National Green Tribunal
Sk Vijayakumar vs Union Of India on 27 July, 2022
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, K. Ramakrishnan, Satyagopal Korlapati
Item Nos. 02 & 03 (Court No. 1)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SPECIAL BENCH
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 180/2017 (SZ)
S.K. Vijaykumar and Ors. Applicant(s)
Versus
Union of India and Ors. Respondent(s)
WITH
Appeal.No.20/2019 (SZ)
S.K. Vijaya Kumar and Ors. Appellant(s)
Versus
Union of India and Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 27.07.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
HON'BLE PROF. A SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant: Mr. Ritwick Dutta, Advocate along with
Mr. Saurabh Sharma, Advocate and
Mr. G. Stanley Hebzon Singh.
Respondent: Mrs. Me. Saraswathy for R1.
Mr. Rajat Jonathan Shaw represented
Mr. Darpan K.M. for R2.
Mr. H.K. Vasanth for R4.
Mr. B. Dhanraj for R5.
ORDER
1. This order will deal with O.A No. 180/2017 (SZ) and Appeal No. 20/2019 (SZ) as both the matters involve common question of remedial action against violation of environmental norms in establishment and 1 functioning of industrial area at Doddaballapura Industrial area, 3rd phase in Bengaluru Rural District, Karnataka.
O.A No. 180/2017 (SZ)
2. Case set out in O.A. No. 180/2017 (SZ) is that Environmental Clearance dated 28.03.2016 was granted for establishing the industrial area in question by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) for establishing 'orange' and 'green' category industries on total plot area of 696.45 acres (281.84 ha). The project is located upstream of the River Arkavati and is part of the 1384 acres (560.0849 ha) which has been acquired by the KIADB for Apparel Park Phase I-IV in the year 2002 to 2015. The specific EC conditions have been violated in construction work in the project. The violations alleged include absence of lab facilities, first aid room, drawl of ground water by bore-wells and tankers without requisite permissions. Even a pipe connection has been illegally allowed for using ground water for industrial purposes. The site is in notified Thippagondanahalli Reservoir (TGR) catchment area which is facing water scarcity. CGWA has notified Doddaballapura Taluka block as 'over-
exploited' area as on November 2008 and 27.12.2012 where ground water can be extracted only for drinking purposes. There is also violation of laid down siting criteria which prohibits new industries within 1.5 km from the embankment of the streams, rivers, dams enlisted in the Guidelines. The entire project is coming up upstream of the River Arkavati which flows in a southerly direction. The changes in the land pattern and land use of the said area would adversely affect the stream flow/surface runoff of the catchment area thereby affecting the Hesarghatta reservoir and other connected water bodies first and then the TGR reservoir itself. The discharge of polluting effluents would also result in the contamination of these extremely fragile water bodies. The Applicant has referred to KSPCB 2 Notifications dated 21.06.2003 and 05.07.2005 laying down guidelines for 'orange' and 'green' category units which require establishment of STP/CETP and green belt which have not been done. There is also requirement for protection of lakes and other water bodies within or in the vicinity of the project and compliance of Notification dated 10.11.2003 issued by the Government of Karnataka for protection of TGR catchment area. The said reservoir is the source of drinking water for the city of Bangalore and surrounding areas. The flow of water therein has been decreasing as per study conducted by the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) in association with Indian Resources Information and Management Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (IN-RIMIT), commissioned by the Bangalore Metropolitan Region Development Authority (BMRDA).
