National Green Tribunal
Shallesh Singh vs Hotel Holiday Regency on 25 February, 2022
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
NEW DELHI
_______________________________________________
Original Application No. 176/2015
(M.A. No. 107/2019 & I.A. No. 199/2020)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Shailesh Singh
S/o Mr. Babu Singh
G-109, Preet Vihar, Delhi-110092 Applicant
Verses
1. Hotel Holiday Regency
Nh-24, Moradabad,
Uttar Pradesh-244001
2. Hotel Clark Awadh
8, Mahatma Gandhi Marg,
Near Parivartan Chowk, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh-226001
3. Hotel Country INN
64/6, Sahibabad Industrial Area,
Near Vaishali Metro Station,
Sahibabad, Ghaziabad,
Uttar Pradesh-201010
4. Hotel Radisson Blu
H-3, Sector 14, Kaushambi,
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201010
5. Hotel Sunshine Park
D-1, Chander Nagar, Near Anand Vihar Railway
Terminal, Ghaziabad,
Uttar Pradesh-201011
6. Chief Secretary
Uttar Pradesh Government,
Lucknow-226010
7. Principal Secretary, Nagar Vikas, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh
Bapu Bhawan, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh-226010
8. District Magistrate
Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh-244001
9. District Magistrate
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226001
1
10. District Magistrate
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201010
11. Chairman/Secretary
Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (UPPCB)
"Pick-up Bhawan" IIIrd Floor, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh-226010
12. Chairman/Secretary
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)
"Parivesh Bhawan" East Arjun Nagar, Shahdara,
Delhi-110032
13. Ground Water Department, Uttar Pradesh
Bhujal Bhavan, Sector-B, Sitapur Road Yojna,
Ram Ram Bank Chauraha, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh-226021
14. Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA)
West Block-2, Wings 3,
RK Puram, Sector-1
New Delhi-110066
Respondent(s)
Counsel for Respondent(s):
Mr. A.K. Prasad, Advocate for CGWA
Mr. Pradeep Misra & Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advocates for UPPCB
Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate for CPCB
PRESENT:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE PROF. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
Reserved on: 19th January, 2022
Pronounced and uploaded on: 25th February, 2022
JUDGMENT
BY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. This Original Application (hereinafter referred to as 'OA') was filed by Shailesh Singh raising grievance that certain hotels namely; Hotel Holiday Regency at NH-24, Moradabad, Hotel Clark Awadh, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Near Parivartan Chowk, Lucknow, Hotel Country INN, Sahibabad District Ghaziabad, Hotel Radisson Blu, Kaushambi, 2 Ghaziabad, Hotel Sunshine Park, Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad are extracting ground water for the purpose of commercial activities without having any permission from Central Ground Water Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'CGWA') and thereby degrading ground water table, contaminating ground water and causing damage irreparable to the environment. He alleged that out of five names given above, four are five- star hotels and their consumption of fresh water is very large which is being satisfied by illegal withdrawal of ground water. This action is in collusion and connivance of the statutory regulators including CGWA and Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (hereinafter referred to as 'UPPCB') officials who have not taken effective action against them. These hotels are impleaded as respondents 1 to 5 in the OA.
2. The OA was heard on 26.05.2015 and Tribunal issued notices to the parties. Respondents 11 to 14 were also directed to carryout inspection of the premises of respondents 1 to 5 and file status report particularly, in regard to the breaches committed by them as alleged by the applicant.
3. Joint inspections were conducted and reports were filed by UPPCB on 21.09.2015. The brief inspection report stated as under:
Sr. Name of Hotel Observations/deficiencies
No.
1. Hotel Holiday Regency i. 01 No. of Borewell with
meter
ii. No permission for
installation of borewell
2. Hotel Clark Awadh i. 3 Nos. of borewells
ii. No permission from CGWA
3. Hotel Country Inn & Suits i. 02 Nos. of borewell
by Carlson ii. CGWA permission for 01
borewell only
4. Hotel Radisson Blu i. Water supply from
Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam
ii. 01 borewell
iii. No permission from CGWA
iv. The borewell was found
disconnected at the time of
inspection and report says
3
that as per the information
of hotel authorities, borewell
was not in use
5. Hotel Sunshine Park i. Water supply line of
Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam
ii. No borewell
4. The inspection report of Hotel Holiday Regency was considered on 27.01.2016 wherein Tribunal also found that looking to the extraction of heavy quantity of ground water to the extent of 650-700 KLD, installation of 55 KLD STP was not sufficient to meet the effluent generated and it shows that hotel was violating other environmental norms also. Tribunal required it to show-cause as to why environmental compensation be not imposed. Tribunal also directed for personal presence of respondent 2 i.e. Hotel Clark Awadh.
5. The matter came up on various dates to consider the issue of extraction of ground water as also treatment of discharge. On 23.12.2016, Tribunal observed that respondents 1 to 3 have confirmed that their water source was running on ground water, respondent 5 was having separate water connection from Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam and respondent 4 has both i.e., ground water and also water supply from Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam. Tribunal required the parties to submit a chart giving details of water consumed per day in relation to standard utilities in respect of water. A similar issue was raised by applicant-Shailesh Singh in respect to some other hotels including, Hotel Oberoi Amarvilas in OA No. 484/2015, Shailesh Singh vs. Hotel the Oberoi Amarvilas & Ors. Hence, both the matters were tagged together. In the meantime, counter affidavit dated 22.07.2015 was filed by CGWA i.e. respondent 14 stating that none of the five hotels in OA No. 176/2015 have permission for drawing ground water from CGWA. The respondent hotels in OA No. 176/2015 also filed their responses but with regard to inspection report, the findings contained 4 therein could not be shown to be incorrect. However, respondents 1 to 3 pointed out that they have subsequently applied for NOC from CGWA. Respondent 1 also said that it has installed ETP with the capacity of 1 KLD per hour. Both the above matters were considered on 28.08.2018 and Tribunal in para 15 observed as under:
"15. The above resume of facts shows that inspite of undisputed need for a proper framework for regulating the groundwater especially in the areas where the capacity of recharging is less than the capacity of the water consumed or which are categorized as over exploited, critical or semi-critical, there is no satisfactory framework to ensure rational use of groundwater. To this extent, mandate of direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is clearly violated. There is no method of assessment of the capacity of the water to be used or for recovery of charges to ensure that the water is not wasted, regulation of the uses to which the groundwater should be put for ensuring reuse of treated water atleast for certain purposes."
