National Green Tribunal
M.Ravichandran vs Joint Commissioner, Arulmigu ... on 11 July, 2022
Bench: K Ramakrishnan, K. Satyagopal
Item No.1:- Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No. 134 of 2017 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF
1. M. Ravichandra
7, Vishnu Maya Nagar,
Itteri Road, Palani - 624 601
2. R.Vijayalakshmi
11/126C, Lakshmipuram,
Palani - 624 601
3. C. Rajendran
11/126C, Lakshmipuram,
Palani - 624 601
...Applicant(s)
Versus
1. The Joint Commissioner
Arulmigu Dhandayuthapani Swamy
Thirukoil, Palani - 624 601.
2. The Commissioner
Sivagiripatty Panchayathu
Palani Taluk.
3. The Commissioner
Municipal Office,
Palani 624 601.
4. The Commissioner
H.R. & C.E.
Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai 600 034.
5. The Secretary
Local Administration,
Secretariat,
Chennai - 600 009.
6. The Secretary
Panchayath
Secretariat, Chennai.
Page 1 of 56
7. Tahsildar
Palani.
8. Collector
Dindigul.
9. The Chairman
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board,
76, Mount Road,
Guindy, Chennai-32.
10. S. Prema
W/o Selvakumar
Proprietor Sri Kantha Vilas
175/7, Thiruvalluvar Gurukkusalai,
Anna Nagar, Palani 624 601.
11. Selvakumar
Proprietor Sri Kantha Vilas
175/7, Thiruvalluvar Gurukkusalai,
Anna Nagar, Palani 624 601.
(R11 - Suo Motu impleaded as per
Order of the Tribunal dated 02.08.2017)
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): None.
For Respondent(s): Dr. D. Shanmuganathan for R2, R4 to R8.
Mr. P. Srinivas through
Mr. N.K. Ponraj for R3.
Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R9.
Mr. K.S. Viswanathan for R10 & R11.
Judgment Reserved on: 08th April 2022.
Judgment Pronounced on: 11th July 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
Whether the Judgement is allowed to be published on the Internet - Yes.
Whether the Judgement is to be published in the All India NGT Reporter - Yes.
Page 2 of 56
JUDGMENT
Delivered by Justice K. Ramakrishnan, Judicial Member.
1. The above application has been filed by three applicants alleging the discharge of untreated sewage generated waste in the new bus shelter and parking area constructed by Palani Aandavar Koil managed by the 1st Respondent into their properties causing damage to their properties affecting the fertility of the soil thereby reducing the agricultural income derived by them by doing cultivation in the property.
2. It was alleged in the application that the applicants are agriculturist having lands in Palani village. The 1st applicant is having land of one acre in Survey No. 820/1B and Survey No. 822/1B while second applicant was having 0.80 cents with coconut trees in Survey No. 820/2B and Survey No. 822/2B out of which, coconut trees are planted over an extent of 0.12 acres and third applicant is having 1.62 acres of land in Survey No. 835 with coconut trees of which coconut trees are planted in an extent of 0.03 acres and all these lands are situated in Palani village and irrigated through Idumbankulam. They used to raise paddy cultivation twice a year and used to get income around Rs.1.50 lakhs per year by each applicant. In addition, applicants 2 and 3 are having coconut trees 75 numbers (48 + 27) irrigated through the well provided with motor pumpset bearing Service Connection No.73 in their lands. Shri Palani Aandavar Thirukoil is having lands in Survey No. 873 adjacent to the lands of the applicants. They built a bus shelter for parking vehicles for tourist who are visiting the temple and they have also constructed toilet, bathroom and lodge to accommodate the pilgrims, tourist without getting any approval from the competent authorities. They were discharging sewage water into their field thereby causing damage to their agricultural lands made it unfit for cultivation for the past several years. In addition to the same, public were also throwing their waste paper, polythene bags, etc. in their lands. The domestic and industrial effluents are not allowed to be discharged without adequate treatment as such discharge would render the land unsuitable for cultivation. Though they made several Page 3 of 56 representations to the Tahsildar, Sub Collector and Commissioner of Municipality, etc. they have not taken any steps to rectify the same.
3. Taking advantage of this situation, 10th respondent a Private Party had constructed a big hotel by demolishing the existing drainage channel which also caused great injury to them. The 10th respondent was also making the construction without getting any proper approval, permission or plan and without providing a drainage system. They have not obtained any permission from the local authorities or any other authority for making their constructions. Respondents 1 and 2 were discharging the polluted water into the main channel passing through the applicants' land, which caused great loss to the agriculture in general. Due to the stagnation of sewage water in the property the electric post, fixed in that property had fallen down due to corrosion, the electric wires were cut and motor pump set also damaged and the existing walls were collapsed.
4. The applicants 2 and 3 were not in a position to use the well water for irrigation of their coconut plants. It was also filled with the drainage water and these places had become a breading place for mosquitoes causing health hazards to the people in the locality.
5. The applicant received a letter dated 10.02.2017 from Commissioner, Palani Municipality informing that they were not in a position to take any steps and advised the applicants to approach the 1st Respondent and Sivagiripatti Panchayat, the 2nd Respondent for remedial measures. Respondents 1 and 10 are not using the existing drainage system as provided in the plan, but on the other hand, they were discharging the polluted water to the main drain by passing through the agricultural lands in Survey Nos. 820, 821, 822, 823, 833, 834 and 835. The action of the respondents 1 and 2 are against the environmental laws and they are not entitled to discharge the contaminated water into the property of anyone and they are expected to treat the water before it is being discharged into the public channel.
Page 4 of 566. The applicant claimed compensation for the loss of income caused on account of the illegal activities of Respondents 1 and 2 as follows:
I. Loss of Agriculture for one acre Income Rs.1,50,000/- per year for each applicants.
Loss for 1st Applicant Ac 1.00 Rs.1,50,000/-
Loss for 2nd & 3rd Applicants Rs.3,00,000/-
(A0.68 Cents + A1.32 Cents) A2.00
Total loss for all the 3 applicants per year Rs.4,50,000/-
Total loss for the past 5 years (5x4,50,000) Rs.22,50,000/-
II. Loss incurred by the 2nd & 3rd Rs.3,00,000/-
Applicants on account of damage to the
Well
Pumpset Rs. 30,000/-
Motor Room Walls Rs. 2,00,000/-
Loss of coconut trees & coconuts Rs. 2,00,000/-
Total sum of Rs. 7,30,000/-
Total Loss I & II (22,50,000/- & 7,30,000/-) Rs.29,80,000/- is due and payable by the respondents to the applicants."