Karnataka PCB had taken the decision not to accord any consent for any industry, as this is bound to change the surface contours and affect the catchment's drainage pattern, vide meeting dated 24.07.2002. The KSPCB further recommended that the area identified by ISRO be declared as an Eco-Sensitive Zone under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (EP Act, 1986) and also suggested to constitute a separate Authority for the conservation of the TGR area. This was followed by Notification dated 18.11.2003 under Section 5 of the EP Act, 1986 by the State of Karnataka placing restrictions in use of the area by categorizing the area into four zones as follows:-
"(1) Zone 1 covers the entire Tippa Zone 1 covers the entire Tippagondanahalli Reservoir Catchment Area. As per the notification dated 18.11.2003, in Zone-1, there would be regulation and checking over exploitation of ground water. Further, no fresh leases or license for mining, quarrying and stone crushers can be granted. Disposal of solid as well as liquid waste without scientific processing is not permitted. To ensure adoption of Rain Water Harvesting systems in all the new and existing buildings, within six months from the date of issue of this order and finally to promote organic farming including bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticide.3
(2) Zone 2 includes the area covered within 2 kms from the Tippagondanahali Reservoir (TGR) boundary. In the said zone, no person is permitted to carry on activities other than Agricultural or agriculture related activities without prior permission. (3) Zone 3 includes the area covered within 1 km distance from the river Arkavathy (only upto Hesarghatta tank from TGR) and Kunmudvathi. The said zone, No person is permitted to carry on activities other than Agriculture or agriculture related activities without permission.
(4) Zone 4 includes the area covered within 1-2 km distance from the river Arkavathy (only upto Hesarghatta tank from TGR) and Kumudvathi (Excluding the areas falling within Zone 2). In the said zone, only those industrial activities which are listed as Green category, by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, with mandatory adoption of rainwater harvesting systems and waste water treatment facilities are permitted. Further the notification states that the other regulatory/civic agencies to issue permit only after Consent for Establishment (CFE) is obtained from the KSPCB. New buildings with only ground and first floor with mandatory adoption of rainwater harvesting systems were permitted."
3. The applicant has accordingly sought cancellation of the EC and injunction against further industrial development in the TGR catchment area.
4. The application was filed on 30.06.2017. The Tribunal issued notice on 22.08.2017 to the respondents, including the State of Karnataka, KSPCB, SEIAA, Karnataka, KIADB and Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA). Replies have been filed by the KIADB, CGWA, SEIAA and KSPCB contesting the violations.
5. The matter has been considered by the Tribunal in the last more than five years in the light of the stand of the parties. To get an independent factual position at the ground level, vide order dated 05.03.2020, the Tribunal constituted a three-member joint Committee comprising of Regional Officer, MoEF&CC, SEIAA, Karnataka and KSPCB. The joint Committee visited the site and after independent evaluation gave its report dated 24.11.2020 to which the applicants filed objections on 10.1.2021.
4Vide order dated 29.6.2021, the Tribunal sought comments of the joint Committee which have been filed on 08.12.2021.
6. The conclusions and recommendations in the report dated 24.11.2020 are as follows:-
"6.0 conclusion and recommendation 6.1 Conclusion:
Following are the conclusion and recommendations of the Committee:
The Tippagondanahalli Reservoir Catchment Area Notification ("TGR Notification") has not prohibited the establishment of industries other than mining, quarrying and stone crushing activities and hence EC granted for KIADB is not in violation of above said notification.
KIADB has not violated the siting criteria Tippagondanahalli Reservoir (TGR) catchment area has been neither notified as an "Eco- Sensitive Area" nor a "Biosphere Reserve". Hence the General Condition under EIA Notification, 2006 will not apply and SEIAA, Karnataka has jurisdiction over the grant of EC for the project.
KIADB has not installed CETP as required under the EC. KIADB informed that the quantity of industrial effluent generated at present is not adequate and also it is not viable for establishment and operation of CETP. It is noted that the domestic sewage and the industrial effluent are treated by the individual industry.
EC stipulates development of green belt in an area of 33% of total area. The KIADB has imposed conditions like 1) A 45-meter-wide green strip shall be provided all along the periphery of the plot, 2) To utilise minimum 33% of the site area for greenery development, while approving the construction plan of the individual industries. It is noted that major industries viz M/s Stelis Biopharma (P) Ltd, M/s Reliance Instrumentation (P) Ltd, M/s DNS Poly fab (P) Ltd, M/s KAPCI Coating India (P) Ltd., M/s Kehin Fie (P) Ltd. & M/s Ashoka Farm Aids have developed Green belt. In addition, KIADB has earmarked 109.11 acres for development green belt and out which developed green belt in an area of 24.06 acres within the Industrial area and carried out avenue plantation in the adjoining roads. As on date, the green belt developed by KlADB is in 24.06 acres and KIADB has assured that 33% will be achieved in phased manner.