6. Thereafter, Tribunal referred to the order dated 26.07.2018 passed in OA No. 59/2012, Vikrant Kumar Tongad v. Union of India & Ors. and issued direction to Ministry of Water Resources (hereinafter referred to as 'MoWR') in consultation with Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (hereinafter referred to as 'MoEF&CC') and Ministry of Agriculture to forthwith review the existing mechanism so as to ensure effective steps for conserving the ground water at least in areas which are over exploited, critical and semi-critical.
7. Issue of extraction of ground water was involved in various other matters and later all those matters were listed together. Vide order dated 03.01.2019, the present OA along with some others were disposed of. Tribunal considered the efficacy of Guidelines published and tested on the 'Precautionary' principle, 'Sustainable Development' as well as 'Inter- generational Equity' and held it unsustainable in law. MoEF&CC and MoWR were required to prepare fresh Guidelines. Relevant extract of the order from para 19 to 32 read as under:
5
"19. Mr. Panjwani, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for some of the applicants, submitted that the MoWR has clearly acted contrary to the mandate of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M.C Mehta (Supra) as well as orders of this Tribunal requiring regulation of ground water, particularly for the OCS areas. The CGWA cannot surrender its responsibility on the ground that the States which had their own regulation need not be regulated by CGWA. In, the revised guidelines, the situation has been made worst by liberalizing the regime of control against extraction of ground water in OCS areas even for commercial/industrial purposes. There is no study undertaken of the likely impact for such liberalization on the ground water resources and there is no projected estimation as to how the revised policy will result in better conservation of ground water which is necessary for compliance of the Precautionary Principle, Sustainable Development Principle as well as Inter-generational Equity Principles. It seems that the revised policy is a sort of knee jerk reaction in response to observations of this Tribunal. It appears that MoWR has not undertaken any strength, weakness, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis to ascertain the weaknesses of old policy and the threat scenarios it offers. It is silent on robust institutional mechanism on surveillance and monitoring of its ground implementation. It rather abdicates its authority in form of delegation to field units without any checks and balances to regulate ground water extraction, on scientific lines and environmentally sustainable manner. Despite stating that the guidelines shall be applicable Pan-
India, the notification does not cover the States of Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, West Bengal, Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and the UT of Delhi. The serious flaws pointed out are:
i. Liberally permitting extraction of ground water and justifying the same on the plea that charges have been prescribed even in OCS areas for commercial/industrial purposes.
ii. Liberally permitting extraction of ground water on the ground that condition was imposed for rain water harvesting without any data of effective compliance of such conditions or even possibility of this being done.
iii. Having exempted categories in OCS areas for purposes other than drinking water, including swimming pools, commercial and industrial uses. Reference has been made to the statistics to show deteriorating status of conservation of water and crises of access to water being available to the common man, as well as its requirement for ensuring e-flow in the rivers.
20. It is clear from the above that, rather than laying down stricter norms for extraction of ground water for commercial purposes and putting in place a robust institutional mechanism for surveillance and monitoring, extraction of ground water has been liberalized adding to the crisis unmindful of the ground situation and likely impact it will have on environment. No data has been furnished to justify the policy reversal by way of uncontrolled liberalized drawal of groundwater in OCS areas.6
21. The provisions of the impugned notification show that drawal of ground water has been, for all practical purposes, made unregulated in all areas, including the OCS areas.
22. The so called regulation is illusory. The so called conditions are incapable of meaningful monitoring, as shown by past experience also.
23. The water conservation fee virtually gives licence to harness ground water to any extent even in OCS areas.
24. There is no institutional mechanism to monitor removal and replenishment of ground water.
25. Delegation provision is virtual abdication of authority.
26. There is no check on injection of pollutants in the ground water in the impugned notification. There is no provision with regard to check on water quality and its remediation, if there is contamination.
27. We are satisfied that the Notification dated 12.12.2018 tested on the Precautionary Principle, Sustainable Development as well as Inter-generational Equity Principles is unsustainable in law and instead of conservation of ground water which is necessary for providing access to drinking water in OCS areas, as well also other needs of environment, including sustenance of rivers and other water bodies, it will result in fast depletion of ground water and damage to water bodies and will be destructive of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
28. Accordingly, the impugned Notification may not be given effect to in view of serious shortcomings as pointed above so that an appropriate mechanism can be introduced consistent with the needs of environment.
29. The MoEF&CC is directed to constitute an Expert Committee by including representatives from IIT Delhi, IIT Roorkee, IIM Ahmedabad, CPCB, NITI Ayog and any other concerned agency or department to examine the issue of appropriate policy for conservation of ground water with a robust institutional mechanism for surveillance and monitoring with a view to enhance access to ground water for drinking purposes in OCS areas by way of appropriate replenishment practices which can be properly accounted and measured for as well as to sustain the floodplains of rivers in terms of e-flows and other water bodies. The MoEF&CC and MoWR may finalize the issue of subject remain inter-se with regard to ground water reserve and its quality.
30. The Committee may be constituted in two weeks and report of the Committee may be furnished to the MoEF&CC and this Tribunal in two months by e-mail at [email protected].
31. The Committee may also indicate the projection of its impact study in light of projected data for the next 50 years (in phased manner with action plan for each decade). Thereafter, fresh guidelines be issued by the concerned Ministry and the report furnished to the Tribunal on or before 30.04.2019.7
32. The CPCB may constitute a mechanism to deal with individual cases of violations of norms, as existed prior to Notification of 12.12.2018, to determine the environment compensation to be recovered or other coercive measures to be taken, including prosecution, for past illegal extraction of ground water, as per law. All the matters relating to illegal extraction of ground water by individuals are disposed of with these directions."
8. In purported compliance of the above directions, Ministry of Jal Shakti, after referring to earlier orders and order dated 20.07.2020, passed by Tribunal, issued a fresh notification dated 24.09.2020, published in Gazette of India (Extraordinary), dated 24.09.2020, laying down Guidelines to regulate and control ground water extraction in India, in supersession of all earlier Guidelines issued by CGWA (hereinafter referred to as 'Guidelines 2020'). These Guidelines have come into force from the date of publication in the Gazette i.e., 24.09.2020. It further says that Guidelines shall have PAN-India applicability.