7. Since no action was taken by the authorities, the applicant filed the application seeking the following interim as well as final reliefs:-
Interim Relief:
a) To issue suitable direction to the 1st and 10th respondents not to discharge water, waste materials into the agricultural land and to stop further constructions in S.No.8, 9, & 821 of the 10th Respondent without getting permission from the competent authorities pending disposal of the application.
b) Direct the respondents to pay the half of the claim amount of the compensation to the applicants being the interim relief for the damages resulted pending disposal of the application
c) To appoint an Advocate Commissioner to note down physical features of the drainage channel as per the Government records, the present existing channel and also note down the drainage system provided by Respondent 1 and Respondent 10.
Final Reliefs:
(i) Directing the respondents 1 to 10 from in any manner polluting the applicants agricultural lands situated in S.No.820/1B, 822/1B, 835, 820/2BH, 822/2B, Palani Village, Palani Taluk.Page 5 of 56
(ii) To issue suitable direction to the 1st and 10th respondents not to discharge water, waste material;s inot the agricultural land and
(iii) To stop further construction of the 1st respondent in S.No.819 & 821 of the 10th Respondent without getting permission from competent authorities.
(iv) Direct the respondents to pay a total sum of Rs.29,80,000/- to the applicants in the above said manner proportion to their share for the damages resulted and also for future damages as fixed by this Hon'ble Tribunal form the date of this application till the date of realization with commercial rate of interest.
(v) To lay the schedule of closed drainage system in Palani by the respondents 1 to 9 and pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper.
8. The husband of the 10th respondent Sri. Selvakumar was impleaded as 11th respondent Suo Moto by the Tribunal as per order dated 02.08.2017.
9. The 10th Respondent filed counter contending that the application is not maintainable. The property in which the 10th respondent was said to be making construction comprised in Survey No. 819 and 820 of Palani Village did not belong to her but it belonged to her husband Sri Selvakumar. Her husband had obtained all necessary statutory permissions for putting up construction over the land owned by him. Applicants 2 and 3 are relatives of Sri Selvakumar and endemically disposed towards him and have deliberately added this Respondent as a party to the application in order to harass their family. She denied the allegation of any pollution being caused on account of the act of her husband in making the construction in the property and this was made with a view to harass her husband due to their enmity with him. Her husband had obtained the following permissions from the statutory authorities.
a)No objection certificate dated 21.02.2015 issued by the District Collector, Dindigul for conversion of barren agricultural lands into lands fit for construction of lodges.
b) Permission from the Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, Madurai Region, Madurai for construction of a restaurant & Lodge building in S.No. 819/1B2, 819/4Badn 821/1A1 measuring an extent of 2287 sq.mtrs. vide Proceedings bearing ROC No.320/2016/MM3 dated 11/03/2016.
c) Permission for construction of building in the aforesaid property granted in the Proceedings of the President, Sivagiri Village Panchayat in Letter No.3/2016-2017 dated 28.04.2016.Page 6 of 56
10. The relief in respect of construction of lodge and restaurant is not maintainable for the following reasons.
i) The construction is being put up in ands approved by the Director of Town & Country Planning and other statutory authorities for granting building approval.
ii) There is no sewage generated from the building being constructed and therefore no letting out of effluents as alleged. A cursory inspection will reveal that there is no sewage being generated from the building under construction.
iii) Civil Construction of the building has been already completed.
iv) There is no toilet for the workers in the building being constructed. The workers are using the Devasthanam Public toilets situated adjacent to the building under construction.
v) The construction plan includes setting up of a Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) for the building at a cost of Rs.30 lakhs (Rs.14 lakhs for the STP Machine and 16 akhs for civil construction)
vi) The application has been filed by the relatives of Mr.Selvakumar, husband of the 10th respondent with an ulterior motive and due to business rivalry.
vii) To the knowledge of the 10th respondent, sewage, if any, are only generated by the lodges which are over 200 in number and various other private rest rooms/wash rooms situate within Palani Municipality/Sivagiri Panchayat limits.
viii) The photographs produced by the applicant are misleading. The husband of the 10th respondent has not damaged any existing channel and has not let out any sewage water into the lands of the applicants or has caused any other damage to environment as alleged in the application."
11. The tourist bus stand at Palani occupies several acres of land and it is necessary to install a proper drainage system to let out waste water generated from the lodges and by the general public who were using the bus stand. The applicants were not entitled to get any of the reliefs against the 10th respondent or her husband. The application is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties for non-implement of her husband who is the owner of the property in which the construction is being undertaken. She prayed for accepting her contentions and dismissal of the application with cost.
Page 7 of 5612. The 9th respondent filed counter affidavit contending that the applicants filed this application against discharge of untreated sewage and waste water into their agricultural lands from the toilets and bathrooms located in tourist bus stand owned by Sri Arulmighu Dhandayudhapani Swamy Thirukoil and against 10th respondent, who was constructing a hotel by name M/s. Kantha Vilas near the applicants' agricultural lands. The applicants made a complaint to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, which was forwarded to the Office of the District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Dindigul on 23.11.2016 and the same was forwarded to the Commissioner, Palani Municipality to take necessary action under District Municipality Act, 1920, vide Board's letter dated 28.11.2016. The above lands were inspected by the officials of the District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Dindigul on 18.07.2017 along with 1st applicant and he had mentioned about the details of the land and the Survey numbers and extent of the land owned by each applicant. He has also informed about the discharge of sewage/mixed water into their land. During inspection, it was revealed that the 1st respondent temple had constructed a building for parking of vehicles for pilgrims and tourists and also constructed rooms, toilets with septic tanks and bathrooms which is located adjacent to and on the northern side of the agricultural lands of the applicants. It was also noticed that overflow from the septic tanks and waste water from the bathrooms located in the parking area owned by the 1st respondent was being discharged and found stagnated within the lands of 1st applicant and the lands belonging to Respondents 2 and 3 was found dry. The sample of sewage effluent in the applicant's land was collected during inspection on 18.07.2017 in the presence of the 1st applicant and the sample was sent to the District Environmental Laboratory, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Dindigul for analysis. Another row of toilets and bathrooms were also constructed in the parking area which is located adjacent to and the northern side of the properties of applicants 2 and 3 but no discharge of waste water was found into their properties noticed at the time of inspection. Since the said tourist bus parking place is located within the jurisdiction of Sivagiripatti Panchayat, the Deputy Block Development Officer Page 8 of 56 Sivagiripatti Panchayat was contacted in person during inspection and he informed that the tourist bus stand was being maintained by the 1st respondent temple authorities only and they had to take action to prevent the discharge of waste water into the agricultural land owned by the applicants. The 1st respondent temple authorities during inspection was also contacted in person and they informed that they proposed to provide a Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP) at a cost of Rs.2 Crores for treatment of sewage/waste water generated from the toilets/bathrooms at tourist bus stand parking area. Neither, the local body nor the Palani temple authorities had taken any steps to stop discharging of sewage effluent/waste water from the toilets and bathrooms into the applicant land. The Construction of hotel of 10th Respondent was under progress at East Giri Street near Rope Car Palani, Dindigul District which is located near the applicants' lands. The property was owned by Thiru. Selvakumar and he was contacted in person and informed that they proposed to construct a hotel with 40 rooms and restaurant facility and also proposed to provide sewage treatment plant for the treatment of waste water. During inspection it was noticed that construction of Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP) was under progress. No discharge of water from the construction activity into the applicants' land was noticed. He informed that he obtained necessary approval from Sivagiripatti Panchayat and also the DTCP, Madurai, but the hotel authority had not obtained consent to establish from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. So, a show cause notice was issued under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 to M/s. Kandhavilas for establishing the hotel without obtaining consent for establishment from the Board. So they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