KIADB has carried out monitoring of the ground water level and its quality through accredited laboratory only in 2020. It is informed that there is no discharge from individual industries and all have adopted zero discharge concept.
As required under the EC conditions, the KIADB need to submit six monthly compliance report to Monitoring Agencies. However, KIADB has submitted two reports only [one in 2018 and another in 2020].5
The grant of EC was not advertised in newspaper within stipulated period of seven days as per the EC. This is non-compliance to the EC condition.
The KIADB has not specifically imposed any condition that "the provision of Energy Conservation Building code 2006 shall be fully complied with" while allotting the plots/approving the construction plan of the individual industries.
The KIADB has not maintained 5 rows of plantation along the boundaries of the industrial area towards villages. They have not categorically allotted plots adjacent to the villages for establishing only green category industries.
The KIADB has not specifically imposed any condition to adopt green building concept by the industries while allotting the plots/approving the construction plan of the individual industries.
The KIADB has submitted Form-I to SEIAA in December 2012, ToRs have been granted by SEIAA on 14.03.2013, Road works have started in February 2013, EC has been granted on 28.03.2016. It is a fact that KIADB has started road development works prior to the grant of EC. This is violation of EIA Notification 2006. In addition, there are certain non- compliances of EC conditions. Therefore, the KIADB has to pay the Environmental Compensation.
6.2 Recommendation of the Committee:
1. The KIADB has earmarked a plot of area of 5.9 acres for establishing CETP, Hazardous Waste & Municipal Solid Waste collection centres, but not developed any facility. The KIADB has to take necessary action in this regard.
2. KIADB shall carryout plantation in 33% area including in the buffer area provided for the water tanks, in kharab lands, in the area between housing layout and industrial layout, within three years.
Plantation of 5 rows of local species of saplings all along the periphery of the industrial area shall be carried out within a year. The Local Forest Department shall be associated for this purpose and requisite budget be earmarked. The KIADB should include the condition while issuing plot to the prospective individual industries that they should develop greenbelt of 33% of the plot area allotted for them, and ensure that the condition is complied even by the plots for which construction plans have already been approved.
3. KIADB shall carry out environmental monitoring at regular intervals and submit along with half year compliance report to the Karnataka SPCB/ Integrated Regional Office, MoEF&CC, Bangalore. KIADB shall establish a separate First Aid Room in Phase-III, so that first aid is given for the needy without delay. KIADB shall consider allotment of plots adjacent to the villages for establishing only green category industries only.
64. KIADB shall pay Environmental Compensation of Rs.15,398,438 for the violations and ensure that such violations are not repeated in future.
5. The KIADB has to impose condition to adopt green building concept by the industries while allotting the plots/approving the construction plan of the individual industries
6. The KIADB has to impose condition that "the provision of Energy Conservation Building code 2006 shall be fully complied with" while allotting the plots/approving the construction plan of the individual industries.
7. The KIADB shall ensure that the Kharab land is kept available to the general public duly displaying a board as public property. No structure of any kind be put up in the Kharab land and shall be afforested and maintained as green belt only.
8. KIADB shall make advertisement about the grant of EC as per the EC dated 24.01.2019 and submit copy to Karnataka SPCB/ Integrated Regional Office, MoEF&CC, Bangalore.
9. The KIADB shall ensure that the existing water bodies canals and rajakaluve and other drainage and water bound structures are retained unaltered with due buffer zone as applicable and maintained under tree cover."
