that under the decisions taken by the State of Uttar Pradesh the owners of the tanneries in this industrial clusters were required to bear and pay capital expenditure for the CETP as well as running expenditure which admittedly they have failed to pay. However, it is pointed out that the tannery owners are in arrears of payment due on account of running of CET Plant.
It is not only a matter of dismay but concern that CETP is found to be ineffective for treating the effluent that it is receiving. The trade effluent is containing the industrial discharge by tannery industries as well as domestic waste and sewage. It is undisputed before us that 12.5 MLD is being discharged only from this industrial clusters outlet directly into river Ganga as the existing CETP at Jajmau, Kanpur is intended to treat only 9 MLD industrial effluents. We shall be dealing with this aspect separately and after submission of the report which we are calling under following directions. Directions:
1. We hereby constitute a special Technical Expert Committee of which following shall be the Members;
a. A representative not below rank of Scientist `C' (Director) of MoEF;
b. Senior Scientist of Environment form CPCB; c. MD, U.P. Jal Nigal d. Commissioner of Municipal Corporation; e. Secretary Environment, State of U.P. f. Senior Chief Environmental Engineer of the U.P. P.C.B. The Secretary Environment state of U.P. would chair the committee. MD, Jal Nigam and Municipal commissioner would be entitled to depute for the field work the Chief Engineers of their respective organisations. However, for compliance of this Order, the contents of the report and its submission to the Tribunal they would be personally responsible.
The Committee shall collect or cause to be collected inflow at the point prior to screening Chamber and the effluent discharged at the point of post physicochemical Treatment Section of the CETP plant at Jajmau that is the treated effluent/ water. The samples shall be analysed for all pollutants including heavy metals, arsenic and all other parameters specified under the applicable notification - to put it simply for all pollutants contained in the effluents and report submitted to the Tribunal.
Similar exercise shall be carried out at the outlet points of the industrial clusters at Unnao.
Ground water samples shall be collected and tested from the points where the treated discharge is being released for floriculture and agriculture areas. Such samples shall also be tested for all parameters including heavy metals. The Committee shall study and submit a report as to what process including the chemicals are being used by the tannery industries at both these industrial clusters. The inspecting team shall collect samples at random from the outlets of the tannery industries that are operating in these pockets and analyse the same. It will also state as to what is the process that is being adopted by the tannery industries for carrying on their industrial activity. The Committee shall give complete details of water use and quantum of effluent discharge made by the tannery industry and the total load of sewage that is being used as inflow for the CETP. The Committee shall report whether the existing chromium recovery plants are adequate for recovery of the entire chromium from the effluent discharged by the tannery industries at Jajmau, and how the sludge that is generated by the CETP is being used or disposed of.
The Committee shall report if the 210 MLD STP is ready for operations. It will also report if the existing 3 STPs in addition to above and 3 more proposed STPs would be sufficient to treat the entire sewage of the Kanpur city collected through 23 drains that are stated to be covering the entire drainage network of the city of Kanpur as shown in the sketch at Exhibit No.1 on record of the Tribunal. The Committee may also take into consideration the 8th STP of 75 MLD that is proposed to be constructed. The Committee shall recommend as to how the existing CETP with the capacity of 36 MLD can be operated effectively and to its optimum capacity and answer whether the existing CETP needs any upgradation or this plant has lived its life.
The Committee shall examine the project with regard to establishment of CETP of 50 MLD and consider the establishment of exclusive industrial effluent treatment plant at Jajmau and whether it will be capable enough to treat all heavy metals travelling to the CETP in light of the result of the analysis report collected in furtherance to the directions passed herein.
The Committee shall also consider and recommend whether any additional CETP is required to be established at any other point then of what capacity and what specification. The Committee shall also obviously take into consideration the analysis reports. All the samples shall be analysed at the laboratory of the UPPCB, Delhi Laboratory of the CPCB and IIT Kanpur.
As far as, 98 industries are concerned, 7 industries have already been granted consent by the Board and 58 industries have been ordered to be closed down by the PCB and remaining industries have closed their commercial activity of their own accord. In this, we direct all the 7 industries which have been granted consent shall be re-inspected by the above team, their effluent shall be collected and report shall be submitted to the Tribunal. The inspecting team would also state whether any of these industries have installed ETP or chromium recovery plant:
and if they have installed, whether those are functional or not.
The remaining 58 industries closed by the Board are at liberty to comply with the directions given by the UPPCB for obtaining consent. If they have also applied, their application shall be considered with utmost priority and only after the premises have been inspected and their effluents analysed in accordance with law.
The industries which have been closed on their own, the District Administration and the Corporation shall ensure that they remain closed and are not permitted to operate unless they obtain consent of the Board in accordance with law and such consents are placed before the Tribunal for approval. Till that time, none of these industries can carry on their industrial activity.
The UPPCB may examine feasibility of amending its orders depending upon the recommendations received from the company that supplies of electricity as to the possibility of segregating industrial connection from the domestic connection wherever there is single connection for common use in the premises. If such report is received upon inspection it may pass orders accordingly.
List this case for further directions. The report should be submitted at least three days in advance to the next date of hearing. We make it clear that the entire Committee shall be personally responsible for carrying out the directions contained in this order without demur and default.
We further direct the District Administration and SSP and DM District Unnao, Kanpur to render all help, co- operation and if necessary depute the necessary force for execution of the directions of the Tribunal by the Committee in a simple and effective manner. ...........................................,CP (Swatanter Kumar) ...........................................,JM (U.D. Salvi) ..........................................,EM (Dr. D.K. Agrawal) ..........................................,EM (Prof. A.R. Yousuf) ..........................................,EM (Bikram Singh Sajwan)