National Green Tribunal
M C Mehta vs Union Of India on 20 April, 2017
Author: Swatanter Kumar
Bench: Swatanter Kumar
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL,
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Original Application No. 200/2014
(C.W.P. No. 3727/1985)
And
Original Application No. 501 of 2014
(M.A. No. 404 of 2015)
And
Original Application No. 146 of 2015
And
Appeal No. 63 of 2015
And
Original Application No. 127 of 2017
And
Original Application No. 133/2017
(W.P. (C) No. 200/2013)
IN THE MATTER OF : -
M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India & Ors.
And
Anil Kumar Singhal Vs. Union of India & Ors.
And
Society for Protection of Environment & Biodiversity & Anr.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
And
Confederation of Delhi Industries & CETP Societies
(An Organisation of CETP Societies)
Vs.
D.P.C.C. & Ors.
And
J.K. Srivastava Vs. Central Pollution Control Board & Ors.
And
Swami Gyan Swarop Sanand Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs & Ors.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SWATANTER KUMAR, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHUVENDRA S. RATHORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE MR. BIKRAM SINGH SAJWAN, EXPERT MEMBER HON'BLE DR. AJAY A. DESHPANDE, EXPERT MEMBER HON'BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER Present Applicant: Mr. M.C. Mehta and Ms. Mehak Rastogi, Advs.
Mr. Salik Shafique and Ms. Upama Bhattarjee, Advs. for Indian Chemical Council and Jubilant Rite Sciences Mr. Arvind Kr. Pandey, Adv. with Mr. Vipin Kaushik, AEE, DSIIDC for Ms. Moni Cinmoy, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Misra and Mr. Daleep Dhayani, Advs. for UPPCB Mr. Rahul Pratap and Mr. Anupam, Advs. for MoEF Mr. B.V. Niren, Adv. for CGSC and CGWA Mr. Mukesh Verma and Mr. Bikash Kumar Sinha, Advs. Mr. I.K. Kapila, Adv. for UP Jal Nigam, Kanpur Jal Sansthan and Kanpur Nagar Nigam along with EE Panpur and SE Coord. Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam and with Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, SE, Sh. Ghanshyam Diwedi, PM, Sh. Gupta, EE and Shri Jain, EE for Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam and Sh. R.K. Singh, EE for Kanpur Nagar Nigam.
Mr. S.A. Zaidi and Mansi Chahal, Advs. for Leather Industries.
1 Ms. Panchajanya Batra Singh, Adv for Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change with Mr. R.N. Jindal, Scientist, Director, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Ms. Antima Bajaj, Adv. for AIDA & for Jain Distillery Mr. Suraj Prakash Singh and Ms. Pushpila Bisht, Advs. for UPSMA and AIDA Mr. Atul Batra, and Mr. Kundan, Advs. for Mother Dairy, Pilakhua Unit Mr. V.K. Shukla, Adv. and Ms. Vijay Lakshmi, Adv. for State of MP Mr. Dinesh Jindal, LO, Delhi Pollution Control Committee Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Adv. for State of Uttar Pradesh Mr. Amit agarwal, and Ms. Asha Basu, Advs. for State of West Bengal Mr. Ishwer Singh, Adv. with Mr. Sandeep, Director (Tech.), NMCG and Mr. N.N. Rai, Director (CWC) and Mr. D.P. Mathuria, Executive Director Mr. Gautam Singh and Mr. Rudreshwar Singh, Advs. for State of Bihar and BSPCB Ms. Neelam Rathore and Ms. Bhawna Gera, Advs. for Association of Textile Processor & Uttar Pradesh Dyes & Bleachers Associations (Micro & Small) & MLA Group & Chamber of Indian Trade & Industry Mr. Narender Pal Singh, Adv. and Mr. Dinesh Jindal, LO Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Adv. for R-10 & 11 Ms. Yogmaya Agnihotri, Adv. for CECB Mr. Ravi P. Mehrotra and Mr. Abhinav Kr. Malik, Advs. for UPSIDC Mr. Jayesh Gaurav, Adv. for JSPCB Mr. Sanjeev Ralli, Adv. and Mr. Dinesh Jindal, LO, Delhi Pollution Control Committee Mr. Taruna A. Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Rajkumar, Adv. & Ms. Niti Choudhary, LA, CPCB Mr. Rishabh Sharma, Adv. for Noticee No. 9 - M/s. Tara API India Pvt. Ltd.
Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, Adv.
