National Green Tribunal
Mr Lalit Kumar R Shah vs Chennai Metro Rail Limited on 22 August, 2024
Author: Satyagopal Korlapati
Bench: Satyagopal Korlapati
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Thursday the 22nd of August, 2024
Original Application No. 175 of 2024 (SZ)
&
I.A. Nos. 80 and 81 of 2024(SZ)
(Through Video Conference)
IN THE MATTER OF
Mr. Lalit Kumar Shah,
(M/76 years)
No. 2c, Adeti Kunj Apartment,
Old No. 29, New No. 20, Balfour Road,
Chennai- 600 010.
...Applicant(s)
Versus
1. Chennai Metro Rail Limited,
Represented by MD
No. 327, Anna Salai, Nandanam,
Chennai- 600 035.
2. Tata Projects Limited,
Represented by MD,
One Boulevard Street,
Lake Boulevard Road,
Powai, Mumbai- 400076.
3. Central Pollution Control Board,
Rep by its Member Secretary,
Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun Nagar,
Delhi- 110032.
4. The District Collector,
Foruth Floor,
M. Singaravelar Maaligai,
62, Rajaji Salai, Chennai Collectorate,
Chennai- 600 001.
5. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority,
Represented by Commissioner,
Thalamuthu-Natarajan Maaligai,
No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road,
Egmore, Chennai- 600 008.
...Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): M/s Shah and Shah, Mr. M. Murthy,
Mr. T. Vardhaman Jain, Dilip Kumar.
For Respondent(s): Mrs. Rita Chandrasekhar for R1.
Mr. Sri Ganesh for R2.
Mrs. Revathi Manivannan for R3.
Dr.D. Shanmuganathan for R4.
1
Mrs. Veena Suresh for R5
Judgment Reserved on: 2nd August, 2024.
CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
JUDGMENT
Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member
1. The applicant who is septuagenarian living with his sister, who is also a senior citizen, at Balfour Road, Chennai-10. In the said area the Chennai Metro Rail Limited (CMRL) Phase-II, corridor-III is being constructed.
2. The applicant has alleged that the work is being carried on even during the night hours which disturb the sleep of the elderly in the area. It is alleged that since the construction is carried on at a distance of 02 to 03 m from their building, the dB (A) is more than 200 in the daytime and in the night time it is much more. According to him the construction is being carried on in a silence zone area which is violation of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000.
3. It is further alleged that the activity of the respondent is in violation of the notification issued by the Central Pollution Control Board which is issued in the interest of the general public based on the ruling of the National Green Tribunal. The applicant also has alleged that the distance between the station at Purasawalkam High Road and the Balfour Road is only less than 750m. Therefore, unless it is minimum of 750m distance, station should not be constructed. 2
4. The Balfour road being predominantly a residential area and also a silence zone due to location of educational institutions, places of worship, hospital and clinics, the activity should not be permitted. As the huge machinery are put to use, it is compulsory and mandatory to use acoustic barriers.
5. On the above grounds, a direction is sought for to the CMRL and the 2nd respondent, Tata Project Limited, to stop forthwith all the construction activity at the Balfour road. In support of the applicant‟s case, the Learned Counsel M/s. Shah & Shah, Mr. M. Murthy, Mr. T. Vardhaman Jain and Mr. Dilip Kumar appearing for the applicant had relied on the following documents.
6. Annexure-1 is a legal notice issued to the Managing Director, CMRL by the applicant on 22.08.2023 calling upon forthwith to stop all the activities of construction of underground station at Balfour road. Annexure-2- Once again on 26.10.2023 a legal notice was sent to the CMRL and the 2nd respondent to abandon the metro station under the Balfour road which is named as Kellys Junction in the project report. Annexure-3-Yet another notice was issued on 13.11.2023 through their Advocate to the CMRL, 2nd respondent and the Chief Secretary, Tamil Nadu not to carry out any activity and not to make any noise in the night hours from 10:00 PM to 07:00 AM.
Annexure-4 is also another legal notice sent by the applicant to the CMRL.
Annexure-5 is the reply to the legal notice by the 2nd respondent wherein it is stated that the 2nd respondent, Tata Project Limited is contractor for CMRL for construction of 04 underground stations at Otteri, Pattalam, Perambur Barracks Road and Kellys and works other than Diaphragm wall of two underground stations at Ayanavaram and 3 Purasaiwakkam station. The 2nd respondent has stated that all the requisite permissions, permits and the approvals were obtained by them as per the terms of the contract so as to commence the execution activities at the site of the project. All such permissions, permits and approvals are valid and in currency. The 2nd respondent has set down the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) in compliance with the guidelines set out in CMRL‟s requirements under the contract and it is obliged to follow the SOPs while carrying out its activities and to keep the noise pollution level and air pollution level within the prescribed limits. Accordingly, it is stated the mechanical equipments like trench cutter, cranes and other tools such as sledgehammer used while erecting or dismantling of barricade and from other activities like unloading of concrete are all within permissible limit. Additional dust from these works is also controlled by sprinkling water on daily basis. Though, lights were used at the project site on a temporary basis to illuminate the work area for carrying out the utility identification works they have been removed upon completion of the said activity. The road closures/diversions have been planned in consultation with the concerned authorities namely, Greater Chennai Traffic Police. The other works related to the utilities like water supply, sewerage, electrical and BSNL in extensive consultation with the utility agencies. The utility diversions were carried out only after obtaining necessary approvals including approval for shutdown by engaging approved contractors.
