National Green Tribunal
Mrs Neena S vs The Joint Chief Controller Of ... on 28 April, 2026
Item No.5:-
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Tuesday, the 28th day of April, 2026.
[Through Physical Hearing (Hybrid Option)]
Original Application No.127 of 2024 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
1) Mrs. Neena. S
No.23-9-744/3, Premier Aristo Apartment,
Flat No. 02, Ground Floor,
Mangaluru Thota Village, Mangaladevi,
Mangalore - 575 001.
2) Mrs. Vimala
No.23-9-754, Krishnappa Compound,
Mangaladevi, Mangalore - 575 001.
3) Mrs. Chitrarekha
No.23-9-753, Krishnappa Compound,
Mangaladevi, Mangalore - 575 001.
4) Mrs. Gunavathi
No.23-9-752, Krishnappa Compound,
Mangaladevi, Mangalore - 575 001.
5) Mrs. Shashikala
No.23-9-751, Krishnappa Compound,
Mangaladevi, Mangalore - 575 001.
...Applicant(s)
Versus
1) The Joint Chief Controller of Explosives
South Circle, Chennai,
Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organization (PESO),
A and D Wing, Block 1-8, 2nd Floor,
Shastri Bhawan,
No.26, Haddows Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai - 600 006.
2) The Commissioner of Police
Mangaluru City,
Near Police Training School,
Pandeshwar, Mangaluru,
Karnataka - 575 001.
3) The Senior Environmental Officer
Karnataka Pollution Control Board,
Plot No.10B, Parisara Bhavana,
Baikampady, Industrial Area,
Mangaluru - 575 011.
Page 1 of 10
4) The Chief Regional Manager
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,
Mangaluru Retail Regional Office,
First Floor, Deo Gratias Building,
Chilimbi, Urwa Stores,
Mangaluru - 575 006.
...Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): Mr. V.B.R. Menon.
For Respondent(s): Mr. A.R. Sakthivel for R1.
Mr. Rajat Jonathan Shaw represented
Mr. Darpan K.M. for R2.
Mr. Devraj Ashok for R3.
Mr. Abdul Saleem, Sr. Adv. a/w.
Mr. S. Saravanan for R4.
Mr. R. Thirunavukarasu for CPCB.
Judgement Reserved on: 19th March, 2026.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Smt. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Dr. PRASHANT GARGAVA, EXPERT MEMBER
JUDGMENT
Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member
1. The applicant ladies are the residents of the apartment and independent house, which are situated adjacent to the proposed Petroleum Pump - cum - Auto LPG Dispensing Station in Mangalore Thota Village, Dakshin Kannada District.
2. The applicants are seeking direction to permanently forebear the 4th Respondent, which is the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL), from commissioning and operating a new Petroleum Retail Outlet - cum - Auto LPG Dispensing Station, contending that the same is in gross violation of the siting criteria prescribed by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in its Office Memorandum (O.M.) dated 07.01.2020.
3. The applicants have alleged that the filling point, dispensing unit, and vent pipes to the petrol pump are situated within a distance of less than 20 meters from the adjacent Page 2 of 10 residential area, which is in violation of the siting criteria prescribed under O.M. dated 07.01.2020.
4. According to the applicants, the operation of the said outlet, involving handling and storing of inflammable petroleum products and auto LPG, results in emission of volatile organic compounds, resulting in air pollution and potential fire hazards, affecting the life and safety of the surrounding population. The 4th Respondent is said to have obtained the Final Explosive License on 28.03.2024 in Form XIV from the Competent Authority without adverting to the mandatory siting criteria and without conducting the requisite statutory enquiries under the provisions of the Petroleum Rules, 2002.
5. The applicants further alleged that the 2nd Respondent had issued the No Objection Certificate (NOC) to the 4th Respondent without conducting an enquiry under Rule 144 (5) of the Petroleum Rules on 02.09.2021, based on the application dated 14.09.2020. Hence, the Original Application is filed contending that the commissioning and operation of the Petroleum Retail Outlet is in gross violation of the siting criteria prescribed by the CPCB.