Date and Orders of the Tribunal Remarks Item No. 30 to 35
Mr. Ishwar Singh, the Learned Counsel appearing April 20, 2017 for Ministry of Water Resources upon instructions from ss the competent authority and Mr. N.N. Rai, Director, Central Water Commission submits that the minimum environmental flow of river Ganga should be 20% in the lean season i.e. November to March. It should be 25% in October and April and 30% from May to September on a monthly average flow basis. The percentage should be on the flow of river Ganga pre-diversion or extraction, say, at Haridwar. It is further stated that excessive extraction of 2 groundwater is a serious issue in the flood plain and the Item No. 30 to 35 lands falling near river Ganga of Segment `B' of Phase-I. April 20, There should be reduction in extraction of groundwater as 2017 excessive extraction of groundwater directly impacts the ss base flow of the river. The diversion again should not be excessive at the maximum, it could be 75% of the flow of the river prior to extraction on a monthly average during the lean period.
The Member Secretary, Central Pollution Control Board along with the counsel submits that the minimum environmental flow of river in Segment `B' of Phase-I, i.e. Haridwar to Kanpur should be 600 cusec at least. This is based upon the data of Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Department, notification of the State Government dated 05th August, 2010 and the Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of Writ Petition No. 4003 of 2006 order dated 27th November, 2009 and 19th January, 2011. The flow as per these figures of river Ganga at Haridwar is 13639 cusec giving a percentage of 5%, and 55% of this river flow gets diverted at Haridwar itself. It is stated that the extraction of groundwater in this Segment must be reduced as it adversely affects the base flow of the river and greater extraction of ground water would result in excessive discharge of effluent as well. The reduction should be uniformly applicable to the extractors. It is further stated that it is 45% discharge and 55% diversion.
According to MoEF, though principally they adopt what the Ministry of Water Resources say, however, they consider it appropriate that 20 cumecs i.e. @ 750 cusecs 3 should be minimum flow of river Ganga in Segment `B'. Item No. 30 to 35 The excessive groundwater extraction should be checked April 20, immediately and appropriate measures in that behalf 2017 should be taken.
ss During the course of hearing it has been brought to our notice that majority of the 30 drains which are subject matter of deliberation before the Tribunal presently are required to be intercepted and through the pumping station taken to the pipeline which is ultimately lead to Jajmau where the STPs are supposed to be operating.
It is also undisputed before us and as documents have been placed on record after physical inspection that the sewer line leading to Jajmau is nearly 72% non- functional. It is therefore necessary for the Tribunal to direct that the sewer lines leading from various parts of these 30 drains should be absolutely clean before any project before the Tribunal can be considered and agreed to, if at all. Unless that pipeline is cleared and is capable of handling the quantum of sewage and other waste that is to be carried to Jajmau STP, entire exercise would be futile and the project non-functional.
Therefore, we direct the Managing Director of Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam; Member Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board; Secretary, Irrigation Department of Uttar Pradesh; Commissioner, Kanpur Nagar Nigam cause to be cleaned the entire sewer line leading to Jajmau within three weeks from today. The Secretary, Urban Development, Uttar Pradesh Government shall be Chairman of the Committee. The said committee would 4 be authorised to get the work done through a specialised Item No. 30 to 35 agency, if they so desire in accordance with rule. April 20, 2017 We make it clear that the period of three weeks have ss been granted at the request of the Learned Counsel appearing for Nagar Nigam who took instructions from Mr. Ghanshyam Diwedi, Project Manager. The committee shall file compliance report to the Tribunal immediately on the expiry of three weeks.
We make it clear that not even any sludge, silt and other waste should remain in the sewer line leading from various sections to Jajmau. Compliance report be submitted as directed before the Tribunal. Sludge, silt removed from the pipeline shall be analysed, it will be seen whether it contain any hazardous and metallic substances. Depending upon the analysis reports, the Government of Uttar Pradesh shall identify the site where this sludge and waste shall be dumped. We make it clear that the dumping should be strictly in accordance with the relevant rules in face and should not cause any adverse effect on environment and public health. It is also requested that Drain No. 16 to 18 (Bhagwatdas/Guptarghat Nalla, Satti Chauraha an Dabka Nala-3) should be totally blocked at their end. All the drains would be sealed at the end of the pipe towards the river bank and if any waste at any time is found to be deposited between the point of interception and at the end of the drain, the same should be mechanically lifted and transported to the STPs.
5 List these matters tomorrow i.e. on 21st April, 2017. Item No. 30 to 35 April 20, 2017 ...........................................,CP (Swatanter Kumar) ss ...........................................,JM (Dr. Jawad Rahim) ...........................................,JM (Raghuvendra S. Rathore) ..........................................,EM (Bikram Singh Sajwan) ..........................................,EM (Dr. Ajay A. Deshpande) ..........................................,EM (Dr. Nagin Nanda) 6