National Green Tribunal
Harishchandra Goel vs Midc on 27 May, 2022
Item No. 01 (Pune Bench)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE
(By Video Conferencing)
Org. Application No. 52/2022(WZ)
Jyoti Industries Applicant(s)
Versus
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation
Amravati & Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 27.05.2022.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant(s): Ms. Ishwari Pande, Advocate a/w
Mr. Anirodha Mishtra, Advocate
ORDER
1. This Application has been moved under Section 18(1) read with Sections 14 and 15 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with a prayer that it be declared that the resolution dated 04.11.2020 would adversely impact environment and that Respondent No.1 and his agents, successors- in-interest, authorised personnel or any person claiming or acting through him may be restrained from altering the nature of such property (Plot No.OS-2/1), Amravati Industrial Area, village Jewad, taluka Amravati, district Amravati) from open space for plantation to industrial land and it is further prayed that Notices dated 08.10.2022 and 11.4.2022 issued by Respondent No.1 be declared illegal and violative of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the rules framed thereunder. Further, it is prayed that the actions of Respondent No.1 in passing resolution dated 04.11.2020 regarding converting the said property into industrial use be declared null and void and also violative of the circulations dated 19.08.2019 and 05.10.2020 issued by MIDC.
1
2. The facts in brief in this case are that the Applicant is a duly registered partnership firm which is running the business of soap manufacturing and that their factory is situated in plot No. W-16-A and P, MIDC, Amravati. The Applicant and Respondent No.1 executed a registered lease-deed bearing registration No.3602/2016 for the period of five years in favour of Applicant for the purpose of tree plantation, and gardening and beautification upon the said plot. After taking over the possession the Applicant commenced plantation drive as per specification and rules laid down by the Respondent No.1 as well as in accordance with the terms and conditions laid down in the said lease agreement. In the meantime, a circular was issued by MIDC stating that conversion of open space land wherein plantation has taken place to industrial land cannot be done. Subsequent circular dated 05.10.2020, emphasizes on the creation of 'oxygen generator' in the MIDC industrial area. The Respondent without any cogent reasons issued Notice dated 8.10.2020 to the Applicant alleging that the Applicant has not carried out any plantation upon the said plot and sought possession of the same back and it was further stated that the Applicant has violated essential terms and conditions of the lease agreement.
3. It is in this backdrop, the above reliefs have been prayed for. From the averments made above, we find that there is dispute between the Applicant and Respondent No.1 relating to violation of terms and conditions of the lease executed between them. According to the Applicant some plantation work is done by them which prima facie has been proved by annexing the details at page No.73 to 75, of the kind of plantation which has been done by them there and also drawing our attention to page No.77 which is payment of remuneration for the plantation survey i.e. amount of Rs.5000/-.
4. Learned Counsel for the Applicant has tried to get this dispute covered under the Environmental laws by referring to Section 7 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 which is as follows: 2
" Section 7 in The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 7 Persons carrying on industry, operation, etc., not to allow emission or discharge of environmental pollutants in excess of the standards. --No person carrying on any industry, operation or process shall discharge or emit or permit to be discharged or emitted any environmental pollutant in excess of such standards as may be prescribed."
5. We are not convinced with the arguments raised by the learned Counsel for the Applicant and it clearly appears from the pleadings that it is private dispute between two parties relating to violation of the terms and conditions of the lease deed stated above. Whole grievance of the Applicant admittedly is that whatever plantation has been done by them should not allowed to felled because that would lead to environmental degradation, to that extent the arguments have some force. Therefore, we are disposing of this Application with direction that Respondent No.1 shall not cut any trees which have been planted by the Applicant on the above mentioned land without prior permission from the concerned authority.
The Application is disposed of accordingly.
Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM May 27, 2022.
Original Application No. 52/2022 (WZ)HK 3