13. The 1st applicant in the original applicant filed counter to a miscellaneous application filed by the 11th respondent contending that the application is not maintainable. The lands comprised in Survey Nos.819 and 821 of Palani village having an extent of 81.19 acres, originally belonged to the family of the applicants and 11th respondent. Out of the said extent a Settlement Deed No.2159/2015 dated 18.09.2015 was executed by the Page 9 of 56 applicants, 11th respondent and his two sons in favour of the 10th respondent in respect of an extent of 22.3 cents in Survey Numbers 819/4A and 819/3A. They obtained bank loan by executing Deposit of Title Deeds with respect to total extent of 81.19 cents out of which 58.89 cents belonged to applicants and 11th respondent and 22.03 cents belonged to 10th respondent and borrowed an amount of Rs.6 Crore 80 Lakhs from State Bank of India, Palani Branch evidenced by Doc. No. 472/2017 for construction of the disputed lodge. The 11th respondent and 10th respondent are husband and wife and they are living together in the same address and they were jointly doing business in the name of Sri Kanthavilas. They obtained clearance for conversion of agricultural land into plots for construction purpose for the entire extent of 81.19 cents. So there was no mala fides on the part of the applicants in impleading 10th respondent as a party to the proceedings. The 1st applicant is an office bearer of land owners of Agricultural welfare association and he only made representation as early as on 24.09.2012 itself to the authorities for redressal. He was also responsible for issuing lawyer's notice to the 1 st respondent in the original application on 30.06.2015. He was not related to 10th respondent or the 1th respondent as alleged. Applicants 2 and 3 though related to 11th respondent, there was no rivalry between them as alleged. It was understood by the 1st applicant that there was a civil case pending pertaining to the family properties of the 11th respondent and his two brothers and the disputed proposed lodge was also added one of the items in the said suit. Later, the 11th respondent had deliberately executed a Settlement Deed on 18.09.2015 settling a portion of the disputed lodge for preventing the free flow of water and as such 10th respondent was also to some extent responsible for stagnation of water and as such she is also a necessary party to the proceedings. This Tribunal by order dated 03.07.2017 ordered status quo but the 11th respondent as well as 10th respondent were continuing with their construction work of the disputed lodge. Though a police complaint was given, the same was also not considered by the authorities. They are continuing with the construction. The 1st applicant denied the allegation that respondents 10 and 11 had not damaged any existing channel or drainage and they have not let out any sewage water into the land of the applicants. They were having lands Page 10 of 56 adjacent to the property of the applicants and stopped the flow of drainage water coming from north to south at the entry point on the northern side of their land and then diverted the direction of sewage water towards the western direction with the connivance of the 1st respondent by slopping the existing channel which normally flows from east to west. That was how the applicants' lands were receiving sewage not only from the 1st respondent's bus stand directly from north to south but also from the general drainage water discharged by the hotels lodges including that of the property of the respondents 10 and 11. They had also given the details of the water channel which was in existence earlier. They had not displayed the plan approved said to have been obtained from Town and Country Planning Authorities. Large number of people used to assemble during the festival season on every Pradhosham days Thaipoosam, Panguni Uthiram at the roadside Vinayagar temple in Giri Street Palani. So they prayed for treating this also part of their pleadings, in the original applications.
14. The 1st respondent filed counter affidavit contending that the application is not maintainable and the same is barred by limitation and the sewage water is being discharged into the lands for many years and they have not stated any particular year from which the water is being discharged into the land in order to avoid question of limitation. Sri Arulmighu Dhandayudhapani Swamy Thirukoil, Palani attracts huge number of devotees from all over Tamil Nadu. The temple administration has land measuring 14.75 acres in Survey Numbers 812/2B2, 812/B, 814/1B, 814/2, 815/1, 815/2, 816/1,2,3 817/2, 818/1,2, 819/1A1, 836/1A1B, 837, 838/2 which were acquired from private land owners by the temple authorities for the purpose of construction of tourist bus stand and rooms for the benefit of the pilgrims in the year 1998. The temple authorities had provided a free of cost bus stand and a lodge with ten rooms, 10 toilets and 10 bathrooms separately for men and women in the year 2004. Further, in the year 2015, in order to manage the crowd, 8 more toilets and 4 bathrooms were constructed for both women and men separately. The said bus stand and toilets were mainly put to use only during festival season. On all other days, the pilgrims park the vehicles in the Giri Page 11 of 56 Veedhi itself as the pilgrims crowd mainly is a floating crowd. Since the toilets were for free use for the pilgrims, the temple administration did not charge for the maintenance of the toilets from the pilgrims and on the other hand, the maintenance of the toilets including other places belonging to the temple had been handed over to a private entity namely M/s. Padmavathi Hospitality and Management Services Pvt. Ltd. Chennai on contract for a sum of Rs.37,68,855/- which agency was involved in the sanitary operations and also maintaining the toilets and parking ground by engaging 325 persons. The temple administration also constructed septic tanks which, stores the water from the toilets and it was taken through a soak pit to the drainage channel constructed by the temple administration to reach the channel maintained by the Municipality. Apart from the same, temple administration has also sought for permission for erecting Sewerage Treatment Plant (STP) at an estimated cost of Rs.2 Crores with the fund of the Tourism Culture and Religious Endowment Department, which is yet to be sanctioned by the temple administration. Apart from the same, there are about 15 private lodging houses nearly 10 permanent structure shops and more than 100 temporary shops surrounding the applicants' land which were also discharging sewage water in the said channel from which the sewage water had been flowing freely into the lands belonging to the applicants and the applicants and the predecessor in title were keeping quite when water was flowing which was used to water the coconut plants. Apart from the coconut plants, the applicant never cultivated the lands for many years. The drainage channel belonging to the Municipality also is connected to the sewage lines from the Forest Department quarters residents and lodges at Ganapathy Lodge location residents situated in Itteri Road, along the Idumban Temple, Vanniyappan Koundan area and other private lodging houses situated in Syed Rowther Kuttai area and none of them have arrayed as respondents in the above application. They denied the allegation regarding the nature of cultivation made in the property and the income derived by them. They had not produced any document to show that this property was being cultivated with paddy and they were getting so much income from their property. They denied the allegations that due to the discharge of sewage water, damage has Page 12 of 56 been caused to the agriculture land and they were entitled to compensation. On the date of inspection by the Pollution Control Board authorities on 24.08.2017, it was found that the properties belonging to applicants 2 and 3 were found dry and there was no stagnation of sewage water found. The entire litigation was based on the enmity between the applicants and respondents 10 and 11, whereas the temple administration had constructed bus stand and toilets, etc. as early as in the year 2004 and no complaints were filed still 2015, only when 1st applicant made some representation to the temple administration. So the entire application is barred by limitation as against the 1st respondent. They prayed for dismissal of the application.