7. The objections and response in the second report of the Committee dated 8.12.2021 in a tabular form is as follows:-
" S.No. Objections raised by the applicant Remarks of the Joint Committee 1 That the above titled Application has been Based on the direction of Hon'ble filed raising substantial questions relating NGT, the Joint Committee had to the environment arising out of the blatant examined the issues raised by violation of the conditions of the the applicant and filed a detailed Environmental Clearance dated 28.03.2016 report. granted to the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board ("KIADB") for the establishment of "Industrial Area" at Doddaballapura Industrial Area, 3rdPhase. The Application also raises the issue of violation of the Notification dated 18,11,2003 known as the Tippagondanahalli Reservoir Notification ("TGR Notification") issued by the State of Karnataka as well as the sitting criteria guidelines Issued by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board as well as the EIA Notification of 2006.
2 That this Hon'ble Tribunal had considered No comments the issue at length vide order dated 5.03.2020 and had passed the following order:
"28. There is no material before this Tribunal as to whether the allegations in the application have been substantiated or not.7
In order to ascertain as to I have nether the allegations In the applications are correct and whether there was any violation of conditions imposed either in the environment clearance or in the consent to establish issued in favour for the fifth respondent unit, we feel it appropriate to appoint a Joint Committee comprising of a Senior Officer from Regional Office, Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate and change, Bangalore, Senior Officer from State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) of State of Karnataka and the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board to inspect the area in question and submit a factual and action taken report regarding the allegations made in the application including the siting criteria and also existence of any eco-sensitive areas within the prohibited distance of the unit as alleged by the petitioner as per Notification dated, 18.11.2003 of Government of Karnataka and if there is any violation, what is the action taken by them and submit a factual and action taken report to this Tribunal within a period of two months.
29. State Environment Impact Assessment Authority shall be the nodal agency for coordination and also for providing necessary logistics for the purpose,"
3 That the Joint Committee inspected the site Based on the direction of Hon'ble in question on 22.10.2020 and Submitted NGT, the Joint Committee had its report to this Hon'ble Tribunal on examined he issues raised by 24.11.2020. At the outset, it is pertinent to the applicant and filed a detailed point out that the Joint Committee has found report. that the project proponent, i.e. KIADB has not complied with several conditions of the Environmental Clearance datecd 28.03.2016. In fact, the Committee has assessed the environmental compensation for the same as Rs. 1,53,98,438/ 4(i) That the entire issue related to TGR Covered in the para 5.1, page 7 Notification, 2003 has been Completely & 8 of the Joint Committee neglected by the Joint Committee. The TGR Report dated 24.11.2020 Catchment area has been notified under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 by the State of Karnataka after recognizing the ecological sensitivity and the need to conserve and protect the catchment area for the source of drinking water for the city of Bangalore, However, the Committee has completely glossed over the violations of the said Notification.
4(ii) That the Joint Committee failed to consider Covered in the para 5.1, page 7 the fact that the KlADB has concealed the & 8 of the Joint Committee fact deliberately that the Industrial Area Report dated 24.11.2020 falls within Zone-1 of TGR, Notification in Form-I & PFR as well as the EIA Report submitted for appraisal of ToR/EC. This amounts to concealment of facts and Therefore the Environmental Clearance dated 28.0342016 as well as the amendment dated 24.01.2019 is liable to be withdrawn as per the provisions of Para 8
(vi) of the ETA Notification, 2006.8
4(iii) It is pertinent to note that the Joint Covered in para 5.1.13, Page 19 Committee completely failed to consider the of the Joint Committee Report condition for Zone- 1 of the TGR Catchment dated 24.11.2020. Area as per the TGR Notification 2003, i.e., The Ground Water Authority Regulation and checking over exploitation of issues permission for extracting ground water. In this regard, it may be ground water based on the noted that a project like "industrial area is availability of ground water and water Intensive project on its own and when by posing conditions for rain the individual industries come up, the water harvesting and ground exploitation of ground water would increase water recharge. much further 4(iv) That the Committee failed to give any KIADB has informed that they findings with respect to the Illegal ground have obtained permission from water extraction, It may be noted that as on Ground Water Authority for date, there is no supply of water by the extracting Ground Water from 10 Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage bore wells. Copy of the Board to the Project Proponent for the permission is enclosed as project In question. The water for Annexure-1 construction phase Is being sourced