National Green Tribunal
Compliance Of Municipal Solid Waste ... vs . on 1 September, 2022
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Item No. 01 Court No. 1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 606/2018
(In respect of State of West Bengal)
In re: Compliance of Municipal Solid Waste Management Rules,
2016 and other environmental issues
(Arising out of directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in W.P. No. 888/1996 and W.P. No. 375/2012)
Date of hearing: 01.09.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE PROF. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER
Present: Dr. Hari Krishna Dwivedi, Chief Secretary, West Bengal with
Smt. Roshni Sen, Principal Secretary, Environment Department, West
Bengal, Khalil Ahmed, Principal Secretary, UD & MA Department, West
Bengal, Dr. Rajesh Kumar, Member Secretary, West Bengal Pollution
Control Board (WBPCB) & Chairman, River Rejuvenation Committee (RRC),
Smt. Nandini Ghosh, Program Director, West Bengal State Project
Management Group (WBSPMG) & Special Commissioner, UD & MA
Department, West Bengal, Supriya Ghosal, Director, State Urban
Development Agency (SUDA), Kousik Das, Secretary, Municipal
Engineering Directorate
Ms. Divya Sinha, Addl. Director, CPCB
ORDER
The Issue - Monitoring of compliance of waste in terms of orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court
1. The issues of solid as well as liquid waste management are being monitored by this Tribunal as per orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court order dated 02.09.2014 in Writ Petition No. 888/1996, Almitra H. Patel vs. Union of India & Ors., with regard to solid waste management and order 1 dated 22.02.2017 in W.P. No. 375/2012, reported in (2017) 5 SCC 326, Paryavaran Suraksha vs. Union of India, with regard to liquid waste management. Other related issues include pollution of 351 river stretches, 124 non-attainment cities in terms of air quality, 100 polluted industrial clusters, illegal sand mining etc. which have also been dealt with earlier but we propose to limit the proceedings in the present matter to two issues of solid waste and sewage management.
ORDERS OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT TRANSFERRING THE ISSUE OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND LIQUID WASTE MANAGEMENT TO THIS TRIBUNAL:
Solid Waste Management
2. While transferring the issue of solid waste management vide Order dated 02.09.2014 in Writ Petition No. 888/1996, Almitra H. Patel Vs. Union of India & Ors., the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed "handling of solid municipal waste is a perennial challenge and would require constant efforts and monitoring with a view to making the municipal authorities concerned accountable, taking note of dereliction, if any, issuing suitable directions consistent with the said Rules and direction incidental to the purpose underlying the Rules such as upgradation of technology wherever possible. All these matters can, in our opinion, be best left to be handled by the National Green Tribunal established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The Tribunal, it is common ground, is not only equipped with the necessary expertise to examine and deal with the environment related issues but is also competent to issue in appropriate cases directions considered necessary for enforcing the statutory provisions."
3. Before transferring the said proceedings, matter was monitored by Hon'ble Supreme Court for about eighteen years and orders passed include 2 (2000) 2 SCC 679 and (2004) 13 SCC 538, directing scientific disposal of waste by setting up of compost plants/processing plants, preventing water percolation through heaps of garbage, creating focused 'solid waste management cells' in all States and complying with the Municipal Solid Waste Management Rules, 2000 (now replaced by SWM Rules, 2016). It was observed that the local authorities constituted for providing services to the citizens are lethargic and insufficient in their functioning which is impermissible. Non-accountability has led to lack of effort on the part of the employees. Domestic garbage and sewage along with poor drainage system in an unplanned manner contribute heavily to the problem of solid waste. The number of slums have multiplied significantly occupying large areas of public land. Promise of free land attracts more land grabbers. Instead of "slum clearance" there is "slum creation" in cities which is further aggravating the problem of domestic waste being strewn in the open. Accordingly, the Court directed that provisions pertaining to sanitation and public health be complied with, streets and public premises be cleaned daily, statutory authorities levy and recover charges from any person violating laws and ensure scientific disposal of waste, landfill sites be identified keeping in mind requirement of the city for next 20 years and environmental considerations, sites be identified for setting up of compost plants, steps be taken to prevent fresh encroachments and compliance report be submitted within eight weeks. Further observations in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court1are:
"3. The petitioner has handed over a note in the Court showing the progress that has been made in some of the States and also setting out some of the suggestions, including the suggestion for creation of solid waste management cell, so as to put a focus on the issue and also to provide incentives to those who perform 1 (2004) 13 SCC 538 3 well as was tried in some of the States. The said note states as under:
"1. As a result of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's orders on 26- 7-2004, in Maharashtra the number of authorisations granted for solid waste management (SWM) has increased from 32% to 98%, in Gujarat from 58% to 92% and in M.P. from NIL to 34%. No affidavits at all have been received from the 24 other States/UTs for which CPCB reported NIL or less than 3% authorisations in February 2004. All these States and their SPCBs can study and learn from Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat's successes.
2. All States/UTs and their SPCBs/PCCs have totally ignored the improvement of existing open dumps, due by 31-12-2001, let alone identifying and monitoring the existing sites. Simple steps can be taken immediately at almost no cost by every single ULB to prevent monsoon water percolation through the heaps, which produces highly polluting black run-off (leachate). Waste heaps can be made convex to eliminate standing water, upslope diversion drains can prevent water inflow, downslope diversion drains can capture leachate for recirculation onto the heaps, and disused heaps can be given soil cover for vegetative healing.
3. Lack of funds is no excuse for inaction. Smaller towns in every State should go and learn from Suryapet in A.P. (population 103,000) and Namakkal in T.N. (population 53,000) which have both seen dustbin-free 'zero garbage towns' complying with the MSW Rules since 2003 with no financial input from the State or the Centre, just good management and a sense of commitment.
4. States seem to use the Rules as an excuse to milk funds from the Centre, by making that a precondition for action and inflating waste processing costs 2-3 fold. The Supreme Court Committee recommended 1/3 contribution each from the city, State and Centre. Before seeking 70-80% Centre's contribution, every State should first ensure that each city first spends its own share to immediately make its wastes non-polluting by simple sanitising/stabilising, which is always the first step in composting viz. inoculate the waste with cow dung solution or bio culture and placing it in windrows (long heaps) which are turned at least once or twice over a period of 45 to 60 days.
5. Unless each State creates a focussed 'solid waste management cell' and rewards its cities for good performance, both of which Maharashtra has done, compliance with the MSW Rules seems to be an illusion.4
6. The admitted position is that the MSW Rules have not been complied with even after four years. None of the functionaries have bothered or discharged their duties to ensure compliance. Even existing dumps have not been improved. Thus deeper thought and urgent and immediate action is necessary to ensure compliance in future."
4. In this regard, reference may also be made to orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Municipal Council, Ratlam vs. Vardhichand2 and B.L. Wadhera v. Union of India and Ors.3 laying down that clean environment is fundamental right of citizens under Article 21 and it is for the local bodies as well as the State to ensure that public health is preserved by taking all possible steps. For doing so, financial inability cannot be pleaded. We note that even after 26 years of monitoring, 18 years by Hon'ble Supreme Court and eight years by this Tribunal, ground situation remains unsatisfactory.
Liquid Waste Management
5. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha vs. Union of India4 required this Tribunal to monitor directions for proper treatment of sewage to prevent untreated sewage and other effluents being discharged in water bodies by directing "We are of the view that mere directions are inconsequential, unless a rigid implementation mechanism is laid down. We, therefore, hereby provide that the directions pertaining to continuation of industrial activity only when there is in place a functional "primary effluent treatment plants", and the setting up of functional "common effluent treatment plants" within the timelines, expressed above, shall be of the Member Secretaries of the Pollution Control Boards concerned. The Secretary of the Department of Environment, of the State Government 2 (1980) 4 SCC 162 3 (1996) 2 SCC 594 4 (2017) 5 SCC 326 5 concerned (and the Union Territory concerned), shall be answerable in case of default. The Secretaries to the Government concerned shall be responsible for monitoring the progress and issuing necessary directions to the Pollution Control Board concerned, as may be required, for the implementation of the above directions. They shall be also responsible for collecting and maintaining records of data, in respect of the directions contained in this order. The said data shall be furnished to the Central Ground Water Authority, which shall evaluate the data and shall furnish the same to the Bench of the jurisdictional National Green Tribunal. To supervise complaints of non-implementation of the instant directions, the Benches concerned of the National Green Tribunal, will maintain running and numbered case files, by dividing the jurisdictional area into units. The abovementioned case files will be listed periodically. The Pollution Control Board concerned is also hereby directed to initiate such civil or criminal action, as may be permissible in law, against all or any of the defaulters."
6. Extracts from the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti Vs. Union of India are as follows:
"7. Having effectuated the directions recorded in the foregoing paragraphs, the next step would be, to set up common effluent treatment plants. We are informed, that for the aforesaid purpose, the financial contribution of the Central Government is to the extent of 50%, that of the State Government concerned (including the Union Territory concerned) is 25%. The balance 25%, is to be arranged by way of loans from banks. The above loans, are to be repaid, by the industrial areas, and/or industrial clusters. We are also informed that the setting up of a common effluent treatment plant, would ordinarily take approximately two years (in cases where the process has yet to be commenced). The reason for the above prolonged period, for setting up "common effluent treatment plants", 6 according to the learned counsel, is not only financial, but also, the requirement of land acquisition, for the same. x..............................x.....................x....................
10. Given the responsibility vested in municipalities under Article 243-W of the Constitution, as also, in Item 6 of Schedule XII, wherein the aforesaid obligation, pointedly extends to "public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management", we are of the view that the onus to operate the existing common effluent treatment plants, rests on municipalities (and/or local bodies). Given the aforesaid responsibility, the municipalities (and/or local bodies) concerned, cannot be permitted to shy away from discharging this onerous duty. In case there are further financial constraints, the remedy lies in Articles 243-X and 243-Y of the Constitution. It will be open to the municipalities (and/or local bodies) concerned, to evolve norms to recover funds, for the purpose of generating finances to install and run all the "common effluent treatment plants", within the purview of the provisions referred to hereinabove. Needless to mention that such norms as may be evolved for generating financial resources, may include all or any of the commercial, industrial and domestic beneficiaries, of the facility. The process of evolving the above norms, shall be supervised by the State Government (Union Territory) concerned, through the Secretaries, Urban Development and Local Bodies, respectively (depending on the location of the respective common effluent treatment plant). The norms for generating funds for setting up and/or operating the "common effluent treatment plant" shall be finalised, on or before 31- 3-2017, so as to be implemented with effect from the next financial year. In case, such norms are not in place, before the commencement of the next financial year, the State Governments (or the Union Territories) concerned, shall cater to the financial requirements, of running the "common effluent treatment plants", which are presently dysfunctional, from their own financial resources.
11. Just in the manner suggested hereinabove, for the purpose of setting up of "common effluent treatment plants", the State Governments concerned (including, the Union Territories concerned) will prioritise such cities, towns and villages, which discharge industrial pollutants and sewer, directly into rivers and water bodies.
12. We are of the view that in the manner suggested above, the malady of sewer treatment, should also be dealt with simultaneously. We, therefore, hereby direct that "sewage treatment plants" shall also be set up and made 7 functional, within the timelines and the format, expressed hereinabove."
7. Expression 'Common Effluent Treatment Plants" in para 7 may infact refer to the STPs, as the context shows.
8. On this subject, inspite of deadline of 31.3.2018 fixed by Hon'ble Supreme Court for preventing discharge of pollutants and rigorous monitoring by this Tribunal for the last five years, ground situation remains unsatisfactory.
Procedural History of present proceedings before this Tribunal
9. In the light of above, the Tribunal has considered the matter in the last eight years as far as solid waste management is concerned and more than five years as far as liquid waste management is concerned. Main orders on the subject include orders dated 22.12.2016, 31.08.2018, 16.01.2019, 28.8.2019, 12.09.2019, 6.12.2019, 07.01.2020, 28.02.2020, 02.07.2020, 14.12.2020, 22.2.2021, 30.11.2021, 14.12.2020 and 31.05.2022. First two orders - dated 22.12.2016 and 31.08.2018 deal only with solid waste management. Orders dated 28.8.2019, 6.12.2019 and 22.2.2021 deal with only liquid waste management while the remaining orders deal with solid waste as well as liquid waste management. Issue of liquid waste has also been separately dealt with in OA No. 593/2017 which was finally disposed of on 22.02.2021 with direction that further monitoring be undertaken by Central Monitoring Committee constituted by the said order. It was held that monitoring by the Tribunal cannot be for indefinite time and State authorities are primarily responsible for such monitoring after adequate monitoring by the Tribunal. By the same order, the Tribunal also dealt with the issue of 351 identified polluted river stretches in OA 673/2018. This is apart from individual cases dealing with 8 solid and liquid waste management. A brief reference of these orders will be made hereafter.