6. The Joint Chief Commissioner of Explosives, PESO (Respondent No.1), in his reply, has stated that, in the instant case, the local laws governing are the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1961, and the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act. Both the laws do not bar the establishment or running of a petrol pump in a commercial zone and commercially classified property. The Tahsildar of Mangalore Taluk Office had issued a certificate dated 27.03.2024 that Sy. No. 644/P1 of Mangalore Thota Village is classified as 'partly residential'. The Mangalore Urban Development Authority, in its order dated 14.07.2020, has converted the land for commercial purpose, and the said land falls under the 'commercial zone'. Prior approval for establishing the Petroleum Retail Outlet was granted to HPCL on 06.10.2020 as per the Petroleum Rules, 2002. The Commissioner of Police, Mangalore, also issued the NOC along with the layout drawing endorsed by him on 02.09.2021. While so, a complaint Page 3 of 10 dated 12.02.2024 was received from the residents of Premier Aristo Apartment Owners Association, alleging violation of the siting criteria prescribed by the CPCB, and the same was forwarded to HPCL seeking an explanation. The 4th Respondent/HPCL, in its reply dated 24.02.2024, has stated that the NOC issued on 02.09.2021 had duly considered the CPCB Guidelines and that there was no designated residential area within a 30-meter radius of the retail outlet. Further, HPCL had sent a communication dated 28.03.2024 reiterating the fact that the subject land falls within the 'commercial zone' as per the applicable local laws. Hence, there is no violation of the siting criteria.
7. The 1st Respondent also placed reliance on the order dated 15.02.2024 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 2095 of 2021, wherein it is held that, while granting prior site approval under Rule 131, the authorities are required to conduct due enquiry to satisfy compliance with the statutory requirements, and physical inspection may be undertaken wherever necessary. In compliance with the said requirements, the authorities had ensured that all the relevant documents were examined prior to the issuance of the license.
8. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB), which is the 3rd Respondent, in its reply, has stated that a complaint was received by them from the Aristo Apartment Owners Association on 21.02.2024, and an explanation was sought from HPCL. The KSPCB also inspected the subject petroleum retail outlet on 16.12.2025 and observed that there was no air or water pollution issue at the subject site and the outlet had also started dispensing CNG and there is no problem with the same being dispensed. The distance of residential units mentioned by the applicants is more than 30 meters away from the dispensing unit, vent pipe and decanting pipe of the subject petroleum retail outlet, as per the revised layout plan submitted by them.
Page 4 of 109. Upon directions from this Tribunal, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), though not a party to this proceeding, also filed its reply, stating that CPCB had issued the guidelines dated 07.01.2020 prescribing the siting criteria and environmental safeguards for new petrol pumps. With regard to CNG dispensing stations, it is stated that the Expert Committee, in its meeting held on 14.06.2022, examined the environmental impacts and noted that the fugitive methane emissions from CNG are primarily related to safety and leakages, which are governed by technical standards, safety guidelines, and regulations prescribed by the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB), Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organization (PESO), Oil Industries Safety Directorate (OISD), and other statutory bodies. CPCB also clarified, vide communication dated 18.07.2022, that separate environmental guidelines/siting criteria are not required for CNG Retail Outlets or Dispensing Stations and that adherence to safety and operational standards prescribed by the competent authority would be sufficient. CPCB further stated that the requirement of providing double wall tanks or concrete protection walls around the underground storage tanks in cases where petrol pumps are located within 50 to 100 meters from surface waterbodies was introduced vide addendum dated 16.08.2021 to the CPCB guidelines to prevent potential contamination of waterbodies. It is clarified that such measures are environmental safeguards, while broader safety considerations fall within the domain of agencies such as PESO and OISD.
10. The 4th Respondent, which is the Project Proponent (HPCL), in its reply, has stated that a newspaper advertisement dated 05.01.2018 was issued inviting applications for establishment of a company-owned company-operated (COCO) retail outlet at various locations in the State of Karnataka. Pursuant to the same, the subject site was identified on 31.07.2018 for establishment of the retail outlet. The 4 th Respondent had obtained all necessary statutory approvals and permissions for establishment of the retail outlet. The approvals include initial application for PESO license, initial approval for MS & HSD granted for the same layout submitted on 17.12.2018, and the NOC granted by the Commissioner of Police dated 02.09.2021.