Out of 10 borewells, only two are through illegally sunken bore wells and yielding water and water supply water tankers. The water for construction from these two borewells have phase and operation phase is being been provided to M/S Keihin Fie sourced through three illegally sunken Pvt Ltd ( presently M/s Hitachi borewells and water tankers along with Astemo Fie Pvt Ltd) and Takii nearby water bodies. Also, in one of the Seeds India Pvt Ltd. three bore wells, the pipe connection is provided directly to the adjoining Industry for its Industrial purpose. It is purulent to note that this issue was brought to the notice of the Joint Committee by the Applicant No.1 during the inspection 4(v) That the Join Committee erred In noting The TGR notification has been that "the TGR catchment area has been notified by the Government of neither notified as an "a-a-Sensitive Area" Karnataka based on the nor a "Biosphere, Reserve "and "The TGR recommendation of the KSPCB. Catchment area has not been declared as The Notification classifies the ESZ by the Competent Authority, the area into four zones and MOEF&CC". It is submitted that it would be stipulates regulations. The completely erroneous to state that the TGR details have been covered at Catchment Areas not an ecologically para 5.1, page 7 & 8 of the Joint sensitive area. It is to be noted that the TGR Committee Report dated Notification flows from the powers vested 24.11.2020 in the State Government under the statutory provisions of section 3 and section 23 r/w section 5of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. This has also been held the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka dated 06-11-2011 in the matter of Escon Gensets Private Limited v. The Director, Industries and Commerce Department & Ors. (W.P.38162/ 2009), wherein the Hon'b1e High Court has upheld the TGR Catchment Area Notification which Is notified by State Government under section 5 flows from section 3 and section 23 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.The portion of the judgment dated 06-01-2011 is reproduced hereunder:
"13. We have taken into consideration the various provisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, while advancing his last contention. In our considered view, none of the provisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is applicable to the facts and 9 circumstances of this case. The relevant provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, which must be deemed to have been invoked for issuing the notification dated 18.11.2003 (Annexure - A/1) are Sections 3 and 23 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The aforesaid provisions are being reproduced hereunder: 3 Power of Central GOVT to take measures to protect and improve Environment (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, XXXVOOCX In particular, and without prejudice XXXXXXA' (3) The Central Government may, if it considers xxxxxx
23. Power to delegate Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-
section (3) of section 3, the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, delegate, subject to such conditions and limitations as may be specified in the notification, such of its powers and functions under this Act, except the power to constitute an authority under sub-section (3) of section 3 and to make rules under section 25, as it may deem necessary or expedient, to any officer, State Government or other authority. From a perusal of the aforesaid provisions, we are satisfied that the notification issued letter the State Government cited 18.11.2003 (Annexure-
A1) flows from the powers State Government under the aforesaid provisions. It is therefore apparent, that the measures of the kind, which were taken by the State Government in its notification dated 18.11.2003 (Annexure-A/1), were permissible under Section 3, and as such, relevant directions in respect thereof could certainly have been Issued under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. In view of the above, we are satisfied, that them was absolutely no infirmity in the notification Issued by the State Government on18.11.2003."
4,v. TGR-WP 38162 of 2019 KSPCB.
recommended that the area identified by ISRO to be declared as Eco sensitive zone- separate authority to be constituted.
4(vi) The preamble of the TGR Notification, 2003 In the matter of G Eshwaraiah clearly reflects that the area was found to & Ors V. State of Karnataka & be ecologically sensitive by the State of Ors. (WP.
Karnataka. 20080-20082/2010), the
The following issues become critical for the Hon'ble High Court of
consideration of this Hon'ble Tribunal: Karnataka has upheld the TGR
a. That the Tippagondanahalli Notification dated 18.11.2003
Reservoir (TGR), built at the confluence of and felt that "When it is evident
Arkavathi and Kumudvathi Rivers, is an that the entire area of the
important source of drinking water to the proposed Industrial Layout is
city of Bangalore and the surrounding within the catchment area of a
areas. drinking water source to the
b. That the State Government City of Bangalore,
recognized that over the years, the inflow to consideration as to what is so
10
TGR had been decreasing and quality of inevitable about the said lands
water supplied by this reservoir had also for formation of industrial
deteriorated. This was further fortified by layout and why not a layout in
the observations and conclusions of the an area which does not fall
study conducted by the Indian Space within the catchment area.