Orders dated 22.12.2016 and 31.08.2018
10. Vide order dated 22.12.2016, (2016) SCC Online NGT 2981, the issue of Solid Waste Management was disposed of requiring strict compliance of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 by all the States/UTs making it clear that if violations continue, the State will be liable to pay compensation. Later, matter was taken up to ascertain compliance status and finding that all the States/UTs were still non-compliant in the matter, the matter was again taken up and fresh directions issued for monitoring by the Tribunal constituted Monitoring Committees vide order dated 31.08.2018. Later, continuance of the committees was left to discretion of the States, depending on their own monitoring mechanism. Order dated 16.01.2019 requiring personal presence of Chief Secretaries of all States and UTs to explore remedial action after interaction with them and further orders
11. In view of continuing non-compliances, vide order dated 16.01.2019, the Tribunal directed personal presence of Chief Secretaries of all States and UTs for interaction to ensure compliance. The Tribunal held that large scale non-compliance of environmental norms was resulting in deaths and diseases and irreversible damage to the environment, without accountability for such failures. Though violation of the Rules as well as orders of this Tribunal is criminal offence, still there was rampant violation by State authorities practically with no accountability which unhappy situation was required to be remedied by involvement of highest functionaries of the State in the interest of public health and to uphold rule of law.
9
12. In terms of order dated 16.1.2019, the Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs appeared on different dates till 18.07.2019 and the Tribunal, after reviewing the status of noncompliance on most of the issues, directed further effective steps to be taken for compliance of the Rules and the environmental norms. The Chief Secretary of West Bengal appeared on 02.04.2019 and following directions were issued:
"39. In view of above, after discussion with the Chief Secretary, following further directions are issued:
i. Steps for compliance of Rules 22 and 24 of SWM Rules be now taken within six weeks to the extent not yet taken. Similar steps be taken with regard to Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules and Plastic Waste Management Rules.
ii. Atleast three major cities and as many major towns as possible in the State and atleast three Panchayats in every District may be notified on the website within two weeks from today as model cities/towns/villages which will be made fully compliant within next six months.
iii. The remaining cities, towns and Village Panchayats of the State may be made fully compliant in respect of environmental norms within one year.
iv. A quarterly report be furnished by the Chief Secretary, every three months. First such report shall be furnished by July 10, 2019.
v. The Chief Secretary may personally monitor the progress, atleast once in a month, with all the District Magistrates.
vi. The District Magistrates or other Officers may be imparted requisite training.
vii. The District Magistrates may monitor the status of compliance of environmental norms, atleast once in two weeks.
viii. Performance audit of functioning of all regulatory bodies may be got conducted and remedial measures be taken, within six months."
13. The Chief Secretary of West Bengal appeared again on 17.01.2020 and the Tribunal inter-alia issued following directions:
"35. We accordingly direct:10
a. In view of the fact that most of the statutory timelines have expired and directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal to comply with Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 remain unexecuted, compensation scale is hereby laid down for continued failure after 31.03.2020. The compliance of the Rules requires taking of several steps mentioned in Rule 22 from Serial No. 1 to 10 (mentioned in para 12 above). Any such continued failure will result in liability of every Local Body to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 10 lakh per month per Local Body for population of above 10 lakhs, Rs. 5 lakh per month per Local Body for population between 5 lakhs and 10 lakhs and Rs. 1 lakh per month per other Local Body from 01.04.2020 till compliance. If the Local Bodies are unable to bear financial burden, the liability will be of the State Government with liberty to take remedial action against the erring Local Bodies. Apart from compensation, adverse entries must be made in the ACRs of the CEO of the said Local Bodies and other senior functionaries in Department of Urban Development etc. who are responsible for compliance of order of this Tribunal.
b. Legacy waste remediation was to 'commence' from 01.11.2019 in terms of order of this Tribunal dated 17.07.2019 in O.A. No. 519/2019 para 285 even though statutory timeline for 'completing' the said step is till 07.04.2021 (as per serial no. 11 in Rule 22), which direction remains unexecuted at most of the places. Continued failure of every Local Body on the subject of commencing the work of legacy waste sites remediation from 01.04.2020 till compliance will result in liability to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 10 lakh per month per Local Body for population of above 10 lakhs, Rs. 5 lakh per month per Local Body for population between 5 lakhs and 10 lakhs and Rs. 1 lakh per month per other Local Body. If the Local Bodies are unable 5 The Chief Secretaries may ensure allocation of funds for processing of legacy waste and its disposal and in their respective next reports, give the progress relating to management of all the legacy waste dumpsites. Remediation work on all other dumpsites may commence from 01.11.2019 and completed preferably within six months and in no case beyond one year.
Substantial progress be made within six months. We are conscious that the SWM Rules provide for a maximum period of upto five years for the purpose, however there is no reason why the same should not happen earlier, in view of serious implications on the environment and public health.
((a) What a Waste 2.0, Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050, World Bank Group, ISBN (paper): 978-1-4648-1329-0, 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank, http://datatopics.worldbank.org/what-a-waste/. The report states- When waste is burned, the resulting toxins and particulate matter in the air can cause respiratory and neurological diseases, among others (Thompson 2014). Piles of waste produce toxic liquid runoff called leachate, which can drain into rivers, groundwater, and soil. Organic waste entering waterways reduces the amount of oxygen available and promotes the growth of harmful organisms (Bhada-Tata and Hoornweg 2016). Marine pollution is also increasing as a result of mismanaged solid waste on land, poor disposal practices by sea vessels, and runoff from sewage and polluted streams.
(b)https://www.epw.in/engage/article/institutional-framework-implementing-solid-waste-management- india-macro-analysis Several studies have been published that link asthma, heart attack, and emphysema to burning garbage. Human faecal matter is also frequently found in municipal waste--this, along with unmanaged decomposed garbage, attracts other rodents, that further lead to a spread of diseases such as dengue and malaria. Leachate from rotten garbage contains heavy metals and toxic liquid; with such emissions ending up either absorbed into the soil or flowing into water bodies today (Awasthi 2013), the entire food chain can be affected when this contaminated water is utilised for agriculture, human consumption and animal consumption.) 11 to bear financial burden, the liability will be of the State Government with liberty to take remedial action against the erring Local Bodies. Apart from compensation, adverse entries must be made in the ACRs of the CEO of the said Local Bodies and other senior functionaries in Department of Urban Development etc. who are responsible for compliance of order of this Tribunal.
c. Further, with regard to thematic areas listed above in para 20, steps be ensured by the Chief Secretary in terms of directions of this Tribunal especially w.r.t. plastic waste, bio- medical waste, construction and demolition waste which are linked with solid waste treatment and disposal. Action may also be ensured by the Chief Secretary of the State with respect to remaining thematic areas viz. hazardous waste, e-waste, polluted industrial clusters, reuse of treated water, performance of CETPs/ETPs, groundwater extraction, groundwater recharge, restoration of water bodies, noise pollution and illegal sand mining.
d. The compensation regime already laid down for failure of the Local Bodies and/or Department of Irrigation and Public Health/In-charge Department to take action for treatment of sewage in terms of observations in para 31 above will result in liability to pay compensation as already noted above. e. Compensation in above terms may be deposited with the CPCB for being spent on restoration of environment which may be ensured by the Chief Secretary of the State. f. An 'Environment Monitoring Cell' may be set up in the office of Chief Secretary of the State within one month from today, if not already done for coordination and compliance of above directions which will be the responsibility of the Chief Secretary of the State.
Compliance reports in respect of significant environmental issues may be furnished in terms of order dated 07.01.2020 quarterly with a copy to CPCB."
14. In short, the Tribunal expected three model cities, towns and villages to be made compliant in six months and the remaining State with one year. It was this target for the State by setting up of environmental cells directly under the Chief Secretaries, regular periodical monitoring by the Chief Secretaries at the State level and by the District Magistrates at the District level. Further direction also was to take action for non-compliance by recovery of compensation and recording adverse ACRs against erring officers. The Tribunal also directed 12 filing of quarterly reports by the Chief Secretaries. Based on such reports, CPCB was to file consolidated status reports. The Chief Secretaries were to appear again after six months with updated status of compliance. It is difficult to hold that the State has taken directions of the Tribunal seriously or even endeavoured to go by this mandate. Even after three years, neither there is adequate compliance nor the same has been projected in immediate future. No accountability fixed, no performance audit shown to have been conducted and no entries in ACRs are shown to have been made. There is nothing to show that compensation has been recovered in terms of directions of the Tribunal. The State assumes that none is responsible for such gross violations of law and directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal. It is difficult to say how rule of law will be achieved. We thus record our disappointment with the attitude of the State and hope the State makes amends in compliance now.
15. The Tribunal has been receiving progress reports from States as well as monitoring Committees wherever functioning which have been considered by further orders.
Further Review after completing round of interaction with all Chief Secretaries by order dated 12.9.2019
16. The matter was then reviewed on 12.09.2019 in the light of report of the CPCB dated 09.09.2019 showing wide gaps in compliance of solid waste, plastic waste, bio-medical waste management, rejuvenation of identified polluted river stretches, polluted industrial clusters and non-attainment cities. A fresh schedule for appearance of the Chief Secretaries was issued. Vide order dated 07.01.2020, the Tribunal directed CPCB to ascertain Compliance of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 in terms of MSW generated, segregated and treated, gaps in the waste 13 processing, enforcement of statutory timelines and orders of this Tribunal, number of sites remediated, and quantity of legacy waste therein and timelines for completing remediation. It was further directed that on the subject of sewage treatment, CPCB has to ascertain quantity of sewage generated and treated in the State, gap in the sewage treatment and timelines to bridge the gap, including strategy for use of treated water for secondary purpose. CPCB was accordingly directed to redesign its formats for securing relevant quantifiable information. Order dated 28.02.2020
17. Accordingly, the Chief Secretaries of 18 States/UTs appeared and filed updated status reports. Since there still existed huge gaps in compliance, further directions were issued by way of different orders. Last such order is of 28.2.2020. Other orders are on same pattern. The direction part of the said order is reproduced below:
"41. In view of above, consistent with the directions referred to in Para 29 issued on 10.01.2020 in the case of UP, Punjab and Chandigarh which have also been repeated for other States in matters already dealt with, we direct:
g. In view of the fact that most of the statutory timelines have expired and directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal to comply with Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 remain unexecuted, interim compensation scale is hereby laid down for continued failure after 31.03.2020. The compliance of the Rules requires taking of several steps mentioned in Rule 22 from Serial No. 1 to 10 (mentioned in para 12 above). Any such continued failure will result in liability of every Local Body to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 10 lakh per month per Local Body for population of above 10 lakhs, Rs. 5 lakh per month per Local Body for population between 5 lakhs and 10 lakhs and Rs. 1 lakh per month per other Local Body from 01.04.2020 till compliance. If the Local Bodies are unable to bear financial burden, the liability will be of the State Governments with liberty to take remedial action against the erring Local Bodies.
Apart from compensation, adverse entries must be made in the ACRs of the CEO of the said Local 14 Bodies and other senior functionaries in Department of Urban Development etc. who are responsible for compliance of order of this Tribunal. Final compensation may be assessed and recovered by the State PCBs/PCCs in the light of Para 33 above within six months from today. CPCB may prepare a template and issue an appropriate direction to the State PCBs/PCCs for undertaking such an assessment in the light thereof within one month.
h. Legacy waste remediation was to 'commence' from 01.11.2019 in terms of order of this Tribunal dated 17.07.2019 in O.A. No. 519/2019 para 286 even though statutory timeline for 'completing' the said step is till 07.04.2021 (as per serial no. 11 in Rule
22), which direction remains unexecuted at most of the places and delay in clearing legacy waste is causing huge damage to environment in monetary terms as noted in para 33 above, pending assessment and recovery of such damage by the concerned State PCB within four months from today, continued failure of every Local Body on the subject of commencing the work of legacy waste sites remediation from 01.04.2020 till compliance will result in liability to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 10 lakh per month per Local Body for population of above 10 lakhs, Rs. 5 lakh per month per Local Body for population between 5 lakhs and 10 lakhs and Rs. 1 lakh per month per other Local Body. If the Local Bodies are unable to bear financial burden, the liability will be of the State Governments with liberty to take remedial action against the erring Local Bodies. Apart from compensation, adverse entries must be made in the ACRs of the CEO of the said Local Bodies and other senior functionaries in Department of Urban Development etc. who are responsible for compliance of order of this Tribunal. Final compensation may be assessed and recovered by the State PCBs/PCCs in the light of Para 33 above within six months from today.
i. Further, with regard to thematic areas listed above in para 20, steps be ensured by the Chief Secretaries in terms of directions of this Tribunal especially w.r.t. plastic waste, bio-medical waste, construction and demolition 6 The Chief Secretaries may ensure allocation of funds for processing of legacy waste and its disposal and in their respective next reports, give the progress relating to management of all the legacy waste dumpsites. Remediation work on all other dumpsites may commence from 01.11.2019 and completed preferably within six months and in no case beyond one year. Substantial progress be made within six months. We are conscious that the SWM Rules provide for a maximum period of upto five years for the purpose, however there is no reason why the same should not happen earlier, in view of serious implications on the environment and public health.