15. The 3rd respondent filed counter affidavit contending that the property of the applicants and the respondents are situated outside the municipal limits of Palani Municipality and they are not in any manner responsible for the alleged inconveniences caused to the applicants. The property of the applicants is situated in Sivagiripatti Panchayat limits outside the Palani Municipality limits and as such the claims of the applicants are not maintainable against them. They are filing the reply affidavit on behalf of the 5th respondent as well. The grievance of the applicants was against Palani Devasthanam authority and the 10th respondent and it was for them to answer the allegations. The underground sewage system for Palani town is in the stage of approval of detailed project report. The detailed project report had been submitted to the 6 th respondent for administrative and financial sanction and on getting the sanction, the tender process would be carried out as per the orders of the Government. On implementation of the underground sewage system, the outflow of the existing users and Palani Town will be diverted to sewage treatment plant and the treated water will be discharged after ensuring the suitability of the quality. The establishments in the Palani Municipality limits were now advised to ensure that there was no outflow into the open channels that causes health hazards to the public. They were not liable for any of the reliefs claimed. The 10th respondent is already having a lodging house within the limits of 2nd respondent and it is for the 2nd Page 13 of 56 respondent to take action regarding the grievance of the applicants. They prayed for dismissal of the application.
16. In the meantime another third party filed I.A. No. 170 of 2021 to get themselves impleaded in the proceedings stating that his property is also situated near to the properties of the applicants and he was also affected by the illegal discharge of sewage water into his property, but this Tribunal dismissed the application.
17. This Tribunal while admitting the matter ordered status quo against 10th respondent from proceeding with the construction in the property and respondents 10 and 11 filed M.A. No.130/2019 for vacating the status quo order and this Tribunal by order dated 28.07.2017 modified the order permitting respondents 10 and 11 to proceed with the construction after obtaining consent to establish for the STP from the Board and this Tribunal also directed the Pollution Control Board to monitor the construction of the building by respondents 10 and 11 and take action against them, if they found any deficiency and violation committed by them.
18. As per order dated 12.12.2019, this Tribunal, after considering the pleadings and the previous orders passed, appointed a Joint Committee consisting of District Collector, Dindigul, Commissioner, Palani Municipality, the Executive Officer, Sivagiripatti Panchayat and an Officer or Scientist of Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to inspect the property and to submit a report considering the following aspects.
a) The present status as to whether any untreated sewage water is being discharged into the property of the applicants;
b) Whether it has caused any damage to the properties of the applicants;
c) Whether any Sewage Treatment Plant has been established with necessary standard and capacity to meet the necessity of treating sewage water, considering its waste generation Page 14 of 56
d) to ascertain the polluters who are responsible for the damage caused to the environment;
e) to ascertain the quality of the water that has been discharged from the Sewage Treatment Plant, if any established by the local bodies.
f) If there is any discharge that is let into the properties of the applicants, assess the damage caused to the soil (if any), and
g) assess the environmental compensation, for the loss caused due to wrongful act of the polluters; and
h) they were directed to ascertain if the pollution still continues or any damage has been caused to soil and water in the property of the applicants or the surrounding area on account of unscientific discharge of untreated sewage water then, suggest the remedial measures to solve the same and restore the damage caused to environment and assess the compensation taking into account the loss of service caused to ecology and cost of restoration if any damage has been caused to yield in the property of the applicants, then compensation for the loss of yield also to be assessed.
19. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board was designated as Nodal Agency for coordination. A committee was given the option, to include any expert for the purpose of assessment of compensation, deterioration of soil and water quality and for proposing a remedial measures for the same. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board was also directed to file an independent report regarding the present status and violation of environment laws, if any and action taken.
20. On 10.11.2020, this Tribunal had considered the report submitted by the Joint Committee dated nil e-filed on 09.11.2020 and extracted in para 3 of the order which reads as follows.
"Report on directions issued by the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal (SZ) Chennai order dated 25.09.2020 for the application No. 134 of 2017 filed before the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal (SZ) Chennai filed by Thiru M. Ravichandran, Tmt. R. Vijayalakshmi and Thiru. C.Rajendran of Palani, Dindugul District.
As directed by the Hon'ble NGT, Joint Committee has been formed with following members Page 15 of 56
1. Sub Collector, Palani, representing the District Collector, Dindigul
2. District Environmental Engineer, TNPC Board, Dindigul
3. Thiru. R. Jeyaraman Former Under Secretary, Loss of Ecology Authority, Chennai - 600 017.
4. Commissioner, Palani Municipality, Dindigul District.
5. Block Development Officer (VP), Palani Panchayat Union, Dindigul District Meanwhile, Hon'ble NGT in its latest order dated 25.09.2020 has directed to submit the report on or before 10.11.2020 by e-filing.
Accordingly, the members of the joint committee have attended a meeting on 12.10.2020 at the O/o. Sub Collector, Palani and discuss about the issues related to the above court case. Subsequently, joint committee has visited the applicants land on 12.10.2020 along with applicants Thiru M.Ravichandran and Thiru C. Rajendran. One more applicant Tmt. R.Vijayalakshmi W/o. M. Rajendran was not available during inspection. Thiru. M. Rajendran was represented on behalf of his wife Tmt. R. Vijayalakshmi.
Inspection of tourist bus stand of palani temple and applicant's lands on 12.10.2020 by the committee First respondent informed the following details to the Joint Committee
1) First respondent has constituted a bus stand for parking of vehicles for pilgrims and tourists in year 2012 with total extend 4 acres. It has also constructed the rooms, toilets with septic tanks and bathrooms which is located adjacent & northern side of applicant's agricultural lands.
2) Details of bathroom, toilets and dormitory and year of constructions Description Year of Construction Numbers Rooms 2008 10 Toilets on east side 2008 20 Bathrooms on east side 2008 20 Toilets on west side 2015 16 Bathrooms on west side 2015 8 Dormitory 2015 4 (75 persons each)
3) The details of septic tanks provided to treat the sewage generated from toilets is as follows:
Description Size Capacity
Septic Tank - 1 2.40 x 6.50 x 1.80 m 28.08 m3
Septic Tank - 2 2.40 x 6.50 x 1.80 m 28.08 m3
Septic Tank - 3 3.60 x 10.60 x 1.80 m 68.68 m3
4) The quantity of generation of sewage from toilets is about 18.0 KLD (36 Nos. x 50 persons x 10 lit/head)
5) The quantity of generation of sullage is 42.0 KLD (28 x 50 persons x 30 lit/head)
6) First respondent also informed that the usage of toilet and bathrooms is 20 days only in a year (during festival seasons only)
7) Temple authority already constructed the compound wall on south side facing petitioner's land. During inspection construction of compound wall (damage portion) is under progress. However, a hold was noticed in the compound wall.