Research Organization (ISRO) In association There is no consideration of
with Indian Resources Information and theses aspect before issue of
Management Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (IN- the notification under Section 3
.RIMIT), commissioned by the Bangalore (1) of the KIADB Act nor has
Metropolitan Region Development Authority been any material been
("MMRDA") to ascertain the reasons for produced in that regard."
reduced inflow of water to TGR. But the Horible Court has not
c. That the study carried out by ISRO issued any direction
in association with IN-RIMT revealed that preventing formation of
unplanned development in the catchment Industrial layout in Zone-I, of
area and increasing urbanization and TGR Notification
industrialization were the main reasons for the deteriorating quality and reduced flow into the reservoir. Further, the increasing urbanization and industrialization had led to alteration in the drainage pattern of the TGR catchment area resulting in reduced inflow into the TGR. Moreover, there were number of industries in the catchment area, whose effluents along with underground leachate and sewage flow into the TGR thus affecting the quality of water.
d. That in pursuance to this, the Karnataka State Pollution. Control Board had taken the decision not to accord any consent for any industry, as this is bound to change the surface contours and affect the catchments drainage pattern, vide meeting dated 24.7.2002. The KSPCB further recommended that the area identified by ISRO be declared as an Eco Sensitive Zone under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and also suggested to Con lute a separate Authority for the conservation of the TGR area.
e. That further, vide meeting dated 08.7.2003, chaired by the Principal secretary, Urban Development, it was resolved to protect this ecologically sensitive area keeping In mind that the quantity and quality of the TGR reservoir will have direct impact on the large population of the Bangalore. Therefore, the Government considered it necessary to protect the catchment| area of the TGR to prevent any activity that would lead to contamination of the reservoir.
f. That therefore, in view of these findings, the Government of Karnataka issued the notification dated 18.11.2003, exercising the power conferred under Section 5 of the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986, considered It in public interest to categorise the TGR the catchment areas into four zones with a view to declare its an ECO Sensitive Zone with regulated and restricted activities permitted as given in the Schedule to the Notification.
Thus it is clear ...........the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the matter of G Eshwaraiah & Ors V. State of Karnataka && Ors. (WP 20080- 20082/2010), wherein 11 the Hon'ble High Court has upheld the TGR Catchment Area notification and ha held that an industrial area cannot be developed in Zone-I as per the Notification, since it would invariable entail over exploitation of ground water........"
4(vii) With respect to the violation of the sitting According to KIADB, it has
criteria: Acquired land for
That in this regard, It Is submitted that the Development of Doddaballapura
Committee has completely, erred in Obadenahalli Industrial Area
concluding that "during the grant of EC, only 3rd Phase, under KIADB Act.
E1A Notification was in force and not the KIADB has approved the
sitting altered This is blatantly misleading formation of layout plan in its
and wrong. It is submitted that Committee 321st Board Meeting held on 27-
failed to notice that KSPCB Siting guidelines 12-2012.
for Orange and Green industries vide As per TGR Notification 2003
notifications dated 21.06.2003 as well as and 2019, the Obadenahalli
05.07.2005 were in place. Further, even Industrial Area falls under zone-
before the sitting guidelines of 2003, the 1. In Zone-1 all types of KSPCB had sitting guidelines dating back to Industrial Activity can be carried 1980s. Thus, the Committee failed to out with scientific treatment of consider the following violations that the solid as well as liquid waste Applicant had clearly stated at Para 13 of except for the Original Application and the same are Mining, quarrying and not being repeated for the sake of brevity, stone crushers activities. Also covered in Para 5.1.2, Page 9 (Sr 10 of the Joint Committee Report dated 24.11.2020.