9. Guidelines 2020 says that ground water abstraction in States/UTs (which are not regulating ground water abstraction) shall continue to be regulated by CGWA. Further, wherever States/UTs have come out with their own ground water abstraction Guidelines, which are inconsistent with the CGWA Guidelines, the provisions of CGWA Guidelines will prevail.
However, in case, Guidelines followed by such States/UTs contain some more stringent provisions than CGWA Guidelines, such provisions may also be given effect to, by the States/UTs Authorities, in addition to those contained in the CGWA Guidelines. States may be at liberty to suggest additional conditions/criteria based on the local hydro-geological situations which shall be reviewed by CGWA/Ministry of Jal Shakti, Government of India before acceptance. All new/existing industries, industries seeking expansion, infrastructure projects and mining projects abstracting ground water, unless specifically exempted under para 1.0 below, will be required to seek NOC from CGWA, or, the concerned 8 State/UT Ground Water Authority, as the case may be. Guidelines 2020 said that water management plans shall be prepared by all State Ground Water Authorities/Organizations for all over-exploited, critical and semi- critical assessment units, starting with over-exploited units.
10. Para 1.0 of Guidelines 2020 deals with exemptions from seeking NOC. It is more or less similar to the earlier exemption clause contained in the preceding Guidelines, with a solitary difference that this time industrial units in the category of Micro and Small Enterprises drawing less than 10 cum/day, are added in the category of exempted categories. It says:
"1.0 Exemptions from seeking No Objection Certificate:
Following categories of consumers shall be exempted from seeking No Objection Certificate for ground water extraction:
(i) Individual domestic consumers in both rural and urban areas for drinking water and domestic uses.
(ii) Rural drinking water supply schemes.
(iii) Armed Forces Establishments and Central Armed Police Forces establishments in both rural and urban areas.
(iv) Agricultural activities.
(v) Micro and small Enterprises drawing ground water less than 10 cum/day."
11. For Drinking & domestic use for Residential apartments/Group housing societies/Government water supply agencies in urban areas, procedure for NOC is provided in para 2.0. It says that for new and existing wells, where Government water supply agency is unable to supply requisite amount of water in the area, NOC shall be granted, subject to following specific conditions:
"i) Installation of Sewage Treatment Plants shall be mandatory for all residential apartments/ Group Housing Societies where ground water requirement is more than 20 m3/day. The water from Sewage Treatment Plants shall be utilized for toilet flushing, car washing, gardening etc.
ii) The No Objection Certificate shall be valid for a period of five years from the date of issue or till such time local Government water supply is provided to the project area, whichever is earlier.
In case the project proponent receives water supply from the concerned local Government Water Supply Agency during the 9 validity of the No Objection Certificate, intimation regarding availability of public water supply shall be sent by the project proponent to CGWA and No Objection Certificate will be cancelled by the Authority. In other cases, the project proponent will apply for renewal of No Objection Certificate, ninety days before the expiry of No Objection Certificate.
iii) Proponents shall be liable to pay ground water abstraction charges for the quantum of ground water proposed to be extracted, as per rates mentioned in Table 5.1."
12. Vide para 3.0, Agriculture sector was exempted from obtaining NOC for ground water extraction. For commercial use, para 4.0 of Guidelines, 2020, says that no new major industry shall be granted NOC in over- exploited assessment areas except as per the policy Guidelines.
13. Para 4.1 deals with the case of industrial use and says that in over- exploited assessment units, NOC shall not be granted for ground water abstraction to any new industry except those falling in the category of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (hereinafter referred to as 'MSME'). However, an exception has been provided for grant of NOC for drinking/domestic use for work force, green belt use by these new industries. Expansion of existing industries involving increase in quantum of ground water abstraction in over-exploited assessment units shall not be permitted. NOC shall not be granted to new packaged water industries in over-exploited areas, even if they belong to MSME category. Thereafter, certain specific conditions have been mentioned for grant of NOC to industries, and the same are as under-
"i) No Objection Certificate shall be granted only in such cases where local government water supply agencies are not able to supply the desired quantity of water.
ii) All industries shall be required to adopt latest water efficient technologies so as to reduce dependence on ground water resources.
iii) All industries abstracting ground water in excess of 100 m3/d shall be required to undertake annual water audit through Confederation of Indian Industries (CII)/ Federation Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)/ National 10 Productivity Council (NPC) certified auditors and submit audit reports within three months of completion of the same to CGWA.
All such industries shall be required to reduce their ground water use by at least 20% over the next three years through appropriate means.
iv) Construction of observation well(s) (piezometer)(s) within the premises and installation of appropriate water level monitoring mechanism as mentioned in Section 15 shall be mandatory for industries drawing/ proposing to draw more than 10 m3/day of ground water and. Monitoring of water level shall be done by the project proponent. The piezometer (observation well) shall be constructed at a minimum distance of 15 m from the bore well/production well. Depth and aquifer zone tapped in the piezometer shall be the same as that of the pumping well/wells. Detailed guidelines for design and construction of piezometers are given in Annexure II. Monthly water level data shall be submitted to the CGWA through the web portal.
v) The proponent shall be required to adopt roof top rain water harvesting/recharge in the project premises. Industries which are likely to pollute ground water (chemical, pharmaceutical, dyes, pigments, paints, textiles, tannery, pesticides/insecticides, fertilizers, slaughter house, explosives etc.) shall store the harvested rain water in surface storage tanks for use in the industry.
vi) Injection of treated/untreated waste water into aquifer system is strictly prohibited.
vii) Industries which are likely to cause ground water pollution e.g. Tanning, Slaughter Houses, Dye, Chemical/ Petrochemical, Coal washeries, other hazardous units etc. (as per CPCB list) need to undertake necessary well head protection measures to ensure prevention of ground water pollution (Annexure III).
viii) All industries drawing ground water in safe, semi-
critical and critical assessment units shall be required to pay ground water abstraction charges as applicable as per Tables 5.2 A and 5.3 A.
ix) All existing industries drawing ground water in over-
exploited assessment units shall be liable to pay ground water restoration charges as applicable as per Tables 5.2 B and 5.3 B."