The Joint Committee noted the following
8) The first respondent has not provided any disposal facility for overflow from septic tank.
Page 16 of 569) Waste water from first respondent's rooms is found to discharged into applicants land via compound wall.
10) Sewage & sullage generated by houses, hotels located in the land of second and third respondents is passed through drain owned by first respondents.
11) Samples of stagnated water in the agricultural land owned by Thiru Sithanathan (nearer to the applicants land) and also water from the open well (not in use) owned by one of applicant Thiru C. Rajendran were collected and samples were sent to TNPCB lab for analysis.
II. Inspection of the hotel M/s. S.P. Properties by the Committee Subsequently the joint committee has inspected the hotel M/s. S.P. Properties owned by the 10th respondent located on south side adjacent of tourist bus stand and near to the applicant's land. During inspection Thiru. V.R. Sampath kumar GM was available. During inspection, following observations were made
1) Hotel has completed the construction of rooms, restaurants, but it was not in operation. The GM informed that the hotel has not yet started commercially.
2) Hotel has proposed to generated 10.40 KLD of sewage and installed sewage treatment plant (STP) to treat the sewage to be generated from the hotel and same was under operable condition. Since, the hotel was not under operation, there was no generation of sewage or any waste water.
3) After treatment of sewage, the unit has proposed to recycle 8.0 KLD of treated sewage of toilet furnishing and to utilize 2.40 KLD for gardening within the premises.
4) No discharge of sewage / waste water from the hotel to the applicant's land was noticed.
5) 9th respondent, Board has already instructed to hotel to commission the activities after obtaining Consent to Operate Order (CTO) from the Board.
III. Collection of samples in the applicant's land on 14.10.2020 by the official of TNPCB Samples of stagnated water (3 Nos.) were collected by the respondent Board official on 14.10.2020 from each applicant's land in presence of applicants Thiru M. Ravichandran and Thiru C. Rajendran. The samples were also sent to laboratory of respondent Board for analysis.
IV. Inspection on 04.11.2020 by the officials of TNPCB The ninth respondent Board officials inspected the rectification works carried out by the first respondent to improve environment on 04.11.2020. During inspection Thiru Venkatesan, EE, and Thiru Mari Balaji, AE of first respondent, Arulmigu Dhandayuthapani Swamy Thirukoil were available. During inspection, following observations were made
1) Three numbers of dispersion trenches have been provided to dispose the treated sewage from three septic tanks. Temple authority report that existing dispersion trenches provided before 12 years have been replaced with new dispersion trenches. The details of dispersion is as follows Description Size Dispersion trench -1 20 x 1.0 x 1.0 m Dispersion trench -2 20 x 1.0 x 1.0 m Dispersion trench -3 20 x 1.0 x 1.0 m
2) Hole/gap below the grade beam of the compound wall facing south side has been filled with earth as to arrest the discharge of waste water into the applicant's lands.
3) East west drain located at back side toilets and bathrooms (west side) has been completely closed and no discharge of sewage / waste into the applicant's lands.
Page 17 of 564) The pipe from where the waste water discharged earlier into the east west drain has been repaired and connected to the north south drain which ultimately joins the main public drain owned by the second respondent Sivagiripatti Panchayat.
5) Waste water from second and third respondents (local bodies) is passing through drain of first respondent temple authority was diverted into public drain owned by Sivagiripatti Panchayat.
6) Lying of new pipe line with inspection chambers are under progress to convey the waste water generated from the bathrooms located on east side into public drain owned by Sivagiripatti Panchayat.
V. Arresting of entry of sewage/ waste water into the applicant's lands by implementing the following steps
a) Dispersion trench to each septic tank has been constructed to dispose the sewage effluent.
b) Hole/gap below the grade beam of the compound wall facing south side has been filled with earth.
c) East west drain located at back side toilets and bathrooms (west side) has been completely closed.
d) The pipe from where the waste water discharged earlier into the east west drain has been diverted to the public drain owned by the local body.
e) Entry of waste water generated from Sivagiripatti Panchayat & Palani Municipality has been arrested by constructing a wall in the drain owned by temple and diverted into public drain owned by Sivagiripatti panchayat.
f) Laying of new pipe line with inspection chambers so as to convey the waste water generated from the bathrooms located on east side into public drain owned by Sivagiripatti Panchayat.
Regarding levying of environmental compensation for the damage caused to applications land, the Joint Committee requested the extend of land, type of crop cultivated & others in the applicants land. The Environmental Compensation will be assessed after obtaining the necessary data from concerned authorities. Hence, two months time is requested to file the affidavit regarding environmental damage.
Submitted intermediate report to Hon'ble NGT."
21. Thereafter this Tribunal passed the following orders.
"It is seen from the report that they wanted some more time to assess the environmental compensation and also noted various violations and they wanted two months time for filing further report.
The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 10 & 11 submitted that they have already applied for Consent to Operate and it is under process. The local bodies are directed to submit their present status report regarding the steps taken by them to mitigate the circumstances raised by the applicant on account of their non 10 discharge of their obligation in maintaining hygiene in that area especially, when it is a big temple area where large number of pilgrims are expected to come.
Considering the report submitted by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB), we feel that some more time can be granted to them to submit a further report. In the mean time, the authorities are also directed to submit a present status report regarding the progress of the work that is being undertaken by them in meeting the situation.
They are also directed to submit the reports as directed by this Tribunal on or before 22.01.2021 by e-filing along with necessary hardcopies to be produced as per Rules.
The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the above said authorities by e-mail immediately so as to comply with the direction."
Page 18 of 5622. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board filed a report signed on 20.01.2021 e-filed on the same day in compliance with the direction issued by this Tribunal by order dated 10.11.2020.
23. The 1st Respondent had filed their objection to the Joint Committee Report regarding the nature of sewage generated and its quantity and the duration of generation of the same. The respondent had carried out the recommendations made by the Joint Committee which was mentioned in the report. The committee has not mentioned about the discharge of sewage from other establishments into the water channel which ultimately reaches the property of the applicants. The engineers of the temple authorities had collected the details of the places/areas and approximate quantity of sewage water discharge through the drainage line maintained by the temple administration which falls under the jurisdiction of 3rd respondent municipality and these aspects were not considered by the Joint Committee. According to the 1st Respondent no sewage water from the tourist parking area had been drained into the applicants' lands and a letter has been sent to the District Collector to direct the local bodies to divert the drains away from the tourist bus stand parking area.