Page 5 of 10The retail outlet has been constructed using modern and state-of- the-art technology, including underground storage tanks and a secure pipeline system design to prevent leakage, and all necessary safety measures were implemented in accordance with the applicable norms. The siting criteria prescribed by CPCB dated 07.01.2020 are not applicable to the present case, as the same is clarified by CPCB stating that the siting criteria shall not apply to retail outlets where prior PESO clearance or initial approval had been obtained and construction had commenced prior to 07.01.2020. In the present case, the initial license was granted for filling-cum-storage of CNG at the retail outlet on 30.10.2019 and the construction had commenced prior to the said date and therefore, the guidelines are not applicable. Further, the said layout is not situated in a residential area. The land in question has been validly converted for commercial purpose and the surrounding properties are also commercial establishments, including a restaurant and a conventional hall. Therefore, there is no violation of minimum distance requirements prescribed under the CPCB guidelines. All other approvals and licenses were granted by the competent authorities after due consideration. Therefore, the allegations of environmental pollution, fire hazard and safety risk are baseless, unfounded and not supported by any scientific evidence.
11. Additionally, the 4th Respondent (HPCL) also expressed willingness to undertake any additional safety measures as may be directed and the 4th Respondent is also ready to modify the site plan of the retail outlet and develop and establish an outlet in such a way that the plan accommodates a single island for MS/HSD facilities with vent pipe, fill pipe and dispensing unit at distances of 30.90 meters, 32 meters and 30.59 meters respectively from the nearby alleged residential building, in conformity with the CPCB Guidelines.
12. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the applicants as well as the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.
Page 6 of 1013. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the proposed Petroleum Retail Outlet - cum - Auto LPG Dispensing Station is in gross violation of the siting criteria prescribed by CPCB vide its O.M. dated 07.01.2020, as alleged by the applicants.
14. The subject project was initially conceived as a CNG storage and dispensing facility, for which PESO's license was granted on 30.10.2019 and the construction commenced before 07.01.2020. The said approval was limited in scope and did not include storage or dispensing of MS/HSD or Auto LPG. The NOC dated 02.09.2021 was issued subsequent to the coming into force of the CPCB siting criteria dated 07.01.2020. Therefore, the competent authority was required to examine compliance with the said guidelines at the time of granting the NOC. It is to be noted that the subject land has been converted into commercial use by the competent authority on 22.07.2020. Though the 4 th Respondent had contended that the site is situated in a 'commercial zone', the certificate of the Tahsildar dated 27.03.2024 indicates that the area is 'partly residential' and 'partly commercial'.
15. The 4th Respondent also relies on PESO's initial approval of 2019 and subsequent clarification by CPCB dated 29.01.2021 to state that the siting criteria are not applicable to the unit.
16. The applicants have contended that residential premises exist within close distance from the proposed outlet, raising concerns relating to safety and environmental impact. In this regard, KSPCB, upon inspection, has observed that the outlet is presently dispensing only CNG and no significant pollution issues were noticed. As per the revised layout, the distance from the nearby residential premises is stated to be more than 30 meters. CPCB has also clarified that no independent environmental siting criteria are prescribed for CNG outlets and such facilities are governed primarily by safety standards under the specialized statutory authorities. Introduction of petrol and diesel dispensing constitutes a distinct and higher-risk activity, necessitating Page 7 of 10 independent compliance with the CPCB Guidelines dated 07.01.2020, particularly when the NOC was granted in the year 2021.
17. It is also placed on record by the 4th Respondent that, without prejudice to their contentions, they have expressed willingness to modify the layout plan so as to comply with the CPCB requirements, indicating that the dispensing unit, vent pipe and decanting pipes can be located at distances of approximately 30.90 meters, 32 meters and 30.59 meters respectively from nearby residential structures. The grant of NOC dated 02.09.2021 does not reflect adequate and independent consideration of the CPCB siting criteria, especially in the context of mixed land use and proximity to residential structures, thereby rendering the decision-making process legally unsustainable.
18. Therefore, so far as the CNG dispensing operations are concerned, there are no violations of environmental norms, as CPCB has clarified that no separate siting criteria are prescribed and no adverse environmental impact has been demonstrated. So far as the petroleum retail outlet is concerned, the 4th Respondent has expressed willingness to revise the layout to maintain a distance of more than 30 meters and such proposal requires independent verification and approval by competent authorities and cannot be accepted merely on an undertaking given by HPCL.