14. The documents to be submitted along with application for grant of NOC, included an IAR, which was made mandatory, where abstraction of ground water proposed is in excess of 100 m3/day in over-exploited, critical and semi-critical areas. The aforesaid report shall be on the ground 11 water regime and also socio-economic impacts to be prepared by accredited consultants.
15. In respect of mining projects, Para 4.2 says that there is no restriction on grant of NOC even in over-exploited areas. It reads as under:
"All existing as well as new mining projects will be required to obtain No Objection Certificate for ground water abstraction. Since mining projects are location specific, there will be no ban on grant of No Objection Certificate for abstraction of ground water for such projects in over-exploited assessment units."
16. However, specific conditions attached for issue of NOC for mining projects are provided in para 4.2, as under:
"i) It shall be mandatory for all the mining industries to ensure that water available from de-watering operations is properly treated and should be gainfully utilized for supply for irrigation, dust suppression, mining process, recharge in downstream and for maintaining e-flows in the river system.
ii) Construction of observation well(s) (piezometers) along the periphery in the premises, for monthly ground water level monitoring, shall be mandatory for mines drawing/ proposing to draw more than 10 m3/day of ground water. Depth and aquifer zone tapped in the piezometer shall be commensurate with that of pumping well/wells.
iii) In addition, the proponent shall monitor ground water levels by establishing observation wells (piezometers) in the core and buffer zones as specified in the No Objection Certificate.
iv) In case of coal and other base metal mining the project proponent shall use the advance dewatering technology (by construction of series of dewatering abstraction structures) to avoid contamination of surface water.
v) In addition to this, all mining units shall also monitor the water quality of mine seepage and mine discharge through NABL accredited/ Govt. approved laboratories and the same shall be submitted at the time of self-compliance.
vi) All mining projects drawing ground water in safe, semi-critical and critical assessment units shall be required to pay ground water abstraction charges as applicable as per Tables 5.4 A.
vii) All mining projects drawing ground water in over-exploited assessment units shall be liable to pay ground water restoration charges as per Table 5.4 B."12
17. The documents required to be submitted along with application for NOC in respect of a mining project, include, besides mining plan approved by the concerned Authorities and proposals for rain water harvesting/recharge within the premises, a comprehensive report, made mandatory vide clause(c), which reads as under:
"(c) Comprehensive report prepared by accredited consultant on ground water conditions in both core and buffer zones of the mine, depth wise and year wise mine seepage calculations, impact assessment of mining and dewatering on ground water regime and its socio-economic impact, details of recycling, reuse and recharge, reduction of pumping with use of technology for mining and water management to minimize and mitigate the adverse impact on ground water, based on local conditions.
Format for report is given in Annexure V."
18. In Para 4.3 of Guidelines 2020, issue of NOC to infrastructure project has been dealt with. Here, it is said that since infrastructure projects are location specific, grant of NOC to such projects located in over- exploited assessment units shall not be banned. It reads as under:
"4.3 Infrastructure projects:
Since infrastructure projects are location specific, grant of No Objection Certificate to such projects located in over- exploited assessment units shall not be banned. New infrastructure projects/residential buildings may require dewatering during construction activity and/or use ground water for construction. In both cases, applicants shall seek No Objection Certificate from CGWA before commencement of work. However, in over-exploited assessment units, use of ground water for construction activity shall be permitted only if no treated sewage water is available within 10 km radius of the site. New as well as existing Infrastructure projects shall also be required to seek No Objection Certificate for abstraction of ground water."
19. However, it is also provided in para 4.3 that no NOC shall be granted for extraction of groundwater for water parks, theme parks and amusement parks in over-exploited assessment units. Thereafter, specific conditions for grant of NOC for ground water abstraction in infrastructure projects are provided, in para 4.3 in clauses (i) to (v), as under:
"i) In case of infrastructure projects that require dewatering, proponent shall be required to carry out regular monitoring of 13 dewatering discharge rate (using a digital water flow meter) and submit the data through the web portal to CGWA/SGWA as applicable. Monitoring records and results should be retained by the proponent for two years, for inspection or reporting as required by CGWA/SGWA.
ii) Installation of Sewage Treatment Plants (STP) shall be mandatory for new projects, where ground water requirement is more than 20 m3/day. The water from STP shall be utilized for toilet flushing, car washing, gardening etc.
iii) For infrastructure dewatering/ construction activity, No Objection Certificate shall be valid for specific period as per the detailed proposal submitted by the project proponent.
iv) All infrastructure projects drawing ground water in safe, semi-
critical and critical assessment units shall be required to pay ground water abstraction charges as applicable as per Table 5.3 A.
v) All infrastructure projects (new/ existing) drawing ground water in over-exploited assessment units shall be liable to pay ground water restoration charges as per Table 5.3 B."
20. For documents required to be submitted along with the application, clauses (a), (c) and (e) to (g) of Para 4.3, talk of the following documents:
"(a) In cases where dewatering is involved, submission of impact assessment report prepared by an accredited consultant on the ground water situation in the area giving detailed plan of pumping, proposed usage of pumped water and comprehensive impact assessment of the same on the ground water regime shall be mandatory. The report should highlight environmental risks and proposed management strategies to overcome any significant environmental issues such as ground water level decline, land subsidence etc.
(c) Certificate from a government agency regarding non availability of treated sewage water for construction within 10 km radius of the site in critical and over-exploited areas.
(e) Proposal for rain water harvesting/ recharge within the premises as per Model Building Bye Laws issued by Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs.
(f) Details of water requirement computed as per National Building Code, 2016 (Annexure I), taking into account recycling/ reuse of treated water for flushing etc. (in case of completed infrastructure projects for commercial use).
(g) Completion certificate from the concerned agency for infrastructure projects requiring water for commercial use."14
21. More attention has been paid in Guidelines 2020 on ground water abstraction charges. It is payable by all residential apartments/group housing societies/Government water supply agencies in urban areas and industries/mining/infrastructure projects. Ground water abstraction charges, based on quantum of ground water extraction and category of assessment units as per details given in Guidelines, are payable by all industries/mining/infrastructure projects drawing ground water in safe, semi-critical and critical assessment units. Ground water restoration charges, based on quantum of ground water abstraction, are payable by all existing mining/infrastructure projects and existing industries including MSME drawing ground water in over-exploited assessment units. Ground water restoration charges are also payable by new MSME, new infrastructure and new mining projects in over-exploited areas.