24. The Pollution Control Board has filed an interim report stating that the 11th respondent had completed the construction of the hotel and applied for consent to operate and the same was returned for want of additional particulars. The unit has provided full-fledged sewage treatment plant. At present, there was no question of discharge of waste water into the applicants' land from that property. They also produced certain photographs showing the stagnation of water in some areas in the property of the applicants and the nature of cultivation made in the property.
25. The Palani Municipality also filed another reply affidavit dated 09.06.2021, wherein they have stated that no amount of sewage from Palani Municipality is reaching the properties of the applicants. It was also mentioned that surface water flows from adjoining Idumban Malai Page 19 of 56 Koil is the main reason for the inundation of the applicant's land and the flow of sewage from the toilets of 1st respondent were only ancillary factors that have been curbed as already set out by the Joint Committee. The applicants were not affected by any sewage from the limits of Palani Municipality the topography of the land is such that it is higher in level compared with the natural channels that carries surface run of from Palani Municipal area. The applicants have to take their own precautions for preventing inundation of their land as the flow of surface water from the Idumban Malai is stagnated in their lands during monsoon period. With regard to the sewage that is generated within Palani Town, there is a sewage network that is functional from the year 1980 and this system is in use for the sewage generated by the residents. The said system after treatment disposed its outflow into the oxidation pond in survey field number 1/2, 1/3 and 1/4 of Palani Village and Town. The Project for the extended and added area of the developed urban areas of Palani Town has been proposed at a cost of Rs.155 Crores and the DPR for the same is under consideration for the issue of administrative and financial sanction. There was no connection for the lands of the applicants and surface flows of the said developed area did not reach the lands of the applicants due to contour levels. So they are not responsible for the alleged stagnation of water in the properties of the applicants.
26. Thereafter, the matter has been adjourned from time to time for the Joint Committee to file their report assessing Environmental Compensation. The matter was taken up on 16.11.2021 and on that day, this Tribunal considered the Joint Committee Report dated nil e-filed on 27.10.2021 and extracted in Para 2 of the order which reads as follows:
"Action taken by the Committee Meeting of the Committee on 12.10.2020 In this connection, Joint Committee requested related documents from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and other departments inspected in and around of the questionable lands and sewage treatment facility of the Arulmigu Dhandauthapani Swamy Thirukovil, Palani Municipality, Sivakiripatty Panchayat and SP Properties.Page 20 of 56 Page 21 of 56 Page 22 of 56 Page 23 of 56 Page 24 of 56 Page 25 of 56 Page 26 of 56 Page 27 of 56 Page 28 of 56 Page 29 of 56 Page 30 of 56 Page 31 of 56 Page 32 of 56 Page 33 of 56 Page 34 of 56 Page 35 of 56 Page 36 of 56 Page 37 of 56 Page 38 of 56 Page 39 of 56 Page 40 of 56 Page 41 of 56 Page 42 of 56 Page 43 of 56 Page 44 of 56 Page 45 of 56
27. Respondents 10 and 11 filed objection to the Joint Committee Report wherein they stated that there was no possibility of any sewage being let into the properties of applicants from their property which was found even in the earlier reports in favour of the respondents 10 and 11. No reasoning were given for the committee to fasten the liability on these respondents. The 1st respondent filed objection to the Joint Committee Report giving details of the sewage treatment facility provided and none of the other establishments which are responsible for discharge of sewage into the public drain which ultimately reaches the property of the applicants were made liable for the same.
28. Heard the counsel for the applicants, official respondents and the party respondents.
29. The counsel for the applicants argued that the Joint Committee Report will go to show that there was stagnation of sewage water in the properties of the applicants and during rainy season it will spread over to the other properties as well. Till the sewage flow is stopped, they were suffering the damage and loss of yield has been caused to their property. So, all the respondents and party respondents namely Palani Municipality, Sivagiri Patti Panchayat respondents 10 and 11 and the Palani Temple Devasthanam are responsible for the same and they are liable to compensate the applicants.
30. On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Official respondents including the Pollution Control Board submitted that whenever complaints were received, they were making proper inspections and issuing directions to the authorities and action is being taken if those directions were not complied.
31. The counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submitted that they are not the only person responsible for the sewage discharge and they have provided necessary sewage collection system and in fact, only during festival season when there is excess crowd, some overflow happened Page 46 of 56 which ultimately reached the drain and along with the sewage collected in the sewage drain of the local body. There are lot of other establishments situated which are responsible for the same as well. So, they cannot be mulcted with the liability. They have made all rectification methods to prevent discharge of sewage from their property to any other properties.
32. The counsel appearing for respondents 10 and 11 submitted that even as per the earlier reports, there was a finding that there was no discharge of sewage from their property and they have provided STP and there is no possibility of discharge of untreated sewage from their property. So, they are not responsible for any damage caused.
33. The counsel appearing for the Palani Municipality submitted that there was no possibility of any sewage generated from Palani Municipal area reaching the property of the applicants. They have their own sewage system and the sewage water is being treated in the STP provided and it is being discharged only after meeting the standard.
34. The counsel appearing for the Sivagiripatti Panchayat submitted that the sewage generated from the bus stand constructed by the 1st respondent and the facilities provided for the pilgrims used the toilets and bathrooms has resulted in the overflow which reached the property of the applicants.
35. Considered the pleadings, Joint Committee Report and the objections filed by the parties to the report and the submissions made by the counsel at the time of hearing.
36. The points that arose for consideration are:
i. Whether there was any violation of environmental laws committed by 1st respondent, Palani Municipality, Sivagiripatti Panchayat and Respondents 10 and 11, which resulted in any damage to the properties of the applicants?Page 47 of 56
ii. Whether the applicants are entitled for any compensation as claimed and who is liable to pay the same to the applicants?
iii. What are all the further directions, if any, to be issued applying "Precautionary Principle" to protect environment and also restore damage (if any) caused to the environmental on account of the any of the violations committed by the above said respondents?
iv. Relief and cost.
POINTS:
37. The grievance of the applicants was that on account of the illegal activities of party respondents namely Sri Arulmighu Dhandayudhapani Swamy Thirukoil, Palani, Palani Municipality, Sivagiripatti Panchayat and respondents 10 and 11 the untreated sewage generated from their properties and within the limits of the local bodies are drained into the property of the applicants which resulted in damage to their properties and also resulted in loss of income as it has become unfit for cultivation. They have also given the details of the properties and the nature of cultivation and quantified the amount of compensation which was extracted earlier and as such we are not re-extracting the same. Those allegations were denied by the respondents.