19. Initially, PESO approval was obtained on 30.10.2019 and construction had commenced prior to the issuance of the said guidelines. It is evident from the records that the initial approval granted on 30.10.2019 is for the proposed CNG filling-cum- storage facilities and did not include MS/HSD or Auto LPG facilities. Therefore, the clarification by CPCB is only for CNG and cannot be extended to cover activities which were not originally approved. The NOC was granted on 02.09.2021 by the Commissioner of Police, i.e., subsequent to the coming into force of the CPCB guidelines dated 07.01.2020. The clarification dated 29.01.2021 by CPCB states that "the siting criteria for new retail outlets are to be complied with in cases where construction of retail outlets by oil marketing companies (OMC) commenced on or after Page 8 of 10 07.01.2020. In other words, the siting criteria will not apply to those cases where PESO's prior clearance/initial approval has been obtained and subsequently construction has been started by OMC before 07.01.2020".
20. Therefore, it is evident that the exemption as per the above clarification cannot be extended to activities that were not part of the original approval. The applicants have specifically contended that residential apartments and dwelling units exist within close proximity of the project site. As already held, it is within a partly commercial and partly residential zone. CPCB clarified that there are no separate guidelines for CNG outlets and they are governed only by safety standards. Therefore, there is no impediment to operating the CNG outlet. Nevertheless, so far as the petroleum retail outlet is concerned, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs. V.B.R. Menon & Ors. [2023 (7) SCC 368], if there is any breach of the guidelines issued by CPCB vide O.M. dated 07.01.2020, it is for the SPCBs concerned to proceed against the erring outlet. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced below:
"In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the Civil Appeal No.2039 of 2022 in the following terms:-
(a) The CPCB shall ensure that all the retail petroleum outlets located in different cities having population of more than 10 lakh and having turn over of more than 300 KL/Month shall install the VRS mechanism within the fresh timeline as prescribed in its Circular dated 04.06.2021. To put it in other words, the CPCB shall ensure that the directions issued by the NGT as contained in para 69(i) and (ii) of the impugned order is fully complied with. It shall be the legal obligation of all the State Pollution Control Boards to ensure that the directions issued by the NGT in regard to the installation of the VRS mechanism is complied with within the fresh timeline as prescribed by the CPCB.
(b) We set aside the directions issued by the NGT in the impugned order as contained in para 69(iii) and (iv). Instead, we direct the CPCB to instruct all the State Pollution Control Boards to ensure that the guidelines issued by it vide the Office Memorandum dated 07.01.2020 are strictly adhered to. If there is breach of any of the guidelines issued by the CPCB vide Office Memorandum dated 07.01.2020, then the concerned State Pollution Control Board shall proceed against the erring outlet in accordance with law at the earliest."Page 9 of 10
21. In that context, the Karnataka SPCB has already stated that the residential units mentioned by the applicants are more than 30 meters away from the dispensing unit, vent pipe and decanting pipe of the subject petroleum retail outlet, as per the revised plan submitted by the 4th Respondent (HPCL). Therefore, the applicants cannot have any objection, as the retail outlet is complying with the guidelines and norms of CPCB dated 07.01.2020.
22. In the result, as discussed above, there is no impediment for the continued operation of the CNG dispensing facility, as the same does not attract independent siting criteria under the CPCB guidelines and no violation of environmental norms has been established. Insofar as the proposed Petroleum Retail Outlet - cum - Auto LPG Dispensing Station is concerned, the same is required to strictly comply with the CPCB siting criteria dated 07.01.2020 and in view of the revised layout indicating maintenance of the prescribed distance of more than 30 meters from nearby residential structures and subject to verification and approval by the competent authorities, the applicants cannot sustain their objections.
23. Accordingly, the Original Application [O.A. No.127 of 2024 (SZ)] is rejected.
Sd/-
Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, JM Sd/-
Dr. Prashant Gargava, EM Internet - Yes/No All India NGT Reporter - Yes/No O.A. No.127/2024 (SZ) 28th April, 2026. Mn.
Page 10 of 10