15 waste which are linked with solid waste treatment and disposal. Action may also be ensured by the Chief Secretaries of the States/UTs with respect to remaining thematic areas viz. hazardous waste, e-waste, polluted industrial clusters, reuse of treated water, performance of CETPs/ETPs, groundwater extraction, groundwater recharge, restoration of water bodies, noise pollution and illegal sand mining.
j. The compensation regime already laid down for failure of the Local Bodies and/or Department of Irrigation and Public Health/In-charge Department to take action for treatment of sewage in terms of observations in Para 36 above will result in liability to pay compensation as already noted above which are reproduced for ready reference:
i. Interim measures for phytoremediation/ bioremediation etc. in respect of 100% sewage to reduce the pollution load on recipient water bodies - 31.03.2020.
Compensation is payable for failure to do so at the rate of Rs. 5 lakh per month per drain by concerned Local Bodies/States (in terms of orders dated 28.08.2019 in O.A. No. 593/2017 and 06.12.2019 in O.A. No. 673/2018) w.e.f. 01.04.2020.
ii. Commencement of setting up of STPs -
31.03.2020. Compensation is payable for failure to do so at the rate of Rs. 5 lakh per month per STP by concerned Local Bodies/States (in terms of orders dated 28.08.2019 in O.A. No. 593/2017 and 06.12.2019 in O.A. No. 673/2018) w.e.f.
01.04.2020.
iii. Commissioning of STPs - 31.03.2021.
Compensation is payable for failure to do so at the rate of Rs. 10 lakh per month per STP by concerned Local Bodies/States (in terms of orders dated 28.08.2019 in O.A. No. 593/2017 and 06.12.2019 in O.A. No. 673/2018) w.e.f. 01.04.2021.
k. Compensation in above terms may be deposited with the CPCB for being spent on restoration of environment which may be ensured by the Chief Secretaries' of the States/UTs.
l. An 'Environment Monitoring Cell' may be set up in the office of Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs within one month from today, if not already done for coordination and compliance of above directions which will be the responsibility of the Chief Secretaries of the States/UTs.16
m. Compliance reports in respect of significant environmental issues may be furnished in terms of order dated 07.01.2020 quarterly with a copy to CPCB.
18. Timelines under the Rules referred to in sub para (a) above are :
"22. Time frame for implementation:- Necessary infrastructure for implementation of these rules shall be created by the local bodies and other concerned authorities, as the case may be, on their own, by directly or engaging agencies within the time frame specified below:
Sl. Activity Time limit
No. from the date
of notification
of rules
(1) (2) (3)
1. Identification of suitable sites for setting up 1 year
solid waste processing facilities.
2. Identification of suitable sites for setting up 1 year
common regional sanitary landfill facilities for suitable clusters of local authorities under 0.5 million population and for setting up common regional sanitary landfill facilities or stand alone sanitary landfill facilities by all local authorities having a population of 0.5 million or more.
3. Procurement of suitable sites for setting up 2 years solid waste processing facility and sanitary landfill facilities.
4. Enforcing waste generators to practice segregation 2 years of bio degradable, recyclable, combustible, sanitary waste domestic hazardous and inert solid wastes at source.
5. Ensure door to door collection of segregated waste 2 years and its transportation in covered vehicles to processing or disposal facilities.
6. ensure separate storage, collection and 2 years transportation of construction and demolition wastes.
7. setting up solid waste processing facilities by all 2 years Local Bodies having 100000 or more population.
8. Setting up solid waste processing facilities by Local 3 years Bodies and census towns below 100000 population.
9. setting up common or stand alone sanitary 3 years landfills by or for all Local Bodies having 0.5 million or more population for the disposal of only such residual wastes from the processing facilities as well as untreatable inert wastes as permitted under the Rules.
10. setting up common or regional sanitary 3 years landfills by 3 years all Local Bodies and census towns under 0.5 million population for the disposal of permitted waste under the rules.17
11. bio-remediation or capping of old and 5 years "
abandoned dump sites.
19. Our comments with regard to compliance of directions dated 28.2.2020 remain the same as in para 13 above.
Order dated 02.07.2020
20. The matter was then considered on 02.07.2020. Having regard to the pandemic, appearance of remaining Chief Secretaries was deferred. Order dated 14.12.2020
21. The matter was further considered on 14.12.2020 for review of progress. Scheduled appearance of remaining Chief Secretaries was dispensed with but it was directed that monitoring at the level of Chief Secretaries may continue and quarterly status reports be filed with CPCB so that CPCB may file a consolidated report every six months before the Tribunal. It was further directed that compensation in terms of earlier orders be recovered and credited to a separate account with the Environment Department of concerned State to be used for restoration of environment. It was also observed that in these proceedings Solid Waste Management also will be monitored, other issues being considered in separate proceedings.
22. As already noted above, there is nothing to show compliance by the State of West Bengal on the issue of deposit of compensation and its utilization as directed.
Further review on 30.11.2021 - huge gaps still found and hence, another round of interaction with Chief Secretaries proposed 18
23. The matter was thereafter taken up on 30.11.2021 to consider the report of CPCB dated 25.10.2020 giving compliance status in 32 States/UTs as in March, 2021 as follows:-
"Solid Waste Management 4.0 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS a. Total No. of ULBs in 29 States/UTs is 4186.
b. As per information provided by 29 States/UTs - total waste generated is 150858.951 TPD of which 94435.318 TPD is processed, which is 62.6% of the total waste generated in these States/UT. 11772.4538 TPD (7.8%) of the waste is landfilled and the gap in Solid waste management in 29 States is 45071.771 TPD which is 29.8% of the waste generated in these States/UTs.
c. Information on MRF has been provided for 28 States/UTs covering 77% of ULBs in these States/UTs.
d. Information on Recycling facilities have been provided for 22 States/UTs covering 39% of ULBs in these States/UTs e. Information on Composting facilities has been provided for all 29 States/UTs covering 70% of ULBs in these States/UTs f. Information on WtE has been provided for 25 out of 29 States/UTs covering 1.9% of ULBs in these States/UTs.
g. Information on RDF has been provided for 24 out of 29 States/UTs covering 12.4% of ULBs in these States/UTs.
h. Information on Biomethanation has been provided for 27 out of 29 States/UTs covering 7.1% of ULBs in these States/UTs.
i. Information on Landfills has been provided in 24 out of 29 States/UTs covering 18.9% of ULBs in the States.
j. 498 of 2111 (23%) dumpsites in 25 States/UTs have been cleared and Remediation has been initiated in 23% (496) of the dumpsites.
k. Model Town/Cities have been identified in 25 States/UTs.
l. 16 States /UTs have established environmental cells.
m. 15 States /UTs have standardised rates for procurement of services/equipment required for solid waste management.
n. In view of above, States/UTs need to develop of ULB wise action plan for collection, segregation, transportation and 19 processing of waste and lay down an appropriate governance framework at state and district levels."
24. The Tribunal in its order dated 30.11.2021 observed:-
"1to17....xxxx.......................xxx........................................xxx
18. We are of the view that hence forthwith proceedings in this matter need to cover Solid Waste Management and Sewage Management, these issues being crucial and required to be monitored by this Tribunal by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Absence of management of waste results in adding to air and water pollution in a big way. All the legacy waste dump sites in the country need to be remediated to reduce methane gas, foul smell and leachate and also to release valuable land occupied by such sites which can be used for waste management/plantation or raising funds. Waste collected must be scientifically processed and disposed at the earliest in the interest of hygiene and public health. It needs to be ensured that instead of remediating the legacy waste sites, the garbage is not shifted to new sites which is not a solution to the problem. It only results in shifting the problem from one place to the other without any advancement of environment protection. What is necessary is that the garbage must be finally disposed of and land reclaimed. The authorities must move towards zero garbage at the end of the day by ensuring that instead of garbage being collected and dumped, it is taken to destination where it is finally processed scientifically and appropriately, except for reused/recycling of such residues as is possible. This is also the mandate of Swachh Bharat Mission, initiated by the Central Government. Similarly, sewage has to be scientifically treated to give effect to the mandate of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 in the interest of availability of clean water in rivers and other waterbodies. Central Governments programmes also provide for initiatives on these subjects. On both aspects, compensation regime has been laid down which is necessary to enforce the rule of law and for protection of environment and public health. The compensation laid down has to be duly collected and utilized for restoration of environment, by being kept in a separate account. Accountability for the failures needs to be fixed by way of ACRs and departmental action as such failures result in crimes under the law of land and damage to public health. Such failure is also breach of Constitutional obligation to uphold the Right to Life. The country is committed to Sustainable Development Goals of providing clean air and safe drinking water.
19. In view of above, continued failure of Rule of Law must be remedied in terms of mandate of orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition No. 888/1996, Almitra H. Patel Vs. Union of India & Ors. and Paryavaran Suraksha vs. Union of India,7 followed by orders of this Tribunal. It is necessary that Chief 7 (2017) 5 SCC 326 20 Secretaries continue the monitoring and interact with this Tribunal periodically by video conferencing. Accordingly, we lay down following further schedule for personal appearance of the Chief Secretaries, by Video Conferencing, with the status of compliance in respect of each of the States/UTs on the subject of Solid Waste Management and Sewage Management.
The data to be furnished should cover all categories of areas in the State - big cities, towns and villages.
20. The hearing on each of above dates will commence at 10:30 a.m. sharp. The Chief Secretaries may not delegate the responsibility. As far as possible, they may adjust other work for which long advance notice is being given. In case adjustment is found difficult for any unforeseen reason, request for change of date may be mailed by e-mail at judicial- [email protected].
21. All the States/CPCB may undertake process of verification of data after having interaction on video conferencing with the concerned States/UTs within one month. The Secretaries, Environment, Urban Development Department and Irrigation Department may also coordinate with the Member Secretaries of State Legal Services Authorities in all State/UTs in the light of background mentioned in paras 3 and 4 above for the awareness programmes on the subject." Separate orders dated 28.8.2019, 12.9.2019, 6.12.2019 and 22.02.2021 on the subject of Liquid Waste Management
25. Issue of liquid waste management was separately dealt with in OA 593/2017 on directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and in suo motu proceedings for restoration of 351 identified polluted river stretches in OA 673/2018. Vide order dated 28.08.2019, the Tribunal directed that 100% sewage treatment must be ensured by all local bodies. Vide further order dated 06.12.2019 in O.A. No. 673/20188, the Tribunal directed that for failure to commence in-situ remediation, compensation will be payable at the rate of Rs. 5 lakh per month per drain after 31.03.2020 and for failure to commence setting up of STPs after 31.03.2020 compensation is to be paid at the rate of Rs. 5 lakh per month per STP. For failure to complete the project, compensation has to be paid at the rate of Rs. 10 lakh per STP per month after 31.03.2021. Relevant part of the order is quoted below:
8News item published in "The Hindu" authored by Shri Jacob Koshy Titled "More river stretches are now critically polluted: CPCB"21
"47. (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.
ii. Timeline for completing all steps of action plans including completion of setting up STPs and their commissioning till 31.03.2021 in terms of order dated 08.04.2019 in the present case will remain as already directed. In default, compensation will be liable to be paid at the scale laid down in the order of this Tribunal dated 22.08.2019 in the case of river Ganga i.e. Rs. 10 lakhs per month per STP."