38. The Pollution Control Board had earlier filed a report wherein they had stated that there was stagnation of sewage water in the property of the 1 st applicant and at the time of inspection, the properties of applicants 2 and 3 were found to be dry without any stagnation of sewage water. The Pollution Control Board also mentioned in their counter that there was no possibility of any sewage being discharged from the properties of the respondents 10 and 11, as there was no sewage generation and the building construction was in progress, but though they had started construction of STP, they had not obtained consent to establish from the Board and so they directed them to stop the work and apply for consent to establish and only thereafter they could start the work.
Page 48 of 5639. It was seen from the report that when there was overflow from the septic tanks constructed by the 1st respondent temple authorities, that reached the property of the 1st applicant. But, subsequently certain steps have been taken and the sewage collected was later diverted to the public drain owned by Sivagiripatti Panchayat and certain measures have been taken which was extracted in para 5 of the report filed on 09.11.2020 which reads as follows:
Arresting of entry of sewage/waste water into the aplicant's lands by implementing the following steps.
a) Dispersion trench to each septic tank has been constructed to dispose the sewage effluent.
b) Hole/gap below the grade beam of the compound wall facing south side has been filled with earth.
c) East West drain located at back side toilets and bathrooms (west side) has been completely closed.
d) The pipe form where the waste water discharged earlier into the east west drain has been diverted to the public drain owned by the local body.
e) Entry of waste water generated from Sivagiripatti Panchayat & Palani municipality has been arrested by constructing a wall in the drain owned by temple and diverted into public drain owned by Sivagiripatti Panchayat.
f) Laying of new pipe line with inspection chambers so as to convey the waste water generated from the bathrooms located on east side into public drain owned by Sivaigirpatti Panchayat."
40. At present, the grievance of the applicants regarding discharge of untreated sewage into their property has been arrested and the stagnation of water in the property was due to surface run of during rainy season on account of the terrain of the land and flow coming from Irumanam Malai Koil. It is also seen from the report submitted by the Joint Committee e- filed on 27.10.2021 that at present there was no damage caused to the soil and the water and the same is fit for cultivation. But the committee came to the conclusion that till the remedial measures were taken, there was some damage caused and on that basis they have calculated the compensation for loss of income to the applicants and extracted the quantum and also the reasons for assessing the compensation as follows:
The summary of the findings of the Joint Committee A. Committee noticed untreated domestic sewage water of Arulmigu Dhandauthapani Swamy Thirukovil, Palani Municipality, Sivagiripatty Panchayat) is being discharged into the properties of the applicant Due to blockage made by Kandhavilas (M/s. SP Properties) the part of sewage from above parties entered the properties of applicant. B. The discharged untreated domestic sewage water damaged the property of the applicants. C. The committee noticed that Arulmigu Thandauthapani Swamy Thirukovil has established septic tank & Dispersion t rench of adequate size Kandhavilas (SP Properties) has installed sewage treatment plant (STP) with necessary standard and capacity to meet the necessity of treating sewage water considering its waste generation. Palani Municipality and Sivagiripatty Panchayat have diverted the flow of waste water and stopped the sewage flow into applicants land. There will not be any damage to the applicants land in future.Page 49 of 56
D. The committee identified the polluters that is Arulmigu Thandauthapani Swamy Thirukovil, Palani Municipaoity, Sivagiripatty Panchayat and Kandhavilas(SP Properteis). The Committee noticed that the Kandhavilas is not generated any domestic waste but the obstructed way of Municipal domestic sewage water channel by pouring construction waste material (earlier) which influence the over flow of the part of sewage to the adjacent questionable land.
E. The committee observed TNPC Board will ascertain the quality of treated sewage after commissioning of STP by M/s. SP Properties in future. F. The committee took to the soil samples of questionable land due to discharge of domestic sewage the Arulmigu Thandauthapani Swamy Thirukovil, Palani Municipality, Sivagiripatty Panchayat and Kandhavilas (SP Properties) that is being done into the properties of the applicants, to assess damage cost soil. The analysis of soil sample report in 1st feet, 2nd feet and 3rd feet has mentioned I the report P.NO.20 and 21 shows there is no environmental damage of the soil in questionable land. So, in the head of soil reclamation no reversal compensation amount is not arise. G. The Committee assess the environmental compensation caused due to the wrong full act of the polluters as mentioned in the P. No. 22 to 30 for the yield loss of the petitioners.
1. Thiru M. Ravichandran agricultural yield loss Rs.47,875/-
compensation is calculated as
2. Tmt. Vijayalakshmi agricultural yield loss compensation Rs.79,140/-
is calculated as
3. Thiru. C. Rajendran agricultural yield loss motor room Rs.1,74,340/-
and pumpset compensation is calculated as Total Rsa.3,01,355/-
H. The local bodies and HR&CE shall take necessary action to collect and divert the rain water from Idumban hills & other nearby water sources so as to avoid entry of rain water into applicants land."
41. Nobody is entitled to discharge untreated sewage or waste water into the property of any other and also into the public drain before it is being treated. It is also seen from the reports that certain amount of damage has been caused on account of the non-compliance of certain environmental laws by the local bodies and the 1st respondent and also by respondents 10 and 11. Though there was no discharge found from the property at the time of inspection, it is not known what is the nature of treatment that is being done by the respondents 10 and 11 when they were conducting the hotel earlier before demolition and reconstruction of the same, as admittedly they were conducting a hotel earlier in the same property and they were discharging the untreated sewage into the public drain which ultimately reached the property of the applicants.
42. It is true that at the time of inspection, the property of applicants 2 and 3 were found to be dry and only in the property of the 1st applicant, stagnation of sewage water was found. But, when the generation of sewage increases and when it mixed with the rain water, the possibility of the same spreading into the property of the applicants 2 and 3 during Page 50 of 56 rainy season cannot be ruled out as at the time of subsequent inspections, the properties of the applicants were found inundated with rain water and they could not collect the soil and water sample during that time which delayed the filing of the reports.
43. So, under such circumstances, the fact that applicants are entitled for compensation as calculated by the Joint Committee and the same will have to be realized from the persons responsible for the same cannot be denied.
44. Further, it is seen from the report submitted by the Pollution Control Board that sewage system provided by 1st respondent and Palani Municipality and also Sivagiripatti Panchayat was not proper and respondents 10 and 11 have started construction of the STP without obtaining consent to establish from the Pollution Control Board and that is an environmental law violation committed by them for which they are liable to pay compensation.
45. Further, in Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2017) 5 SCC 326, there was a direction of the Apex Court to provide all effluent treatment facilities by the industrial units as well as the local bodies before the effluents were discharged into the water bodies and the regulators were directed to take appropriate action against them in this regard.
46. Further, the Principal Bench in several decisions namely Almitra H Patel & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. in Original Application No.199 of 2014 and also in Original Application No.606 of 2018 had directed the local bodies to implement the Solid Waste Management Rules and provide effluent treatment facilities for treatment of liquid waste generated and if it is not done, directed the Pollution Control Board to take action against them imposing compensation at a particular rate if those facilities were not completed by 31.03.2020. There was a direction to Page 51 of 56 impose compensation for the past violation also, if such things were resulted in damage to environment.