22. Para 6.0 deals with Bulk Water Supply and says that all private tankers, abstracting ground water, and use it for supply as bulk water suppliers, will now mandatorily seek NOC for ground water abstraction. Bulk water suppliers through tankers drawing ground water in safe, semi- critical and critical assessment units shall pay ground water abstraction charges as per Table-6.1A. Bulk water suppliers drawing ground water in over-exploited assessment units shall pay ground water restoration charges as per the Table-6.1B. All tankers will have to install GPS based system for their monitoring of movement/area of operation.
23. Para 7.0 deals with abstraction of saline ground water and here the provision is broadly similar as it was in earlier Guidelines.
24. A new provision with regard to protection of wetland areas is added vide para 8.0 and it reads as under:
" 8.0 Protection of Wetland Areas 15 The wet land areas in the country are very crucial as they are direct reflection of the presence of ground water in such areas. The protection of the wetland areas is being separately handled by the Wetland Authorities. Since ground water is very crucial for the survival of the wetland area, any excessive ground water development within the zone of wetland area would affect the volume of water in that wetland.
Projects falling within 500 m. from the periphery of demarcated wetland areas shall mandatorily submit a detailed proposal indicating that any ground water abstraction by the project proponent does not affect the protected wetland areas. Furthermore, before seeking permission from CGWA, the projects shall take consent/approval from the appropriate Wetland Authorities to establish their projects in the area."
25. Thereafter, in para 9.0 some general compliance conditions of NOC are mentioned which we are omitting at this stage.
26. In para 11.0, subject of renewal of NOC is dealt with. The term of renewal is specified in para 11.0 (v) as under:
"v. No Objection Certificate will be renewed for the terms specified for various uses as follows:
Category Use Term of renewal
Critical, Infrastructure projects for 5 years
Semi- drinking & domestic use and
critical and urban Water Supply Agencies
safe Industries 3 years
Mines 2 years
Over- All users in 'Over-exploited 2 years
exploited areas'
"
27. If there is delay in finalization of NOC, Para 11.0 (vi) contains provision for deemed grant of NOC and reads as under:
"vi. If the application for renewal is submitted in time and the CGWA/the respective State/UT Authority is unable to process the application in time, No Objection Certificate shall be deemed to be extended till the date of renewal of No Objection Certificate."
28. However, if PP has delayed in applying for renewal, provision has been made that he will have to pay only environmental compensation for 16 the period starting from the date of expiry of NOC till NOC is renewed by Competent Authority. However continued withdrawal/extraction of ground water by PP, despite expiry of NOC, will not be illegal. This is what is provided in para 11.0 (vii) which reads as under:
"vii. If the proponent fails to apply for renewal within 3 months from the date of expiry of No Objection Certificate, the proponent shall be liable to pay Environmental Compensation for the period starting from the date of expiry of No Objection Certificate till No Objection Certificate is renewed by the competent authority."
29. Guidelines 2020, vide para 13.0 has appointed District Magistrate/District Collector/Sub Divisional Magistrates of each Revenue District/Sub division as Authorized Officers, delegating power to seal illegal wells, disconnect electricity supply to the energized well, launch prosecution against offenders etc., including grievance redressal related to ground water in their respective jurisdictions. It is also provided that to decentralize and strengthen monitoring and compliance mechanism as per the Guidelines, officials of concerned Departments of Revenue and industries of States/UTs shall be appointed as Authorized Officers in consultation with State/UT Governments. Copy of NOC issued by CGWA shall be forwarded to the respective District Magistrate/District Collector. It is provided in Para 13.0 that for any violation of directions of CGWA and non-fulfilment of the conditions laid down in NOC, Authorized Officers will file appropriate petition/original application etc. under Sections 15 to 21 of EP Act 1986, in appropriate Courts.
30. Para 14.0 direct all Project Proponents (drawing ground water more than 10m3/day) to have mandatorily constructed piezometers (observation wells) within their premises for monitoring of ground water levels.
31. Determination of environmental compensation and formula thereof is provided in para 15.0 of Guidelines 2020, and, it reads as under: 17
"Extraction of ground water for commercial use by industries, infrastructure units and mining projects without a valid No Objection Certificate from appropriate authority shall be considered illegal and such entities shall be liable to pay Environmental Compensation for the quantum of ground water so extracted. The norms prescribed by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) shall be utilized for calculating the Environmental compensation as mentioned below:
ECGW = Ground water consumption per day x Environmental Compensation rate (ECRGW) x No. of days x Deterrence factor where ground water consumption is in m3/day and ECRGW in Rs./Cum"
32. Rates of environmental compensation are prescribed in para 15.1 which are different for different kinds of units in as much as table 15.1 provides rates of environmental compensation for packaged drinking water units; table 15.2 in respect of mining/infrastructure dewatering projects; and table 15.3 for industrial units. It is, however, provided in all the 3 tables mentioned above that minimum environmental compensation shall not be less than Rs. One lakh.
33. Para 15.2 lays down deterrent factors to compensate losses and environmental damage (packaged drinking water units and mining/infrastructure dewatering projects). Para 16.0, besides, and/or in addition of environmental compensation, provides penalty liable to be imposed on Proponents for non-compliance of NOC conditions issued by appropriate authority and rates of penalty are given in Table 16.1.
34. Para 17.0 provided other important conditions applicable to all and reads as under:
"17.0 Other important Conditions (Applicable to all):
i. Sale of ground water by a person/agency not having valid no objection certificate from CGWA/State Ground Water Authority is not permitted.
ii. In infrastructure projects, paved/parking area must be covered with interlocking/perforated tiles or other suitable measures to ensure groundwater infiltration/harvesting.18
iii. In case of Infrastructure projects, the firm/entity shall ensure implementation of dual water supply system in the projects. Compliance of the same shall be submitted through the web portal.
iv. Non-compliance of conditions mentioned in the No Objection Certificate may be taken as sufficient reason for cancellation of no objection certificate accorded/non- renewal of No Objection Certificate.
v. No application shall be entertained without supporting documents as specified in relevant sections.
vi. Abstraction structure(s) should be located inside the premises of project property.
vii. Self compliance of conditions laid down in the no objection certificate shall be reported by the users online in the web portal of Central Ground Water Authority/state Ground Water Authority.
viii. Processing fee prescribed, if any, from time to time shall be charged for various services.