26. Both the matters were disposed of vide order dated 22.02.2021 with a direction that further monitoring be continued at the level of the Chief Secretaries in States and Central Monitoring Committee headed by Secretary, Ministry of Jal Shakti at the national level. Today's hearing in the presence of Chief Secretary, West Bengal to ascertain compliance status and way forward Compliance status in West Bengal presented
27. The presentation filed by the Chief Secretary, West Bengal on 31.08.2022 shows following data:
SUMMARY OF STATUS A: Solid Waste Management Quantity of Waste Gap in Quantity of waste Quantity of Status of Bio-
waste Processed generation being disposed in Legacy mining
generation in (in TPD) and landfills waste in the
the State Processing (in TPD) State
(in TPD) (in TPD) (Tones)
13469.19 3047 10,418 10,418 1.20 crore 6 sites cleared
(13709) 107 sites 84 sites under
processing
22
132.34 acres
recovered out
of 838.09 acres
B): Sewage Management
Quantity of Treatment Current Gap Utilization of treated sewage in
sewage capacity in treatment
generation in (in MLD) (in MLD) Agriculture/ Industrial Any other
the State Horticulture purpose purpose
(in MLD) purpose
2758 1505.85 1490 Not specified
(1268 MLD
utilized)
Our Observations findings and Directions
28. It is disappointing to see from the data presented by the Chief Secretary that after 17.1.2020 when the Chief Secretary, West Bengal last appeared before the Tribunal in the present matter, there is no meaningful progress. There are huge gaps in management of solid as well as liquid waste.
29. On the subject of solid waste management in 125 urban local bodies, the waste generated is mentioned as 13469.19 TPD, while segregation is mentioned to be 5994.98 TPD (44.51%). Collection and transportation of waste is mentioned to be about 13372.32 TPD (99.28%) but, it is not clear what is happening to the waste so transported. Data suggests that waste collected and transported mostly remains unprocessed. Legacy waste is deposited at 107 sites, occupying huge land with accumulated waste to the extent of 1.20 crores MTs. Further, it is reported that out of 13469.19 TPD of waste generation, only 3047 TPD is processed, thereby leaving 10,422.19 TPD waste unprocessed. Thus, there is huge inadequacy of waste processing infrastructure like compositing or waste to energy plants.
Unprocessed legacy waste remains source of air, water and land pollution resulting in damage to the environment and public health. With regard to 23 legacy waste, out of 107 sites having 1.20 crores tonnes of waste, only six sites are reported to have been cleared which is a negligible. Thus, major part of solid waste remains unattended and unprocessed. Comparative Chart of status as in December 2020, June 2021 and August 2022 in respect of generation, collection, transportation, segregation, dump sites cleared and where biomining is commenced is startling. Progress shown is clearance of six dump sites compared to zero dump site cleared in December 2020 and 5 dump sites clearance as in June 2021. It is not clear why till December 2020, dump sites cleared was zero. Even now only 6 dump sites are claimed to have been cleared out of 90, less than even 10% after expiry of all statutory timelines with no accountability for such massive failure.
30. It is mentioned that a special drive has been launched for segregation of waste. Action taken for processing is mentioned only in terms of agencies engaged i.e. for 74 ULBs where generation is above 30 TPD. Those generating below 30 TPD are said to be managed by self-help groups. It is not clear how the self-help groups are managing as no expert agency is shown to have audited standards of performance. Data shows that only 3047 TPD is processed. Even segregated waste ready for processing i.e. 5994.98 TPD is not being processed. Even in rural areas, only 130 solid waste management units are running corresponding to processing of only 70 tonnes of waste is per week, leaving huge gap between the waste generated and processed, exposing the citizens to serious hazard.
31. On the issue of liquid waste, gap is more than 60%. Even though the deadline for such management under the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha vs. Union of India, supra, is 31.03.2018 with further direction to initiate prosecution against the concerned officers 24 responsible for such failure, no such prosecution has been initiated. As mentioned earlier, to give effect to the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Tribunal directed deposit of compensation from 1.4.2020 for delay and recording entries in the ACRs of errant officers which does not appear to have been done. Out of 2758 MLD of sewage generation in urban areas and the treatment capacity of 1505.85 MLD (by setting up of 44 STPs), only 1268 MLD is reported to be treated, leaving a huge gap of 1490 MLD. There is no time bound plan to manage the waste as the same is linked to funding of the Central Government. Incremental progress of operation of STPs is quite unsatisfactory as huge gaps in sewage generation and treatment remain. With regard to sewage management in rural areas generating 1400 MLD, there is no significant progress in setting up of FSTPs beyond paper proposals. With regard to sludge management in STPS, steps are only at proposal stage. We further find that as per the Annual Report of West Bengal State Pollution Control Board for the year 2020-2021 that various rivers which include Ganga at Baharampore, Dakshineswar, Diamond Harbour, Garden Reach, Nadabwip, River Damodar, River Barakar, River Silabati, River Rupnarayan, River Kansai, River Dwarkeswari and almost all the rivers show high presence of faecal coliform. This indicates that there is no or negligible treatment of the Municpal Sewage. Hence, poor people may be forced to drink sewage water. Tribunal has noted in OA No. 200/2014, M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors., vide order dated 22.07.2022 that water quality in the stretch of river Ganga in West Bengal is not fit even for bathing on account of high fecal coliform. As per the Fifth Report filed by the NMCG in the said matter, Tribunal noted the following status:
"xxx ......................................xxx................................xxx 25
6. In pursuance of above, NMCG has filed its 5th Quarterly report on 15.07.2022 incorporating the quarterly reports furnished to it by the States of Uttarakhand (on 14.04.2022), Bihar (on 19.04.2022), West Bengal (on 22.04.2022), and Jharkhand (on 19.04.2022) and Uttar Pradesh (on 23.04.2022). The progress has been summed up in tabular form as follows:
Table- I: Details of Sewage Infrastructure in the 5 Ganga Basin States is as follows:-
Sr. States Sewage Existing Capacity STP Capacity STP Gap in Gap in
No. generatio STP Utilization Capacity Treatment Treatment
n in State (MLD) Under (MLD) as (MLD) as on
(MLD) Capacity Construction Proposed reported on 30.06.2022
(in MLD 31.10.2021
and Nos.) (MLD) (MLD)
1. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
2. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
3. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
4. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
5. West 2758 1438.35 86% 352.25 339.55 1373.31 329.50
Bengal
(37 STPs)
26
Table- II: Compliance Status of STPs in 5 Ganga Basin States (as on 30.06.2022) is as follows:-
A B
States Towns Avg. Installed Utilized Total Operational Non- STPs Non- STPs Compliance
covered sewage sewage Capacity STPs STPs complying Complying as per
by 110 generation treatment (MLD) monitored STPs for Fecal SPCBs/operational
STPs in Ganga capacity Coliform STPS
Front (MLD) norms
towns
(MLD)
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
West 27 1571.50 665 181.20 41 20 12 15/32
18
Bengal
27
32. There is mention of in-situ treatment for Karola River, which is claimed to have been appreciated. This is however not sought to be supported by water quality data. The steps mentioned under 'best practices' can hardly be accepted as such in absence of water quality data.
Monitoring mechanism said to have been adopted can hardly be accepted as meaningful in the face of unchecked rampant violations.
33. Till the gaps are bridged, unprocessed solid waste and untreated liquid waste will continue to remain source of degradation of environment and damage to public health, including deaths and diseases which the society can ill afford. Hence, the urgency of the situation for good governance for ensuring emergent measures in public interest to protect the environment, natural resources and public health as per mandate of the Constitution.
34. As already noted and observed in the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Surakhsha, supra, quoted earlier, the matter falls in 12th Schedule to the Constitution and it is constitutional responsibility of the State and the Local Bodies to provide pollution free environment and to arrange funds. Being part of right to life, which is also basic human right and absolute liability of the State, lack of funds cannot be plea to deny such right. While there may be no objection to any central funds being availed, the State cannot avoid its responsibility or delay its discharge on that pretext. Beyond mentioning proposals for action in uncertain future and without specifying responsibility for continuing delay, there is no firm action plan to prevent continuing pollution and failure to provide clean environment to the citizens of the State which is against the scheme of the Constitution and violation of rights of the citizens. State Government does not appear to be prioritising setting up of sewage and 28 solid waste management facilities though as per its budget for 2022-2023 of the State of West Bengal,9 there is provision of Rs. 12,818.99 crore on Urban Development and Municipal Affairs, apart from provision of Rs. 25,181.83 crores on Panchayats and Rural Development and Rs. 3887.68 crores for public health engineering. One is unable to follow why the works of sewage and solid waste management are not priority.
35. It is a matter of concern that even after 48 years of enactment of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and expiry of timelines for taking necessary steps for solid waste management in terms of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and binding direction in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal in Almitra H. Patel vs. Union of India & Ors. and Paryavaran Suraksha vs. Union of India, supra, huge gaps still exist. Are there insurmountable difficulties for State authorities or lack of will and determination? We find it difficult to believe the first. In our view, it is lack of good governance and determination responsible for the situation which needs to be remedied soonest.
36. We have suggested change in approach in realizing that remedial action cannot wait for indefinite period as is being proposed by the Administration. Sources of funding are laid down in the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Responsibility of the State is to have comprehensive plan to control pollution which is its absolute liability, which is not being understood. If there is deficit in budgetary allocations, it is for the State and state alone to have suitable planning by reducing cost or augmenting resources. By way of suggestion, one may consider harnessing traditional knowledge and community involvement. People must be involved in the problem by appropriate awareness and strategies 9 https://finance.wb.gov.in/new_fin/Pages/Budget_Publication.aspx 29 to encourage public participation and contribution. At the cost of repetition, health issues cannot be deferred to long future. Long future dates which, breach of which is established from the track record of last several decades, is not convincing solution. There is no accountability for the past breaches. It is poor substitute for compliance. This approach may project lack of concern or not realizing the grim ground situation crying for emergent remedial measures on priority. There is no time for leisure, reflected in timelines proposed for bridging the acknowledged gaps.
37. It is the mindset and determination to act in a mission mode which can produce results.
38. Segregation of the solid waste at source and its earliest processing nearest to the point of generation with defined destination is imperative. In particular, adequate compositing/vermicomposting/bio-methanation centers need to be set up and upgraded nearest to the source of generation of wet solid waste, listing people's involvement. Waste generators can themselves be required to process the waste under guidance and handholding by the Administration, with the assistance of identified empaneled service providers. This may perhaps reduce planned expenditure.
39. Similarly, sewage can be required to be processed by conventional cost-effective methods at least at several identified locations with least expenses. Decentralized treatment plants can be explored, apart from imposing condition of ZLD on industries, Group Housing Societies etc. Reduced load can be processed partly with the help of water using commercial establishments requiring water for their processes enforcing consent conditions in CTEs and CTOs whereby State's financial burden can be reduced. In this context, the draft Notification of MoEF&CC dated 30 25.02.202210 etc. and the relevant part of the draft Notification in context of sewage and solid waste management is reproduced below:
"xxx .................................xxx......................................xxx C. Management of sewage/waste water, Reuse and recycle of treated wastewater by dual plumbing system
10. Dual Plumbing System shall be implemented - one for supplying fresh water for drinking, cooking and bathing etc. and another for supply of treated water for flushing.
11. Only treated water shall be used for flushing.
12. In no case, sewage or untreated waste water generated within the project area shall be discharged through storm water drains or otherwise into water bodies nor discharged/injected into the ground water by any mode.
13. Subject to Clause (3) of this notification, the project authority may opt or avail to common off-site treatment facility, as feasible, for treatment with reuse & recycle of corresponding quantity of treated water through the dual plumbing system for flushing and other non-potable use.
A. For projects with built up area of 5,000 sq.mtrs. to 20,000 sq.mtrs. -
i. In areas where there is no municipal sewage network, a. Either Onsite Sewage Treatment Systems with capacity to treat 100% waste water may be installed with appropriate tertiary treatment system with disinfection for black & grey water. Such treated water should be used with dual plumbing system for flushing and other non-potable use;
OR b. In case of usage of septic tank, only black water shall be discharged in the septic tank. Grey water may be treated through natural treatment systems or other secondary treatment as feasible. Such treated water should be used with dual plumbing system for flushing and other non-potable use;10
https://www.compfie.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/01032022_EHS_02.pdf 31 The excess treated water should conform to the general discharge norms of CPCB/MoEF&CC.
ii. In areas where there is municipal sewage network a. Either Onsite Sewage Treatment Systems with capacity to treat 100% waste water may be installed with appropriate tertiary treatment system with disinfection for black & grey water. Such treated water should be used with dual plumbing system for flushing and other non-potable use;
OR b. The project authority may opt to discharge only black water in such municipal sewage network subject to availability of trunk sewer line. For this purpose, two separate pipeline network- one for black water discharge and other for collection of grey water shall be installed. Grey water may be treated through natural treatment systems or other secondary treatment as feasible. Such treated water should be used with dual plumbing system for flushing and other non-potable use;
B. For projects involving built-up area of 20,000 sq. mts. or more -
14. Subject to Clause (3) of this notification, Onsite Sewage Treatment Plant with capacity to treat 100% waste water generated within the project area through tertiary treatment shall be installed. Treated waste water shall be reused on site for landscape, flushing, HVAC, fire-fighting, and other end-uses.