As the project is of national importance the CMRL has taken up these works to provide accessibility to reach out to all corners of the city within a short time.
4
7. In response to the above reply in Annexure-5, Annexure-6 legal notice was once again issued on 09.02.2024. Wherein the applicant has stated that when Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) which is in existence from 2002 onwards is running under loss. This only gives an idea that the policy makers in the country do not have real experience nor they work on real data but for getting benefit to somebody they adopt data which is not in reality or they simply endorse someone‟s project which is not meant for the benefit of public but benefit for few people. It is also stated in the said notice that even CMRL phase-I is concerned, the report submitted before the Standing Committee of the Parliament for the Ministry of the Housing and Urban Affairs that there is a huge gap between the present use of metro rail and the breakeven point for the CMRL phase-I which was put up by spending the tax payers money.
8. He has also alleged that the 2nd respondent and their employees have no knowledge about NAAQs related to the Clean Air Act, or the Noise Pollution Rules which are notified under the Environment Protection Act or the Indian Road Congress Guidelines for roads and pedestrian pavements.
9. Annexure-7 is once again a legal notice dated 22.02.2024 which does not bear the signature would state that huge vibration accompanied by noise, the inmates of the apartment of the applicant face danger to the life and their health. It is further stated that the construction activities are using machines during the night time also which is not legal. Hence once again called upon the CMRL and the 2nd respondent to stop the construction.
10. Learned Counsel, Mrs. Rita Chandresekhar, who appeared for the CMRL submitted that the 2nd respondent is not using trench cutter and 5 other tools such as sledgehammer during the night hours. Even when they are put to use they are all within the permissible limit. The dust pollution is also under control as the project proponent is sprinkling water on daily basis.
11. In the application it is stated that the respondent have failed to consider their own report which states that "modeling result shows that noise level meets the Ambient Noise Quality Standards 55 dB (A) at a distance of about 900 m." This means if the construction is carried on at a distance of 2-3 meters from the building, then the dBA will be more than 200 dBA and in night time it will be even more than 200 dBA and he states that it is carried out in a silence zone area which is in violation of Noise Control Rules, 2000.
12. „Silence Zone‟ is defined in Rule 3 (v) of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 which reads as follows:
"an area comprising not less than 100 metres around hospitals, educational institution and courts may be declared by the State Government as silence area/zone for the purpose of these rules. Provided that an area shall not fall under silent area/zone category unless notified by the State Government in accordance with Sub-Rule (2)".
Whether the Balfour road where the applicant lives is declared as „Silence Zone‟ by the State Government is not supported by any order or rule by the applicant.
13. Rule 5(A)(3) states "sound emitting construction equipment shall not be used or operated during night time in residential areas and silence zones". As per the above, the complaint of the applicant is, the sound emitted by the construction equipment used by the 2nd respondent is causing noise pollution in the residential area which according to him is a silence area. If that is so, the applicant should have approached the appropriate authority giving the complaint as per Section 7 of the 6 Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. The „Authority‟ is defined under Section 2(C) of the Rules which is as follows:
"Authority means any authority or officer authorised by the Central Government, or as the case may be, the State Government in accordance with the laws in force and includes a District Magistrate, Police Commissioner, or any other officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police designated for the maintenance of the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise under any law for the time being in force."
14. From the application or from the annexure filed along with that it appears that applicant has not filed any complaint before the authority complaining about the exceedance of the Ambient Noise Standards in violation of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the applicant to approach the appropriate authority to make is complaint of violation of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 by the 1 st and 2nd respondent.
15. If the applicant makes any such complaint to the authority, the authority may consider the same.
16. In view of the above, the Original Application is disposed of.
17. In view of the disposal of the O.A. No. 175 of 2024, I.A. Nos. 80 and 81 of 2024 also stand disposed of.
............................................................J.M. (Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana) .......................................E.M. (Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati) Internet - Yes/No All India NGT Reporter - Yes/No O.A. No.175/2024(SZ)& I.A. Nos. 80 and 81/2024(SZ) 22nd August, 2024. (AM) 7 Before the National Green Tribunal Southern Zone (Chennai) O.A. No. 175 of 2024 (SZ) & I.A. Nos. 80 and 81/2024(SZ) Mr. Lalit Kumar Shah Vs. Chennai Metro Rail Limted & Ors.
O.A No.175/2024(SZ)& I.A. Nos. 80 and 81/2024(SZ) 22nd August, 2024. (AM) 8