Note:
1. Guidelines are subject to modification from time to time.
2. In case of any discrepancy between Hindi and English versions of this document including the annexures, the English version shall prevail."
35. Thus, the concerned Ministry namely Ministry of Jal Shakti (Department of Water Resources, river Development and Ganga Rejuvenation) issued Guidelines 2020 in purported compliance of directions contained in Tribunal's orders dated 11.09.2019, 20.7.2020 and earlier orders referred in this judgment, but as a matter of fact, we find that Guidelines 2020 broadly do not satisfy directions as given repeatedly and persistently, reposing confidence in the Authorities who are responsible and accountable for preservation and protection of environment, that they would understand their statutory obligations, sensitize themselves with the traumatic condition of environment, show patent endeavour for improvement, march with a conviction that not only present day people but coming generations also get a healthy environment with clean air, non-contaminated water, adequate for drinking and other 19 daily uses, enough ground water necessary for agriculture and simultaneously for developmental activities; and perform with a real sense of devotion and determination. To our utter dismay, they have failed. We do not find much improvement in Guidelines 2020. Virtually, it is only a new cover provided to the old scheme with minor variations, alterations and modifications, here and there, but having no substantial consequences to the root cause and central issue, i.e. protection and preservation of ground water, prevention of, not only further depletion, but a serious and effective attempt for recharge and restoration.
36. So far as exemption for requirement of NOC is concerned, the category of consumers namely domestic, requiring water for drinking and domestic uses, whether in rural and urban areas, Establishments of Security Forces like Armed Forces and Central Armed Police Forces etc. and agricultural activities, we, at this stage, do not find any reason to make any comment but inclusion of some commercial and industrial activities i.e. micro and small industrial entrepreneurs category i.e. MSME, drawing ground water less than 10m3/day, even in the area where ground water level is critical or over exploited, is incomprehensible. The number of such units and impact of drawl of ground water, by such units, on the water level, it appears, has not been examined at all, in as much as the Tribunal passed order on 20.07.2020 and notification containing Guidelines 2020 has been issued 24.09.2020 i.e. within less than two months.
37. Further, in respect of other commercial and industrial activities also, the alleged restrictions are only an eye wash. For commercial uses, it is provided that no NOC to new major industries shall be granted in over-exploited assessment areas except as per Policy Guidelines. In the context of commercial use, only for industrial use, it is provided that NOC shall not be granted for ground water extraction to a new industry, except 20 those falling in the category of MSME. The existing units are not covered by it. More over in the new units, NOC for abstraction of ground water for drinking/domestic use for work force, green belt etc. shall be permitted. Expansion of existing units involving increase of ground water extraction in over-exploited assessment areas shall not be permitted. There is a twist when it says that NOC shall not be granted to new packaged water industries in over-exploited areas even if they belong to MSME category. In Guidelines 2015, no NOC was to be given to any water intensive industry, even if it is MSME, in over exploited assessment areas. Now it is restricted to packaged water industries. Apparently, a drastic relaxation has been given in respect of water intensive industries, for no reason, and that too in flagrant defiance of order of Tribunal.
38. The critical and semi-critical areas have been left untouched and there is no such restriction at all. The only reference to these areas in para 4.1 (viii) is that industries drawing ground water in safe, semi-critical and critical assessment areas shall be required to pay ground water extraction charges which will also be paid by existing industries. The charges are provided as per table 5.2 A and 5.3 A for safe, semi-critical and critical assessment units and tables 5.2 B and 5.3 B for over-exploited areas. The rates provided therein are:
"Table 5.2 A: Rates of ground water abstraction charges for packaged drinking water units (Rs per m 3) S.No. Category Quantum of ground water withdrawal of area Up to 51 to <200 200 to <1000 1000 to 5000 50m3/day m3/day m3/day m3/day <5000 and above m3/day Ground water use
1. Safe 1.00 3.00 5.00 8.00 10.00
2. Semi-critical 2.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
3. Critical 4.00 10.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 21 Table 5.3 A: Rates of Ground Water abstraction charges for other industries & infrastructure projects (Rs per m3) S.No. Category Quantum of ground water withdrawal of area < 200 200 to <1000 1000 to 5000 m3/day and m3/day m3/day above <5000 m3/day Ground water use
1. Safe 1.00 2.00 3.00 5.00
2. Semi-critical 2.00 3.00 5.00 8.00
3. Critical 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 Table 5.2 B: Rates of ground water restoration charges for packaged drinking water units (Rs per m3) S.No. Category Quantum of ground water withdrawal of area Up to 50 51 to <200 200 to <1000 1000 to 5000 m3/day m3/day m3/day m3/day <5000 m3/day and above Ground water use
1. Over-exploited 8.00 20.00 40.00 80.00 120.00 (existing industries only) Table 5.3 B: Rates of ground water restoration charges for other industries & infrastructure projects (Rs per m3) S.No. Category Quantum of ground water withdrawal of area < 200 200 to <1000 1000 to 5000 m3/day and m3/day m3/day above <5000 m3/day Ground water use
1. Over-exploited (existing 6.00 10.00 16.00 20.00 industries / new Industries as per the present Guidelines)
39. Rates prescribed above are very nominal and virtually permits abstraction of ground water in stressed area almost free. Water charges 22 prescribed by local bodies by supplying surface water are much more.
Such nominal rates for abstraction of ground water would in fact encourage more abstraction for commercial purpose and frustrate the gigantic efforts being made by Supreme Court and this Tribunal to preserve and protect ground water particularly in stressed areas.
40. In respect of mining and infrastructure projects, it is specifically provided that NOC shall not be denied or banned for existing as well as new projects in over-exploited areas. Though some conditions are there for monitoring of quantity of ground water extraction in the said area, payment of abstraction charges or the restoration charges as the case may be, but effective steps capable of execution for recharge/restoration are clearly wanting.