15. The adequacy of the Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) shall be certified by an independent expert and a report in this regard shall be submitted to the authorized agency.
16. Discharge of excess treated wastewater outside the premises, after treatment in STP, should meet the discharge standards as notified by CPCB/MoEF&CC from time to time.
17. Wastewater and treated water quantification system through metering/sub-metering shall be installed.
18. Sludge from the onsite sewage treatment shall be collected, conveyed and disposed as per the Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organization (CPHEEO) Manual, 32 Ministry of Housing and Urban Affair, on Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Systems.
19. Where Common Sewage Treatment Plan facility has been availed, it shall be ensured that treated waste water is recycled back to respective building for reuse.
D. Solid Waste Management
20. Subject to Clause (3) of this notification, onsite solid waste management facility should be developed and a formal contractual arrangement shall be ensured with authorized recyclers/concerned municipal agency for disposal of all non- biodegradable waste.
21. Subject to Clause (3) of this notification, where there is no alternate arrangement for disposal of biodegradable waste, Organic waste composter/Vermiculture pit with a minimum capacity of 1.0 kg/150 sqm. of built-up area/day shall be installed & operated."
40. Treated water can also be used by establishments like malls, industrial estates, automobile establishments, power plants, playgrounds, railways, bus stands, local bodies, universities etc. to save potable water for drinking. The treated sewage can be utilized for industrial/agricultural/other non-drinking uses like washing railway wagons/yards, buses, roads, water sprinkling. Several such models reportedly exist11. In West Bengal, treated sewage can extensively be used 11 https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/chennai/2019/jul/31/chennai-industries-to- now-use-treated-sewage-water-2011837.html https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/surat/surat-water-reuse-model-goes- global/articleshow/85668103.cms https://www.aninews.in/news/national/general-news/surat-generating-massive-revenue-by- selling-treated-water-to-industries20201217051127/ https://swachhindia.ndtv.com/surat-generating-massive-revenue-by-selling-treated-water-of- river-tapi-to-industries-54411/ https://m.timesofindia.com/city/ahmedabad/amc-offers-rs43/kl-treated-wastewater-for- industries/amp_articleshow/87169850.cms https://theprint.in/india/governance/nagpur-to- become-the-first-indian-city-to-treat-and-reuse-90-of-its-sewage/180493/ https://www.business-standard.com/content/press-releases-ani/india-s-1st-and-largest-ppp- on-waste-water-reuse-completed-in-record-time- during-pandemic-bags-ficci-water-award- 2020-121022500841_1.html https://mpcb.gov.in/sites/default/files/focus-area-reports- documents/NMC_%26_KTPS_success_story_28052019.pdf https://cpcb.nic.in/success-stories/upload/1501156301.pdf 33 for pisciculture, particularly in rural areas. Central and State Fisheries Departments in coordination with State Urban Development and Local Bodies can work on such already practiced approach for further extension.
41. Thus, it may be necessary to brain storm with available experts and other stake holders in the State at different levels, evolve models which can be fast replicated, initiate special campaigns with community/media involvement in the larger interest of protecting environment and public health with determination for prompt action. Such brain storming sessions may enable capacity enhancement of the regulators and the processes. Campaigns and community involvement may result in reducing the financial and administrative load on the administration.
42. Compliance of environmental norms on the subject of waste management has to be on high on priority. Tribunal has come across cases of serious neglect and continuing damage to the environment in absence of inadequate steps for treatment of solid and liquid waste.12 We are of the view that issues have been identified and monitored by the Tribunal for a long time. It is high time that the State realizes its duty to law and to citizens and adopts further monitoring at its own level. Conclusion with expression of hope for future remedial action
43. We hope in the light of interaction with the Chief Secretary, West Bengal that he will take further measures in the matter by innovative approach, stringent monitoring at appropriate level, including at the level of the District Magistrates (who execute the http://cpheeo.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/engineering_chapter7.pdf 12
(i) OA No. 15/2020/EZ, Jaba Mukherjee vs. State of West Bengal & Ors., order dated 26.08.2022 relating to illegal dumping of garbage on an open land on the cremation and burial grounds of villages of Hiradihi, Kashiashol and Ambashol 34 District Environment Plans) and the Chief Secretary, ensuring that the gap in solid and liquid waste generation and treatment is bridged at the earliest, shortening the proposed timelines, adopting alternative/interim measures to the extent and wherever found viable.
44. The Chief Secretary may consider designating a Senior Nodal Officer at the rank of ACS to regularly assess the progress in bridging the gaps in sewage and solid waste management and establishing stocktaking at district level. Existing and upcoming STPs need to have linkages with industries and other bulk users including Agriculture/horticulture for using treated sewage. Legacy waste sites need to be remediated and reclaimed areas utilized for setting up of waste processing plants so to process day-to-day waste generation. More and more green belts/dense forests need to be set up to mitigate adverse impact of waste. Based on the gained experience, standardized processing and treatment methodologies be replicated for areas of other Corporations, Municipalities and Panchayats.
45. Laid down statutory norms need to be complied as per prescribed timelines and directions in the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal, including directions in orders dated 25.4.2019, 28.2.2020 and 14.12.2020 and other orders in individual cases. In the light of observations in paras 14, 19 and 22 above, accountability be fixed for erring officers and compensation collected and utilised, as already directed.
35 Need for monitoring by NMCG and MoUD NMCG, SBM and Amrut schemes
46. In view of continuing huge gap in solid and liquid waste generation and treatment, it is high time that Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MoUD) and National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG) who have programmes like Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM), AMRUT - 1 and 2.0 and River Cleaning, appropriately monitor compliance of waste management norms by concerned States and take remedial action on their part. In this regard status in respect of Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Lakshadweep, Puducherry, Andhra Pradesh and Chandigarh as depicted in orders of the Tribunal dated 07.07.2022, 21.07.2022, 28.07.2022, 04.08.2022 and 18.08.2022 may also be looked into, apart from data otherwise available. MoEF&CC and CPCB may continue monitoring as per MSW Rules and the Water Act.
Determination of liability for compensation for restoration of environment
47. Apart from compliance in future, the liability of the State has to be fixed for the past violations in the light of earlier binding orders passed in pursuance of orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 2.9.2014 in WP 888/1996, Almitra Patel and dated 22.2.2017 in WP 375/2012, Paryavaran Suraksha. Order dated 22.12.2016 in Almitra Patel clearly laid down liability for compensation for breach of statutory timelines. Similarly, liability for compensation was laid down for failing to install water pollution control devices after 31.3.2020. The Tribunal has to follow 'Polluter Pays' principle under Section 20 of the NGT Act. The State Authorities contributing to pollution by failing in their constitutional duties are also to be held accountable on this principle. Admittedly timelines in Supreme Court orders and orders of 36 this Tribunal for preventing water pollution and statutory timelines for solid waste management are over. Thus, atleast from 01.01.2021, the 'Polluter Pays' principle has to be applied. Compensation has to be equal to the loss to the environment and also taking into account cost of remediation. As held in a recent order dated 03.08.2022 in OA No. 1002/2018, Abhisht Kusum Gupta vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors, compensation for failure to treat sewage has to be fixed atleast @ Rs. 2 crore per MLD, considering minimum cost of treatment. The Tribunal also fixed compensation for failure to clear legacy waste of 30 lac tonnes and adding 110 TPD at Ludhiana at Rs.100 crore vide order dated 25.7.2022 in OA No.286/2022, read with further order dated 18.8.2022 in RA 21/2022, considering expert committee reports showing huge loss to environment including air, water and soil. Compensation works out to roughly Rs. 300/- per MT in respect of legacy waste with addition for continuing addition of untreated waste. This is worked out considering minimum cost of segregation, collection, transportation and disposal.
48. We may quote the said recent orders - dated 25.07.2022 in OA No. 286/2022, News item published in The Indian Express dated 20th April, 2022, titled "7 Charred to death in fire near Ludhiana dumpsite" and further order dated 18.08.2022 in Review Application No. 21/2022 in OA No. 286/2022 in respect of compensation for not processing solid waste and order dated 03.08.2022 in OA No. 1002/2018, Abhisht Kusum Gupta vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. in respect of compensation for not complying with norms of liquid waste management. Some extracts from the said orders are reproduced below:
Order dated 25.07.2022 in OA No. 286/2022 "xxx .............................................xxx..............................xxx 37
9. Since prima facie we find that action needs to be taken in terms of the report on urgent basis, such action being based on pre-existing orders of the Tribunal, including two orders dated 7.3.2019 and 10.1.2020 in OA 606/2018, passed in the presence of Chief Secretary, Punjab on the subject, we direct action in terms of recommendations in the report, subject to further orders, considering the stand of the Corporation and the State. Further, in terms of recommendations, based on calculations in based on earlier orders of this Tribunal, referred in the report, which have attained finality, the Municipal Corporation Ludhiana may deposit a sum of Rs. 100 crores with the District Magistrate, Ludhiana, towards interim compensation within one month, to be kept in a separate account, to be utilized for remedial measures in terms of the report, to be overseen by the Monitoring Committee. If Corporation is unable to make such deposit, it may be done by the State Government. It is open to the Corporation to recover the amount from those contributing to the garbage or those who failed to perform their duties, as per law.
Order dated 18.08.2022 in Review Application No. 21/2022 "xxx .............................................xxx..............................xxx
7. Even after judgement dated 22.12.2016 supra, this Tribunal has been monitoring compliance of Solid Waste Management Rules and the Chief Secretaries of non compliant States were required to appear before this Tribunal in person for interaction. The Chief Secretary, Punjab appeared on 07.03.2019 and thereafter, on 10.01.2020 and orders were passed requiring compliance, after recording findings that there was continued failure. Legacy waste dumpsites are serious threat to public health and also source of generation of greenhouse gases. The Tribunal considered the issue of quantification of loss to environment by legacy waste dump sites inter alia in OA 514/2018 and OA 519/2019. Orders passed show that as per expert studies, loss for such failure, due to release of pollutants in air atmosphere, release of leachate into ground /surface water and soil, due to pollution from the landfill site, damage cost associated with climate change due to carbon di- oxide and methane, damage caused due to aesthetics loss, price depreciation due to disamenity cost etc., is huge running in hundreds of crores. Some of the orders showing this are quoted below:
Order dated 23.03.2020 in O.A. No. 519/2019 "xxx.............................xxx.......................................xxx
18. We may observe that non-compliance of rules relating to waste disposal results in damage to the environment and public health. Any failure needs to be visited with assessment and recovery of compensation for such damage from the persons responsible for such failure.
A study was recently got conducted by CPCB, under orders of this Tribunal requiring such a study by a joint Committee comprising CPCB, NEERI and IIT, Delhi about the monetary cost of 38 damage caused to the environment on account of existence of legacy waste dump site at Gurgaon (Bandhewadi) vide order dated 05.03.2019 in O.A. No. 514/2018. The report of the CPCB filed on 13.02.2020 is that damage on account of the said legacy waste dump site was Rs. 148.46 crore, on account of damage to the air quality, soil and water quality, climate change and disamenity (aesthetic). The damage has been assessed in terms of impact on health due to release of pollutants in air atmosphere, release of leachate into ground /surface water and soil, due to pollution from the landfill site, damage cost associated with climate change due to carbon di-oxide and methane, damage caused due to aesthetics loss, price depreciation due to disamenity cost etc.
19. Thus, monetary cost of every legacy dump site is expected to be huge depending upon the location, quantity and quality of waste and area covered, its proximity to water body/ stream and human habitation etc. Needless to say that there is huge cost for non-compliance of provisions relating to waste management - Solid as well as Liquid. Loss to the environment and public health is taking place not only on account of delay in clearing legacy waste but also for not complying with other provisions of the Rules resulting in huge gap in generation and processing of waste. It may be necessary to determine such cost for delay in clearing legacy waste at every dump site as well as for delay in complying with other rules and failure to treat sewage and recover the same from the persons responsible for action in the matter. Let the Committee comprising CPCB, NEERI & IIT Delhi carry out similar study as mentioned in Para 18 above to assess the amount of damage to environment on account of dump sites in Delhi within two months."