47. So, under such circumstances, we feel it appropriate to direct the Pollution Control Board to assess the environmental compensation for violations committed by the 1st respondent temple authorities, Palani Municipality, and Sivagiripatti Panchayat applying the "Polluter Pays"
principle laid down by the Principal Bench and also the guidelines given by the Central Pollution Control Board for violation of environmental laws committed by respondents 10 and 11 for not obtaining consent to establish for establishment of their treatment facilities namely STP by issuing show cause notice and after giving opportunity to them, assess the compensation and take steps to recover the amount from them, and after recovering the amount from them, the Pollution Control Board in coordination with the District Collector, Dindigul to distribute the amount of compensation assessed by the Joint Committee to applicants 1 to 3 as assessed by the Committee and the Pollution Control Board is also directed to monitor the implementation of Solid Waste Management Rules and Liquid Waste Management in that area periodically and if any violation is found then they are directed to take appropriate action against the violators in accordance with law.
48. So, this Tribunal feels that the application can be disposed of as follows:-
a) The applicants are entitled to get compensation at the rate assessed by the Joint Committee and that will have to be realised from the polluters in proportion to the violations committed by them after assessing the compensation as directed by this Tribunal for the violations committed by them and out of that amount, the District Collector - Dindigul is to distribute the amount to the applicants as assessed by the Joint Committee.
b) The State Pollution Control Board is directed to assess the environmental compensation for the violations committed by Sri Arulmigu Dhandayudhapani Temple Authorities, the Block Development Officer, who is in charge of Sivagiripatti Panchayat, the Palani Municipality and Respondents No.10 and 11 for the Page 52 of 56 violations committed by them for non-implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules and Liquid Waste Management and discharge of untreated sewage into the drain which ultimately reached the property of the applicant and for construction of STP by Respondents No.10 and 11 without obtaining necessary consent from the Board, applying the principle of "Polluter Pays" and applying the guidelines issued by the Principal Bench and also the Central Pollution Control Board in this regard, after affording an opportunity to them by issuing show cause notice showing the details of the compensation assessed and giving them an opportunity to file their objections and after hearing them, pass appropriate orders against them in accordance with law.
c) After assessment of the compensation, the State Pollution Control Board is directed to take steps for recovery of amount from those persons and out of the compensation recovered, the State Pollution Control Board in coordination with the District Collector Dindigul distribute the amount of compensation to the applicants as assessed by the Joint Committee.
d) The Palani Municipality and the Block Development Officer, who is in charge of Sivagiripatti Panchayat are directed to strictly implement the Solid Waste Management Rules and Liquid Waste Management within their jurisdiction and take all necessary steps to avoid discharge of any sewage generated within their area into the neighbouring properties causing any inconvenience to them.
e) The State Pollution Control Board is directed to monitor the implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules and Liquid Waste Management in that area and if there is any violation found by any of the authorities or any individuals in carrying out the same, then they are directed to take appropriate action against those violators including imposition of environmental compensation in accordance with Law.
f) The 1st Respondent temple authorities are directed to take all necessary steps to avoid overflow of sewage from their area of operation and the facilities provided by them for the pilgrims in Page 53 of 56 future and directed to implement the recommendations made by the Joint Committee to avoid such things recurring in future.
g) Since the Joint Committee has found that on account of the remedial measures taken there was no permanent damage caused to the agricultural lands of the applicants and the soil and water conditions are suitable for agriculture, there is no necessity to issue any direction to carry out any remedial measure for restoration of damage caused to their properties.
49. The points are answered accordingly.
50. In the result, the Original Application is disposed of with following directions:-
(i) The applicants are entitled to get compensation at the rate assessed by the Joint Committee and that will have to be realised from the polluters in proportion to the violations committed by them after assessing the compensation as directed by this Tribunal for the violations committed by them and out of that amount, the District Collector - Dindigul is to distribute the amount to the applicants as assessed by the Joint Committee.
(ii) The State Pollution Control Board is directed to assess the environmental compensation for the violations committed by Sri Arulmigu Dhandayudhapani Temple Authorities, the Block Development Officer, who is in charge of Sivagiripatti Panchayat, the Palani Municipality and Respondents No.10 and 11 for the violations committed by them for non-
implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules and Liquid Waste Management and discharge of untreated sewage into the drain which ultimately reached the property of the applicant and for construction of STP by Respondents No.10 and 11 without obtaining necessary consent from the Board, applying the principle of "Polluter Pays" and applying the guidelines issued by the Principal Bench and also the Central Pollution Control Board in this regard, after affording Page 54 of 56 an opportunity to them by issuing show cause notice showing the details of the compensation assessed and giving them an opportunity to file their objections and after hearing them, pass appropriate orders against them in accordance with law.
(iii) After assessment of the compensation, the State Pollution Control Board is directed to take steps for recovery of amount from those persons and out of the compensation recovered, the State Pollution Control Board in coordination with the District Collector Dindigul distribute the amount of compensation to the applicants as assessed by the Joint Committee.
(iv) The Palani Municipality and the Block Development Officer, who is in charge of Sivagiripatti Panchayat are directed to strictly implement the Solid Waste Management Rules and Liquid Waste Management within their jurisdiction and take all necessary steps to avoid discharge of any sewage generated within their area into the neighbouring properties causing any inconvenience to them.
(v) The State Pollution Control Board is directed to monitor the implementation of the Solid Waste Management Rules and Liquid Waste Management in that area and if there is any violation found by any of the authorities or any individuals in carrying out the same, then they are directed to take appropriate action against those violators including imposition of environmental compensation in accordance with law.
(vi) The 1st Respondent temple authorities are directed to take all necessary steps to avoid overflow of sewage from their area of operation and the facilities provided by them for the pilgrims in future and directed to implement the recommendations made by the Joint Committee to avoid such things recurring in future.
(vii) Since the Joint Committee has found that on account of the remedial measures taken there was no permanent damage caused to the agricultural lands of the applicants and the soil Page 55 of 56 and water conditions are suitable for agriculture, there is no necessity to issue any direction to carry out any remedial measure for restoration of damage caused to their properties.
(viii) Considering the circumstances, parties are directed to bear their respective costs in the application.
(ix) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Commissioner - Arulmigu Dhandayudhapani Swamy Thirukoil, Palani, Block Development Officer under whose jurisdiction the Sivagiripatti Panchayat falls, District Collector
- Dindigul, Commissioner - Palani Municipality, Chairman -
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and District Environment Engineer - Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, Dindigul for their information and compliance of directions.
51. With the above directions and observations, this Original Application is disposed of.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M. Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, E.M. O.A. No.134/2017 (SZ) 11th July 2022. SE Page 56 of 56