41. Thus, the issue of constant depletion of water level, initially brought before Tribunal, in the context of NOIDA and Greater NOIDA which are part of district Gautam Buddha Nagar, but subsequently, extended to the entire country since this problem was/is being faced by people throughout the country, remained unexecuted. This Tribunal repeatedly required Statutory Regulators to take effective steps for prevention of depletion of water level and also for recharge/restoration/rejuvenation of water level;
enough power is conferred by Statute upon Statutory Regulator i.e. CGWA to take all permissible, possible and effective steps for the purpose, but it is not understandable why it has been/is reluctant to execute and enforce the said power, in the manner it was desired to protect and preserve ground water level across the country. It is admitted, as also demonstrated in earlier paragraphs, that when study of ground water level was made in different phases, extreme alarming level of ground water was noted in sufficiently large number of places but for regulation purposes a very small fragment thereof was selected by CGWA. In its own discretion, without 23 specifying the criteria on which only a few areas were so selected, CGWA notified a very small numbers and made some provisions, that too, very superficial, for regulating the same. In respect of others, termed as non-
notified area, very relaxed and concessional provisions were made, that too, like grant of a license i.e. NOC, in a very smooth and casual fashion, unmindful of the fact that its statutory duty was to take steps for protection and conservation of ground water level and not to grant easy access for abstraction, that too, to commercial institutions/ establishments/bodies, to extract ground water for commercial/industrial purposes without having any corresponding actual recharge/restoration of ground water, particularly, in the area where it had already depleted to a very low level and was classified as over-exploited, critical or semi critical. Tribunal did not appreciate this approach, expressed its displeasure and disapproval repeatedly, but, and despite that, CGWA, on the pretext of effective functioning of economy, issued revised Guidelines repeatedly and frequently but all failed, when tested at the anvil of conservation and protection of ground water level in stressed or highly stressed areas.
42. Major deficiencies, observed by Tribunal, in various guidelines issued by CGWA, are summarized here as under:
i. Policy to be followed by CGWA has to be rational, meeting basic need of everyone and at the same time preserving water for future generation by preventing wastage or preventable use based on the principle of "sustainable development".
ii. Policy must have punitive measures and recovery of damages from those who have extracted ground water in past and continue to do so unauthorizedly, i.e., illegal extraction, leading to alarming depletion of ground water.
24 iii. Steps to be taken to tap all relevant sources specially the rain water harvesting and preservation of water bodies; iv. When CGWA has classified, over-exploited, critical and semi critical areas for regulation, it has no reason to refuse regulation of such areas on the plea that it would govern/regulate only notified area;
v. Being Central Authority, CGWA has to regulate ground water in the whole country under the mandate of Supreme Court, hence cannot show apathy on the pretext of notified area, ignoring other areas where ground water level is similarly stressed i.e., over-exploited, critical or semi-critical; vi. Extraction of ground water in over-exploited, critical and semi-
critical area with or without permission, only on the pretext of being non-notified, amounts to failure of Statutory duty on the part of CGWA;
vii. Mechanical imposition of condition of recharge of underground water without any mechanism for ensuring its compliance or to check, whether complied or not, at all, while continuing to permit drawl of ground water for commercial purposes, is unjustified;
viii. Abstraction of ground water for building construction, watering plants, swimming pools, threatening availability of ground water in over-exploited, critical and semi- critical areas, specially, in absence of adequate steps for recharge of ground water, is unjustified;
ix. Mere provision for realization of some amount/charges for drawl of ground water is ridiculous and illegal, in respect of extraction of ground water in over-exploited, critical and semi- critical area;
25 x. CGWA has to observe in its functions, precautionary principle, sustainable development as well as inter-generational equity principle. Drawl of ground water for industrial purposes with or without payment, in OCS areas, should be banned. xi. Checking of contamination of ground water by discharge of untreated effluents in water bodies need comprehensive planning and execution and on priority basis, it is necessary, failing whereof, has led to emergency situation in certain areas; xii. Apathy of authorities in last several years, in neglecting subject in breach of trust, reposed in such authorities, has been noted by Tribunal still no information was given with regard to compliance of earlier orders including action for illegal activities of CGWA.
xiii. Instead of laying down strict norms for extraction of ground water for commercial purposes and putting in place a robust institutional mechanism for surveillance and monitoring, extraction of ground water has been liberalized, adding to the crisis, unmindful of ground situation and likely impact, it will have on environment.
xiv. No study or data has been furnished or collected to justify this approach.
xv. Drawl of ground water for all practical purposes made unregulated in all areas including OCS.
xvi. So called regulation is illusory.
xvii. Water conservation fee in effect a license to harness
ground water to any extent even in OCS areas.
xviii. No institutional mechanism to monitor removal and
replenishment of ground water;
xix. No check on injunction of pollutants in ground water;
26
xx. No provision to check water quality and remediation, if there is
contamination;
xxi. Instead of conservation of ground water necessary for
providing access to drinking water in OCS areas, Guidelines would result in fast depletion of ground water and damage to water bodies;
xxii. Mandate of CGWA is not exploitation of ground water in depleted area but to conserve it;
xxiii. OCS areas need regulation for conservation of ground water, cannot be treated separately as notified or non-notified; xxiv. Compensation to be recovered for illegal abstraction, has to be deterrent, linked to the quantum of ground water extracted and period for which such extraction took place;
xxv. CGWA must lay down and follow stringent norms to ensure that there is no depletion of ground water in OCS areas and depleted water level is improved and replenished; xxvi. The abstraction of ground water in over-exploited area should be permitted only for drinking purposes;
xxvii. For calculation of environmental compensation, present categorization of area (over-exploited, critical and semi-critical) shall be considered, irrespective of when violation started or committed;
xxviii. In case of demand of more than 5000 KLD in existing cases, permission be given only after examining scientific assessment of water availability and inter-generational equity. In case of repeated violations, environmental compensation shall be computed at 1.25 times of the previous environmental compensation;
27 xxix. Since OCS areas have been found seriously affected by over-
drawl of ground water, regulation of such drawl for commercial purposes cannot be dispensed with for any industry, even in industrial area;
xxx. In absence of replenishment of ground water, unregulated drawl cannot be permitted to any commercial entity; xxxi. Shortage of availability of water for commercial purposes cannot be remedied by permitting drawl of ground water in OCS areas.
xxxii. Water is a scarce resource; hence, industry has to cope up with such scarcity and find out its own alternative ways to meet the requirement of water;
xxxiii. They cannot be permitted indiscriminate drawl of water in such areas till situation improves;
xxxiv. Liberalization of ground water extraction across the board, to certain categories, without any impact assessment and effective checks, are against law;
xxxv. No road map has been prepared by CGWA as to how revised Guidelines will check and neutralize falling ground water level particular, when it has continuously gone down. Liberalization of abstraction of ground water would defeat the purpose of Constitution of CGWA and is contrary to mandate of Public Trust doctrine;
xxxvi. Effective steps for protecting ground water in OCS areas against individual commercial considerations are must to serve general people.