Order dated 29.01.2021 in O.A. No. 519/2019 "6. Accordingly, status report dated 28.01.2021 has been filed by the CPCB as follows:-
"2.0 Action Taken :-
In compliance of Para 19 of aforesaid Hon'ble NGT's Order, Joint committee comprising of following members has been formed:
Dr. S. K. Goyal, Chief Scientist and Head, NEERI Delhi Zonal Center Dr. G .V .Ramanna, Professor, Department. of Civil Engg., IIT-Delhi Ms D. Sinha, DH- UPC-II, CPCB Mr. P. Agarwal, Scientist-E, CPCB 39 Report on "Assessment of amount of damage to environment on account of dumpsites in Delhi" as prepared by Joint committee is placed at Annexure-A. Amount of Damage to Environment due to three dumpsites of Delhi to be levied on Municipal Corporations of Delhi is given in the following table:
S. No. Name of Municipal Name of Damage Cost
assessed,
Corporation Dumpsite (Rupees)
1. NDMC (North Delhi Bhalswa 155.9 Crore
Municipal Corp.)
2. EDMC (East Delhi Ghazipur 142.5 Crore
Municipal Corp.)
3. SDMC (SouthDelhi Municipal Okhla 151.1 Crore
Corp.)
xxx.........................xxx........................................xxx
7. Report of inspection conducted by the joint Committee comprising of the CPCB, NEERI and IIT Delhi is filed with following summary and conclusion:
"5.0 SUMMARY & CONCLUSION :
i. Hon'ble NGT in OA No. 519/2019 constituted a Committee comprising of CPCB, NEERI & IIT Delhi to assessment of damage to environment due of dump sites in Delhi within two months.
ii. Baseline information was collected by Committee through Questionnaire sent to three concerned Municipal Corporations (MCs). As per the information provided by the MCs, bio mining is being carried out at all three sites. However, about 6% of waste has been bio-remediated at the three sites. Further, fresh waste is being dumped at all three dumpsites.
iii. Potential sources of air pollution at the sites include handling of fresh waste, Bio mining of legacy waste, Methane and other Green House gases from the Dumpsite , transportation of fresh waste & screened fractions, Odour & Fire accidents. Potential sources of water pollution at the sites includes Leachate which is being generated at all the three dumpsites iv. Air Pollution control measures taken at site includes mainly includes sprinkling of water. It has been informed by the authorities that smog guns are being procured for control of 40 air pollution. No concrete measures for leachate collection and treatment have being taken at the three dumpsites.
Leachate is partially being recirculated for stabilization of waste and the remaining is being discharged into nearby surface water drains. Actual details regarding quantity of leachate used/ discharged not provided by the concerned authorities v. Concentration of TDS, TSS, COD & BOD in leachate exceeds the stipulated norms at all the three dumpsites. Concentration of Heavy metals is within the stipulated norms with the exception of lead which has marginally exceeded the permissible limits at Ghazipur. Assessment of Ambient Air, Surface & Ground Water quality is based on monitoring data of CPCB for the past three years. Zone of impact has been considered to be 5 km and information related to monitored stations located within and beyond this radius has been compiled and analysed. In addition, information provided by Delhi Pollution Control Committee regarding ground water monitoring has been taken into consideration.
vii. As per air quality monitoring data, PMio & PM25 concentrations exceeded the prescribed values at all monitored stations upto 5 km distance & beyond from the Dumpsite sites. SO2 & NH3 concentrations are within the prescribed values at all monitored stations. Benzene has exceeded the stipulated limited at one station and NOx has exceeded the permissible limit at 7 monitored stations.
viii. As per the water quality monitoring data, concentration value of Arsenic, Chromium, Copper, Chloride, TDS, Fluoride, Cadmium and Iron exceeded the permissible limits at specified locations of Surface & Ground Water locations. Besides COD was detected at several stations monitored. As heavy metals (except iron) concentration in leachate was within specified norms and Chloride and TDS were within the permissible drinking water limits (BIS 10500) at most stations monitored, further analysis was done in terms of COD & Fe concentration levels and following are the observations:41
High level of COD & Fe reported in Ground water at all three sites in Ground water which may be due to leachate from the dumpsite Very High level of COD, Chloride, TDS, TSS, Turbidity reported in surface water body (Bhalswa lake) located within a radius of 0-1 km from Bhalswa site, which may be due to leachate from the dumpsite High COD values reported in surface water body (Sanjay Lake) located at a distance of 3-5 km from Ghazipur site. Owing to the distance from the site, actual impact due to dumpsite can be confirmed based on the hydrogeology of the region and contaminant transport modelling Fluctuating trend in Iron & COD concentration in ground water observed within 5 km radius at the three sites. Overall increase in Iron and COD levels observed with increase in distance from the dumpsites, indicating, marginal impact on ground water quality due to dumpsite within 5 km distance from dumpsite Ground water outside 5 km radius have reported higher value of COD & Fe than stations located within 5 km radius, indicating minimal impact of dumpsite on ground water quality.
Local factors are contributing in deterioration in water quality at these stations As several sources of water pollution including open drains observed in these regions, actual impact of the local sources as well as that of the dumpsite can be confirmed based on the hydrogeology of the region and contaminant transport modelling ix. There are currently 37 Continuous Air Quality monitoring locations in Delhi, of which 10 are located within a distance of 5 km from the dumpsites.
x. Range in variation in PM2.5 & PM10, NOx & Benzene concentration levels within 5 km overlaps the range observed for stations located at distance greater than 5 km from dumpsites. Fluctuating trend is observed in NOx /Benzene concentration levels vis-a-vis distance from the dumpsite.42
xi. Several local factors such as drains, road dust, vehicular pollution, C&D waste etc. also contribute towards air & water pollution in the region.
As per analysis of air and water quality carried out, deterioration in environmental quality cannot be attributed directly to the various activities happening at the dumpsites. As further detailed investigations are required to assess actual impact of the dumpsite related activities on the environment (air, water & soil quality), interim cost of damage to environment is based on the Environmental Compensation to be levied for violation of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. Cost of damage to environment has been calculated based on the Environmental Compensation to be levied for violation of Solid Waste Management Rules and has been assessed as Rs.155.9 Crore (for Bhalswa), Rs. 142.5 Crore (for Ghazipur) and Rs. 151.1 Crore (for Okhla).
xii. Source apportionment studies are required to assess the actual impact of air pollution sources at dumpsite on air quality in the region.
xiii. Detailed hydrogeological investigations and containment transport modelling is required to assess the impact of dumpsites on surface / ground water."
8. As shown above, in O.A. No. 514/2018, damage to the environment was assessed at Rs. 148.46 crores for Air pollution, Water pollution, Soil pollution, Climatic (GHG emissions) and Aesthetics has been taken into consideration in the report and damage cost to environment is estimated at Rs 148.46 crores. The report has following conclusions:-
"7. Results & Conclusion The report focuses on identifying and estimating monetary losses (in 2019 Rupees) on the environment due to the operation of Bandhwari municipal dumpsite. The damage was assessed with a consideration that there is no major polluting industries existing in nearby vicinity other than the dumpsite. The study estimates a total incurred damage of about ₹ 148.46 Crore due to externalities from Bandhwari dumpsite. The breakup is shown in Table 22. The cost for damages includes drivers of externalities like greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution and aesthetic loss.43
Table 22: Break Up of Monetary Estimation of Damages (reported in 2019 values) Environment Estimated Damage Cost in Lakhs, INR Air Nil Water 2900 Soil 31* Climatic (for last 5 years) 7,000 Aesthetic 4,946 Total 14,846 *Soil value is not considered in total, to avoid double-counting, as it based on total quantum of heavy metal from leachate which is considered in water as well.
The valuation of damages is done for greenhouse gas emissions using social cost of carbon approach recommended by USEPA. The social cost of carbon is indirect measure of loss in economy due to emission of CO2 and is contributing by 73% of total damage due to Bandhwari municipal dumpsite. Air pollution damages are not valued as the emissions hardly breach the limits and the area in which emissions are higher, no population exposure is there. Further, the leachate contaminated groundwater and soil damages are valued using cost transfer method and Extern report valuations. Groundwater sample analysis shows lead and nickel exceeding the BIS standards at sampling locations near the dumpsite. Groundwater beneath the dumpsite showed high contamination due to heavy metals such as Cr, Cu, Pb & Ni. Physiochemical characteristics such as BOD, COD, SS, N, P of the treated leachate showed higher concentration and have contributed to half of the total damage cost in water environment. The leachate is valued for the damages which it can cause due to contamination of soil and water. The damages to water are considered as overall damages. The total quantum of heavy metals due to leachate is fixed and is used for valuation for both soil and water, however, higher damages are seen for water and hence considered in total. Aesthetic losses due to dumpsite are valued using hedonic pricing method. GHG emissions are a part and parcel of any dumpsite. If proper control systems are kept in place these emissions can be controlled and may be utilized as well and hence maximum damages can be averted. Leachate also should be controlled and treated scientifically."
9. Thus, scientific studies support the estimated cost of damage to the environment in the present case. The report of the Committee 44 shows that Ludhiana city generates 1100 TPD of waste which is being deposited in the 52 acres land resulting about 30 lakhs tonnes of legacy waste. As already found, the cost of damage to the environment assessed by the Committee is supported by scientific report in similar circumstances in respect of landfill sites at Delhi and Bandhwari in Gurgaon. The amount in terms of environmental compensation is to be spent for restoration measures such as improving air quality by following proper processing of waste, preventing groundwater or surface water pollution by adopting leachate treatment measures, improving aesthetics and adopting fire-fighting mechanism and remediation of legacy waste to prevent further damage, in the interest of public health and environment."
Order dated 03.08.2022 in OA No. 1002/2018 "xxx .............................................xxx..............................xxx
27. It will suffice to mention that violations are serious and in breach of statutory provisions as well as binding directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal which have been adverted to at length in a recent order dated 06.07.2022 in OA No. 329/2021, Devanshu Bose v. Agra Development Authority & Ors., dealing with the grievance of discharge of untreated sewage. The Tribunal observed:-
"11. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 was enacted 48 years back but state of implementation is so poor that water pollution is rampant inspite of earlier orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal on the subject. Extracts from some earlier orders are as follows:
Extracts from order of this Tribunal Order dated 16.09.2021 in OA 544/2019:
"1to 8.....xxx......................xxx...........................xxx
9. Contamination of water sources is a punishable offence under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 for the last 47 years. Under Section 25 of the Act, untreated discharge of sewage in drain is prohibited and is in fact a criminal offence under Sections 42(2) and 44.
Section 48 of the Act makes the Head of the Department liable for being punished for such offence. As per directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suraksha case13 an outer limit of 31.03.2018 is fixed for completing the work of all STPs in the Country for laying down the sources of budget and direction is to initiate prosecution for continued failure. This Tribunal has been directed to monitor compliance. We may refer to the specific directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Tribunal on the subject:
13
(2017) 5 SCC 326 45 Extracts from the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti Vs. Union of India, supra "7. Having effectuated the directions recorded in the foregoing paragraphs, the next step would be, to set up common effluent treatment plants. We are informed, that for the aforesaid purpose, the financial contribution of the Central Government is to the extent of 50%, that of the State Government concerned (including the Union Territory concerned) is 25%. The balance 25%, is to be arranged by way of loans from banks. The above loans, are to be repaid, by the industrial areas, and/or industrial clusters. We are also informed that the setting up of a common effluent treatment plant, would ordinarily take approximately two years (in cases where the process has yet to be commenced). The reason for the above prolonged period, for setting up "common effluent treatment plants", according to the learned counsel, is not only financial, but also, the requirement of land acquisition, for the same.
x...........................x..................x....................
10. Given the responsibility vested in municipalities under Article 243-W of the Constitution, as also, in Item 6 of Schedule XII, wherein the aforesaid obligation, pointedly extends to "public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management", we are of the view that the onus to operate the existing common effluent treatment plants, rests on municipalities (and/or local bodies). Given the aforesaid responsibility, the municipalities (and/or local bodies) concerned, cannot be permitted to shy away from discharging this onerous duty. In case there are further financial constraints, the remedy lies in Articles 243-X and 243-Y of the Constitution. It will be open to the municipalities (and/or local bodies) concerned, to evolve norms to recover funds, for the purpose of generating finances to install and run all the "common effluent treatment plants", within the purview of the provisions referred to hereinabove. Needless to mention that such norms as may be evolved for generating financial resources, may include all or any of the commercial, industrial and domestic beneficiaries, of the facility. The process of evolving the above norms, shall be supervised by the State Government (Union 46 Territory) concerned, through the Secretaries, Urban Development and Local Bodies, respectively (depending on the location of the respective common effluent treatment plant). The norms for generating funds for setting up and/or operating the "common effluent treatment plant" shall be finalised, on or before 31-3-2017, so as to be implemented with effect from the next financial year. In case, such norms are not in place, before the commencement of the next financial year, the State Governments (or the Union Territories) concerned, shall cater to the financial requirements, of running the "common effluent treatment plants", which are presently dysfunctional, from their own financial resources.