43. In the backdrop of the aforesaid observations which we have culled out from various orders of Tribunal, referred above, ultimately, in the order 28 dated 20.07.2020, 4 issues were formulated in para 27 and in para 28, Tribunal said that the answer to the said issues is 'no'. Tribunal held that as per mandate of sustainable development under Section 20 of NGT Act 2010, Regulator must direct its policy towards preventing further depletion of, and upgrading, ground water levels, based on impact assessment. Extraction can neither be unregulated nor allowed across the board without individual consideration. The directions were consequently issued to prepare meaningful regulatory regime, institutional mechanism for ensuring prevention of depletion, unauthorized extraction of ground water and sustainable management in OCS areas.
44. Unfortunately, the concerned Ministry and Regulator have acted in haste and just in 2 months i.e., 24.09.2020, have published Guidelines 2020 wherein most of the infirmities, irregularities, and failures, pointed out on the part of CGWA, in earlier Guidelines, as such, are present. Though there are minor variations and alterations, but the same are wholly inconsequential, looking to the gravity of the situation, arising due to consistent depletion of ground water.
45. The Notification issued by UPGWD shows that in State of UP almost every district, and some districts as a whole, are in serious stressed condition, having depletion of water to the extent of critical and over- exploited level, and a very few are exceptions.
46. The condition of NCT of Delhi, as already noticed, is already, seriously alarming.
47. The correctness/validity of this Guideline was also challenged in OA No. 69/2020, Sushil Bhatt v. Moon Beverages Limited & Ors., and Appeal No. 45/2020 (Earlier O.A. No. 218/2020), Devi Das Khatri v. Union of India & Ors. We have examined the above Guidelines in our 29 judgement, delivered today, in OA No. 69/2020 (supra) and Appeal No. 45/2020 (supra) and held that Guidelines dated 24.09.2020 fails to satisfy the requirement of environmental law for protection and preservation of ground water when tested on the 'Precautionary' Principle, 'Sustainable Development' as well as 'Inter-generational Equity' Principles. We have issued following directions:
"g. We also constitute a joint committee of CPCB, CGWA and UPPCB to conduct survey in State of UP and prepare data of various categories drawing ground water for commercial purposes, study impact assessment, suggest ways and modes to reduce ground water extraction in OCS areas, and how ground water level can be improved. Committee may induct any other expert as it may find necessary. District Magistrate of concerned district where Committee would visit, shall also be a member of the Committee.
h. CGWA is directed to forthwith issue appropriate orders/directions, regulating ground water extraction in the light of observations made above and the orders passed by Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Others (1997) (supra) and this Tribunal in various cases referred to in this judgment and must take all precautions and care to ensure that in OCS areas, ground water should not be allowed to be extracted in such a manner that general people would have to face problem of water for drinking and domestic purposes."
48. In view of the fact that the subsequent Guidelines issued, has already been examined and the above directions have been issued in OA No. 69/2020 (supra) and Appeal No. 45/2020 (supra), this OA is also disposed of in terms of the above directions.
49. The authorities concerned shall comply with the above directions and submit compliance report by 15th September, 2022 with the Registrar General, NGT, PB. If any further direction is found necessary, the Registrar General, NGT may place the matter before the Tribunal. 30 MA No. 107/2019 and IA No. 199/2020
50. MA No. 107/2019 has been filed by CGWA requesting that it may be allowed to regulate ground water as per the Guidelines dated 16.11.2015 (hereinafter referred to 'Guidelines 2015').
51. So far as MA No. 107/2019 is concerned, Guidelines 2015 have already been discussed in detail in our order passed in OA No. 69/2020 (supra) and Appeal No. 45/2020 (supra), hence, we do not find any justification for such request made on behalf of CGWA. Following the reasons stated in the order passed in OA No. 69/2020 (supra) and Appeal No. 45/2020 (supra), this MA No. 107/2019 filed by CGWA is hereby rejected.
52. IA No. 199/2020 has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to quash UP Groundwater (Management and Regulation) Act, 2019 and UP Groundwater (Management and Regulation) Act, 2020. This IA challenges validity of provincial enactments, i.e., UP Groundwater (Management and Regulation) Act, 2019 and UP Groundwater (Management and Regulation) Act, 2020. Both these provisions have already been discussed in our order passed in OA No. 69/2020 (supra) and Appeal No. 45/2020 (supra). We have already held that to the extent the field is covered by EP Act 1986 and rules, regulations and directions made/issued thereunder would subserve the Central Law and cannot prevail in view of the law laid down in MC Mehta vs. UOI (1997) 11 SCC 312 holding that EP Act, 1986 is referable to Entry 13 list I of Schedule 7 of the Constitution read with Article 253 and, therefore, shall prevail. Beyond that, we cannot determine validity of laws made by State Legislatures, since, to that extent the matter would be beyond the jurisdiction of Tribunal. Therefore, following the reasons and directions 31 given in our judgment delivered today in OA No. 69/2020, Sushil Bhatt (supra), IA No. 199/2020 is disposed of on the same terms.
53. A copy of the order be forwarded to MoEF&CC, Ministry of Jal Shakti, CPCB, UPPCB, UPGWD and CGWA by e-mail for compliance.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, Chairperson Sudhir Agarwal, Judicial Member Brijesh Sethi, Judicial Member Prof. A. Senthil Vel, Expert Member Dr. Afroz Ahmad, Expert Member February 25, 2022 Original Application No. 176/2015 (MA No. 107/2019 & IA No. 199/2020) AB & R 32