11. Just in the manner suggested hereinabove, for the purpose of setting up of "common effluent treatment plants", the State Governments concerned (including, the Union Territories concerned) will prioritise such cities, towns and villages, which discharge industrial pollutants and sewer, directly into rivers and water bodies.
12. We are of the view that in the manner suggested above, the malady of sewer treatment, should also be dealt with simultaneously. We, therefore, hereby direct that "sewage treatment plants" shall also be set up and made functional, within the timelines and the format, expressed hereinabove.
13. We are of the view that mere directions are inconsequential, unless a rigid implementation mechanism is laid down. We, therefore, hereby provide that the directions pertaining to continuation of industrial activity only when there is in place a functional "primary effluent treatment plants", and the setting up of functional "common effluent treatment plants" within the timelines, expressed above, shall be of the Member Secretaries of the Pollution Control Boards concerned. The Secretary of the Department of Environment, of the State Government concerned (and the Union Territory concerned), shall be answerable in case of default. The Secretaries to the Government concerned shall be responsible for monitoring the progress and issuing necessary directions to the Pollution Control Board concerned, as may be required, for the implementation of the above directions. They shall be also responsible for collecting and maintaining records of data, in respect of the directions contained in this order. The 47 said data shall be furnished to the Central Ground Water Authority, which shall evaluate the data and shall furnish the same to the Bench of the jurisdictional National Green Tribunal.
14. To supervise complaints of non-implementation of the instant directions, the Benches concerned of the National Green Tribunal, will maintain running and numbered case files, by dividing the jurisdictional area into units. The abovementioned case files will be listed periodically. The Pollution Control Board concerned is also hereby directed to initiate such civil or criminal action, as may be permissible in law, against all or any of the defaulters.
x........................x........................x.................
16. It however needs to be clarified, that the instant directions and time lines, shall not in any way dilute any time lines and directions issued by Courts or Benches of the National Green Tribunal, hitherto before, wherein the postulated time lines would expire before the ones expressed through the directions recorded above. It is clarified, that the time lines, expressed hereinabove will be relevant, only in situations where there are no prevalent time line(s), and also, where a longer period, has been provided for."
(emphasis supplied) Extracts from orders of this Tribunal in OA 593/2017 :
Order dated 21.05.2020
26. Summary of directions:
i. All States/UTs through their concerned departments such as Urban/Rural Development, Irrigation & Public Health, Local Bodies, Environment, etc. may ensure formulation and execution of plans for sewage treatment and utilization of treated sewage effluent with respect to each city, town and village, adhering to the timeline as directed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. STPs must meet the prescribed standards, including faecal coliform.
CPCB may further continue efforts on compilation of River Basin-wise data. Action plans be firmed up with Budgets/Financial tie up. Such plans be overseen by Chief Secretary and forwarded to CPCB before 30.6.2020.48
CPCB may consolidate all action plans and file a report accordingly.
Ministry of Jal Shakti and Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs may facilitate States/UTs for ensuring that water quality of rivers, lakes, water bodies and ground water is maintained.
As observed in para 13 above, 100% treatment of sewage/effluent must be ensured and strict coercive action taken for any violation to enforce rule of law. Any party is free to move the Hon'ble Supreme Court for continued violation of its order after the deadline of 31.3.2018. This order is without prejudice to the said remedy as direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be diluted or relaxed by this Tribunal in the course of execution. PCBs/PCCs are free to realise compensation for violations but from 1.7.2020, such compensation must be realised as per direction of this Tribunal failing which the erring State PCBs/PCCs will be accountable."
Order dated 21.09.2020 "11. The Tribunal has already issued directions vide orders dated 28.08.2019 and 21.05.2020 for ensuring that no untreated sewage/effluent is discharged into any water body and for any violation compensation is to be assessed and recovered by the CPCB so that the same can be utilized for restoration of the environment, complying with the principle of 'Polluter Pays' which has been held to be part of 'Sustainable Development' and part of right to life. Control of such pollution is crucial for environment, aquatic life, food safety and also human health. .."From OA 673/2018
Order dated 6.12.19:
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court noticed the level of degradation of rivers in India and apathy of the authorities as follows:
"58. Rivers in India are drying up, groundwater is being rapidly depleted, and canals are polluted. Yamuna in Delhi looks like a black drain. Several perennial rivers like Ganga and Brahmaputra are rapidly becoming seasonal. Rivers are dying or declining, and aquifers are getting over pumped. Industries, hotels, etc. are pumping out groundwater at an alarming rate, causing sharp decline in the groundwater 49 levels. Farmers are having a hard time finding groundwater for their crops e.g. in Punjab. In many places there are serpentine queues of exhausted housewives waiting for hours to fill their buckets of water. In this connection John Briscoe has authored a detailed World Bank Report, in which he has mentioned that despite this alarming situation there is widespread complacency on the part of the authorities in India.14 "4. We see Yamuna river virtually turned into a sullage. We take judicial notice of this situation. Similar is the position with Ganges. As it proceeds, industrial effluents are being poured in rivers. Sewage is also being directly put in rivers contributing to the river water pollution. We direct the Pollution Control Boards of the various States as well as the Central Pollution Control Board and various Governments to place before us the data and material with respect to various rivers in the concerned States, and what steps they are taking to curb the pollution in such rivers and to management as to industrial effluents, sewage, garbage, waste and air pollution, including the water management. We club the ending case of water management with this matter.15 xxx......................................xxx.......................xxx
11. In spite of above, in flagrant violation of law of the land, polluted water in the form of sewage, industrial effluents or otherwise has continued to be discharged in the water bodies including the rivers or the canals meeting the rivers. Violation of law is not only by private citizens but also statutory bodies including the local bodies and also failure of the regulatory authorities in taking adequate steps. There is no corresponding coercive action posing danger to rule of law when large scale violation of law is not being remedied. This leads to lawlessness.
12. It will be appropriate to note the crisis situation in the country on the subject of availability of potable water. The matter has been considered in the report of Niti Aayog on Composite Water Management Index (CWMI).16 Following further information also needs to be noted:14
State of Orissa v. Govt. of India, (2009) 5 SCC 492 15 M.C. Mehta Vs Union of India- W.P. (Civil) No. 13029/1985 dated 25.11.2019 16 Niti Ayog on "Composite Water Management Index", June 2018, https://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/document_publication/2018-05-18-Water-Index-
Report_vS8-compressed.pdf.
50
(i) India is suffering from the worst water crisis in its history and millions of lives and livelihoods are under threat. Currently, 600 million Indians face high to extreme water stress and about two lakh people die every year due to inadequate access to safe water17. The crisis is only going to get worse. By 2030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of people and an eventual ~6% loss in the country's GDP18. As per the report of National Commission for Integrated Water Resource Development of MoWR, the water requirement by2050 in high use scenario is likely to be a milder 1,180 BCM, whereas the present-day availability is 695BCM. The total availability of water possible in country is still lower than this projected demand, at 1,137BCM. Thus, there is an imminent need to deepen our understanding of our water resources and usage and put in place interventions that make our water use efficient and sustainable.
(ii) India is undergoing the worst water crisis in its history. Already, more than 600 million people19 are facing acute water shortages.
Critical groundwater resources - which account for 40% of our water supply - are being depleted at unsustainable rates.20
(iii) Most states have achieved less than 50% of the total score in the augmentation of groundwater resources, highlighting the growing national crisis--54% of India's groundwater wells are declining, and 21 major cities are expected to run out of groundwater as soon as 2020, affecting ~100 million people21.
(iv) With nearly 70% of water being contaminated, India is placed at 120th amongst 122 countries in the water quality index.
13. As per statistics mentioned before the Lok Sabha on April 6, 2018, waterborne diseases such as cholera, acute diarrhoeal diseases, typhoid and viral hepatitis continue to be prevalent in India and have caused 10,738 deaths, over the last five years since 2017. Of this, acute diarrhoeal 17Source: WRI Aqueduct; WHO Global Health Observatory 18Source: McKinsey & WRG, 'Charting our water future', 2009; World Bank; Times of India 19 Source: World Resource Institute 20 Source: World Resource Institute 21 Source: UN Water, 'Managing water under uncertainty and risk', 2010; World Bank (Hindustan Times, The Hindu).
51
diseases caused maximum deaths followed by viral hepatitis, typhoid and cholera.22
14. As per 'National Health Profile' published by Central Bureau of Health Investigation, Directorate General of Health Services, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, a total of 1535 Deaths due to Acute Diarrhoeal Diseases was reported during the year 2013.23 Main Causes of Pollution of Rivers
15. As already noted, well known causes of pollution of rivers are dumping of untreated sewage and industrial waste, garbage, plastic waste, e-waste, bio- medical waste, municipal solid waste, diversion of river waters for various purposes affecting e-flow, encroachment of catchment areas and floodplains, over drawl of groundwater, river bank erosion on account of illegal sand mining. Inspite of directions to install Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs), Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPs), Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs), and adopting other anti-pollution measures, satisfactory situation has not been achieved. As per CPCB's report 201624, it has been estimated that 61,948 million liters per day (mld) sewage is generated from the urban areas of which treatment capacity of 23,277 mld is currently existent in India. Thereby the deficit in capacity of waste treatment is of 62%. There is no data available with regard to generation of sewage in the rural areas.
xxx...................................xxx.......................xxx
33. We may note the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court:
"26. Enactment of a law, but tolerating its infringement, is worse than not enacting a law at all. The continued infringement of law, over a period of time, is made possible by adoption of such means which are best known to the violators of law. Continued tolerance of such violations of law not only renders legal provisions nugatory but such tolerance by the enforcement authorities encourages lawlessness and adoption of means which cannot, or ought not to, be tolerated in any civilized society. Law should not only be meant for the law-abiding but is meant to be obeyed by all for whom it has been enacted. A law is usually enacted 22 https://www.indiaspend.com/diarrhoea-took-more-lives-than-any-other-water-borne- disease-in-india-58143/ 23 http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=106612 24 http://www.sulabhenvis.nic.in/Database/STST_wastewater_2090.aspx July 16, updated on December 6, 2016 52 because the legislature feels that it is necessary. It is with a view to protect and preserve the environment and save it for the future generations and to ensure good quality of life that Parliament enacted the anti-pollution laws, namely, the Water Act, Air Act and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. These Acts and Rules framed and notification issued thereunder contain provisions which prohibit and/or regulate certain activities with a view to protect and preserve the environment. When a law is enacted containing some provisions which prohibit certain types of activities, then, it is of utmost importance that such legal provisions are effectively enforced. If a law is enacted but is not being voluntarily obeyed, then, it has to be enforced. Otherwise, infringement of law, which is actively or passively condoned for personal gain, will be encouraged which will in turn lead to a lawless society. Violation of anti-pollution laws not only adversely affects the existing quality of life but the non-enforcement of the legal provisions often results in ecological imbalance and degradation of environment, the adverse effect of which will have to be borne by the future generations.25 xxx.....................xxx.................................xxx "61. ..... If the laws are not enforced and the orders of the courts to enforce and implement the laws are ignored, the result can only be total lawlessness. It is, therefore, necessary to also identify and take appropriate action against officers responsible for this state of affairs. Such blatant misuse of properties at large-scale cannot take place without connivance of the officers concerned. It is also a source of corruption. Therefore, action is also necessary to check corruption, nepotism and total apathy towards the rights of the citizens."26 xxx......................................xxx.......................xxx
35. Vide order dated 22.08.2019 in Original Application 200/2014, dealing with the pollution of river Ganga, the Tribunal issued directions and laid down coercive measures to be taken for discharge of untreated sewage in river Ganga:-
"16. xxx...............xxx..............................xxx
17. Wherever the work has not commenced, it is necessary that no untreated sewage is discharged into the River Ganga.
Bioremediation and/or phytoremediation 25 INDIAN COUNCIL FOR ENVIRO-LEGAL ACTION Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (1996) 5 SCC 281 26 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (2006) 3 SCC 399 - Public functionaries 53 or any other remediation measures may start as an interim measure positively from 01.11.2019, failing which the State may be liable to pay compensation of Rs. 5 Lakhs per month per drain to be deposited with the CPCB. This however, is not to be taken as an excuse to delay the installation of STPs. For delay of the work, the Chief Secretary must identify the officers responsible and assign specific responsibilities. Wherever there are violations, adverse entries in the ACRs must be made in respect of such identified officers. For delay in setting up of STPs and sewerage network beyond prescribed timelines, State may be liable to pay Rs. 10 Lakhs per month per STP and its network. It will be open to the State to recover the said amount from the erring officers/contractors.
36. Vide order dated 28.08.2019, the Tribunal held:-
"15. xxx...............xxx.................................xxx "16. xxx.....................xxx...........................xxx
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 54 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 condoning any past violations. The States/UTs have to enforce recovery of compensation from 01.04.2020 from the defaulting local bodies. On failure of the States/UTs, 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."
12. It is thus appropriate that remedial measures are speedily taken by the Agra Development Authority overseen by the ACS, Urban Development and ACS, Housing and Development, UP in a mission mode. Such steps should cover the present area as well as urban area of Agra. ACS, Urban Development will be the nodal agency for coordination and compliance. The Committee may hold its meeting within two weeks and after taking stock of the situation and earlier orders of this Tribunal, take further remedial action. The Committee will be at liberty to coordinate with any other Department/Agency. In view of chronic and long pending problem, the Committee may explore steps on the pattern of available best practices to the extent found relevant such as arrangement with relevant establishments to supply sewage treated water for which pipelines are laid by such establishments and part of the sewage treatment cost is also shared by such establishments.27 This may help better use of 27 1. Chennai industries to now use treated sewage water - The New Indian Express:https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/chennai/2019/jul/31/chennai- industries-to-now-use-treated-sewage-water-2011837.html
2. Surat sewage reuse model goes global - Surat News - Times of India:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/surat/surat-water-reuse-model-goes- global/articleshow/85668103.cms
3. Surat generating massive revenue by selling treated water to industries:
https://www.aninews.in/news/national/general-news/surat-generating-massive- revenue-by-selling-treated-water-to-industries20201217051127/
4. Surat Generating Massive Revenue By Selling Treated Water of River Tapi To Industries -
News:https://swachhindia.ndtv.com/surat-generating-massive-revenue-by-selling- treated-water-of-river-tapi-to-industries-54411/
5. Industries in Ahmedabad to get treated wastewater - Ahmedabad News - Times of India:
https://m.timesofindia.com/city/ahmedabad/amc-offers-rs43/kl-treated-wastewater- for-industries/amp_articleshow/87169850.cms
6. Gujarat: Now treated wastewater to be piped to two industrial clusters - Cities News, The Indian Express: https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/ahmedabad/gujarat-now- treated-wastewater-to-be-piped-to-two-industrial-clusters-5713792/
7. Nagpur to become the first Indian city to treat and reuse 90% of its sewage:
https://theprint.in/india/governance/nagpur-to-become-the-first-indian-city-to-treat- and-reuse-90-of-its-sewage/180493/
8. India's 1st and largest PPP on waste water reuse completed in record time during pandemic; bags FICCI Water Award 2020: https://www.business- standard.com/content/press-releases-ani/india-s-1st-and-largest-ppp-on-waste-water- 55
treated sewage to save potable water. We may refer to observations in a recent order dated 19.04.2022 in OA No. 887/2019, Sukhwanti v. State of Haryana & Ors. on the subject:-
"10.......Further, for maximising use of treated sewage, PCB may identify potential industrial clusters, major industrial sectors and other bulk users to tie-up each STP with the User group. In this regard, provisions of 'The Haryana Water Resources (Conservation, Regulation and Management) Authority (Amendment) Act, 2022' may be strictly followed. CPCB may also assist HSPCB in this regard. The Tribunal vide order dated 09.03.2022 in OA No. 29/2020(WZ), Suraj Pradip Ajmera vs. Aurangabad Municipal Corporation directed as follows:
"10. During the hearing, suggestion has emerged that an interaction be held at the level of Chief Secretary, Maharashtra with inclusion of Secretary, Urban Development, Maharashtra and Technical Experts as may be decided by them including from IIT, Bombay, Regional Officer, CPCB and Member Secretary, State PCB to consider possibility of laying pipeline upto the industrial area for transporting treated sewage to the industrial areas so that the same can be utilized for industrial purpose. Industries Association may be associated in the project of sewage treatment and can bear a part of the cost out of Corporate Social/Environmental Responsibility, depending upon the financial capacity of the member industries. This may result in a permanent and long-lasting cheaper solution. If successful, this experiment may be tried appropriately at such other locations in the State as found appropriate and also customized different locations. The Committee may also study such models elsewhere in the country which reportedly have been successful. The Committee may also consider any other viable strategies for sewage treatment and interception and diversion of sewage, use of appropriate effective and economical technology, making group housing societies Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) by recycling treating sewage, after treatment in decentralized manner and utilizing the treated sewage for horticulture, flushing, cleaning or other non-drinking purposes. This strategy may help in augmenting availability of potable water particularly in drought affected areas reuse-completed-in-record-time-during-pandemic-bags-ficci-water-award-2020- 121022500841_1.html
9. MPCB Note on domestic west water reuse project at Nagpur:
https://mpcb.gov.in/sites/default/files/focus-area-reports- documents/NMC_%26_KTPS_success_story_28052019.pdf
10. STP at Village Kewara, Bhilwara (Rajasthan)- CPCB Bhopal: https://cpcb.nic.in/success- stories/upload/1501156301.pdf
11.CHAPTER 7: RECYCLING AND REUSE OF SEWAGE:
http://cpheeo.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/engineering_chapter7.pdf 56 of Aurangabad Region in Maharashtra where potable water had to be transported by trains in the past. The Secretary, Urban Development may act as nodal agency who may call for a meeting within one month."
11..................xxx.....................xxx.................xxx
12. The Tribunal has considered the issue of utilization of treated sewage to save potable water for drinking purposes inter-alia vide order dated 21.09.2020 in O.A. No. 148/2016 Mahesh Chandra Saxena vs. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors. By the said order, the data of utilization of treated water as given in the CPCB report dated 15.05.2020 and further report dated 16.09.2020 was noted showing huge gap in reuse of treated water, which resulted in potable water being used even for purposes for which treated water could be used. The Tribunal directed all States/UTs to ensure 100% utilization of treated water for secondary purposes, which may be monitored by Central Monitoring Committee headed by Secretary, Ministry of Jal Shakti and assisted by CPCB, NMCG and Ministry of Urban Development."
13. In light of above, let further action taken report be filed by ACS, Urban Development within three months from today by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF. The report may also cover the observations in para 9 above. ACS, Urban Development may remain present on the next date by Video Conferencing along with Vice Chairman, ADA and Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Agra."
Law laid down in judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard to accountability of statutory authorities
29. Continuing failure of State authorities and statutory regulators to enforce law has created alarming situation of threat to public health and safety. Such patent failure require fixing accountability on polluter pays principle so that degradation of environment can be to some extent reversed. There are observations on the subject in some of judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows:
"Samaj Parivartan Samudaya v. State of Karnataka, (2012) 7 SCC 407 xxx...................................xxx............................xxx
66. Wherever and whenever the State fails to perform its duties, the Court shall step in to ensure that the rule of law prevails over the abuse of process of law. Such abuse may result from inaction or even arbitrary action of protecting the true offenders or failure by different authorities in discharging statutory or legal obligations in consonance with the procedural and 57 penal statutes. This Court expressed its concern about the rampant pilferage and illegal extraction of natural wealth and resources, particularly iron ore, as also the environmental degradation and disaster that may result from unchecked intrusion into the forest areas. This Court, vide its order dated 29-7-2011 invoked the precautionary principle, which is the essence of Article 21 of the Constitution of India as per the dictum of this Court in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, and had consequently issued a ban on illegal mining. The Court also directed relief and rehabilitation programmes to be carried out in contiguous stages to promote intergenerational equity and the regeneration of the forest reserves. This is the ethos of the approach consistently taken by this Court, but this aspect primarily deals with the future concerns. In respect of the past actions, the only option is to examine in depth the huge monetary transactions which were effected at the cost of national wealth, natural resources, and to punish the offenders for their illegal, irregular activities. The protection of these resources was, and is the constitutional duty of the State and its instrumentalities and thus, the Court should adopt a holistic approach and direct comprehensive and specialised investigation into such events of the past.
MCD v. Uphaar Tragedy Victims Assn., (2011) 14 SCC 481 xxx.................................xxx............................................ ...xxx
96. Courts have held that due to the action or inaction of the State or its officers, if the fundamental rights of a citizen are infringed then the liability of the State, its officials and instrumentalities, is strict. The claim raised for compensation in such a case is not a private law claim for damages, under which the damages recoverable are large. The claim made for compensation in public law is for compensating the claimants for deprivation of life and personal liberty which has nothing to do with a claim in a private law claim in tort in an ordinary civil court M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, (1997) 1 SCC 388 xxx................................xxx.....................................xxx
35.......But in the absence of any legislation, the executive acting under the doctrine of public trust cannot abdicate the natural resources and convert them into private ownership, or for commercial use. The aesthetic use and the pristine glory of the natural resources, the environment and the ecosystems of our country cannot be permitted to be eroded for private, commercial or any other use ..."
29. xxx...................................xxx.....................................xxx 58 Further Directions
30. Apart from above remedial action to be taken by concerned authorities and monitored at highest level by the Chief Secretaries, UP and Delhi directly or through any appropriate mechanism, it is necessary to determine accountability for the past failures causing huge damage to the environment and public health and to meet cost of remediation. Pending consideration of action against other authorities and final accountability of NOIDA Authority and DJB, they are directed to deposit respectively a sum of Rs. 100 Crores Rs. 50 Crores in a separate account with CPCB towards interim compensation to be utilized for restoration measures in terms of a remedial plan to be prepared jointly by a joint Committee of Chairman CPCB, Chairman DPCC and Chairman UPPCB. Chairman CPCB will chair and steer the proceedings. The said Committee will be at liberty to co-opt any other expert/institution for the purpose and also identify executing agency which will act in coordination with the nominees of Chief Secretaries of Delhi and UP. The Chief Secretaries of Delhi and UP will be free to identify the erring officers in the process and take remedial action and recover compensation from such erring officers/violators, including the group housing societies. Further action taken reports be filed within three months by the Chief Secretaries, Delhi and UP after coordinating with authorities in their respective States and by Chairman, CPCB by e-mail at judicial- [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF."
Conclusion about quantum of compensation
49. In the light of above and considering damage to the recipient environment, we hold that apart from ensuring compliance at the earliest, compensation has to be paid by the State for past violations. The amount of compensation is fixed @ Rs. 2 crore per MLD (at which rate compensation has been levied against Noida and DJB in OA No. 1002/2018, Abhisht Kusum Gupta vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors, referred to in para 48 above for detailed reasons mentioned therein). As noted earlier, gap in generation and treatment in West Bengal, as per data furnished is 1490 MLD. Thus, under this head, liability of the State of West Bengal is to pay compensation of Rs. 2980 crores, rounded off to Rs. 3000 crore in view of continuing damage. For failure to process solid waste, unprocessed legacy waste being 1.20 crore MT, compensation is assessed @ Rs. 300 per MT (at which approximate rate compensation has been awarded in OA No. 286/2022 against 59 Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, for the reasons given therein). This works out to Rs. 366 crore but adding 134 crore for continuing addition of unprocessed waste @ 13469.19 TPD, the total amount is rounded off to Rs. 500 crore. Thus, final amount of compensation under the two heads (solid and liquid waste) is assessed at Rs. 3500 crores which may be deposited by the State of West Bengal in a separate ring-fenced account within two months, to be operated as per directions of the Chief Secretary and utilised for restoration measures, including preventing discharge of untreated sewage and solid waste treatment/processing facilities, as per appropriate mechanism for planning and execution that may be evolved, within three months. If violations continue, liability to pay additional compensation may have to be considered. Compliance will be the responsibility of the Chief Secretary.
50. Award of above compensation has become necessary under section 15 of the NGT Act to remedy the continuing damage to the environment and to comply with directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court requiring this Tribunal to monitor enforcement of norms for solid and liquid waste management. Moreover, without fixing quantified liability necessary for restoration, mere passing of orders has not shown any tangible results in the last eight years (for solid waste management) and five years (for liquid waste management), even after expiry of statutory/laid down timelines. Continuing damage is required to be prevented in future and past damage is to be restored.
Directions for further follow up
51. Further, six monthly progress reports may be filed by the Chief Secretary with the with a copy to the Registrar General of this Tribunal by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable 60 PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF. Copies thereof may be furnished to the NMCG, MoUD and CPCB and also be placed on the website of the State Government.
A copy of this order be forwarded for compliance to the Chief Secretary, West Bengal, Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, MoEF&CC, GoI, National Mission for Clean Ganga and CPCB.
On report being filed with the Registrar General of this Tribunal, the same may be placed before the Bench, if found necessary.
If any grievance survives, it will be open to the aggrieved parties to take further remedies as per law.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP Sudhir Agarwal, JM Prof. A. Senthil Vel, EM September 01, 2022 Original Application No. 606/2018 61