4(viii) It is pertinent to note that Applicant shared Covered in Para 5.1.2, page 9-10 the KSPCB citing guidelines with KSPCB the Joint representative on the day of the inspection Committee Report dated itself in the presence of MOEF 24.11.2020. representative which they themselves were not aware as well as SEIAA representative. It was also brought to the notice of the MOEF representative present that the said information which was available earlier in KSPCB website is now removed from their website except for Orange and Green category siting guidelines. However, the report is clearly bereft of any findings on the Issue of violation of siting criteria, particularly w.r.t minimum 25kms distance to be maintained from different types of ESA.
4(ix) That an important issue was completely Covered in Para 5.2 , page 21-22 glossed over by the SPCB that the Consent of the Joint to Establish was granted by the SPCB much Committee report dated after the construction work had begun for 24.11.2020. There is a direction the project, thus violating both Air from the Government that " The (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, KSPCB shall not issue CFE 1981 and Water (Prevention and Control of without the project obtaining EC Pollution) Act 1974. However, No action was from SEIAA/ MoEF." Hence, the taken against the Project Proponent under KSPCB has issued CFE only the said enactments by KSPCB. after the KIADB obtained EC from SEIAA. Since the conditions of CFE are in concurrent with the EC, the violation / issue of construction prior to grant of EC is proposed to be taken by SEIAA in its next meeting.
124(x) That it is submitted that the committee has KIADB has stated that they have simply accepted the statements made by earmarked 109.11 acres for KIADB with respect to the status of development of green belt and compliance of the conditions. For instance out of which green belt is with respect to the conditions of developing developed in an area of 24.06 33% of the project area as green belt, the acres within the Industrial area Committee has simply stated in the report and carried out avenue that the KIADB has assured the Committee plantation in the adjoining that it would be achieved in a phased roads. As on date, the green belt manner. No fixed timelines have been developed by KIADB is 24.06 imposed by the committee. This becomes acres and KIADB has assured even more important in light of the fact that that 33% is being achieved in there are Orange as well as Red category phased manner as EC did not industries within the industrial area (which stipulate any timeline for the in itself has been classified as a Red development of 33% green belt. category industry). In this regard, it may be KIADB informed that the State noted that it would be impossible for the Forest Department has been KIADB to achieve 33% green belt requested to carryout plantation development in any case, as the entire area in all the KIADB industrial area has been allotted to various industries to have 5 rows of plantation which includes certain areas marked for along the boundary of the Civic Amenities, S1 P, Truck parking industrial area. Annexure-2 area & KPTCL Sub-station without EC amendment in the scope of project and proper Layout Plan approval by competent Planning Authority, and there is no land where proper plantation can be actually undertaken.
4(xi) That while the committee has noted the It was clarified to the joint space allotted for Solid Waste Management Committee that, even though Facility/ STP which is yet to be established the industrial area is developed but failed to notice that the space is reduced by KIADB, the industries will with the creation of industrial Plot and also establish & operate in a phased no space is allotted for CETP/ Hazardous manner and will take 3-5 years Waste and also that the STP/CETP needs to to completely occupy by the be established on MODULAR BASIS to cater industries. Hence during initial to phase-wish development has simply stages, the quantity of trade accepted the submission made by KIADB. effluent generation will not be sufficient to achieve the designed capacity of CETP. It is also true that the industries which are established in this area have to obtain CFE/CFO from KSPCB,where KSPCB insists for establishment of STP for treatment of domestic sewage and ETP for treating trade effluent Hence by providing STP& ETP at individual industries, the domestic sewage and the industrial effluent are treated by the individual industries.
KIADB has earmarked an area
of 5.9 acre for establishment of
Solid Waste Management
facility which will be taken up in
future based on requirement:
Also earmarked 1.2 acres for
STP between plot numbers 72
and 73 (survey number 44/3
P& 47p of Obadenahalli).
Annexure-3
13
4(xii) That the committee failed to notice that the The ETA Report and Public
objections raised during the first Public Hearing proceedings were
Hearing conducted on 11.11.2014 for grant submitted before the SEAC
of EC wherein it was informed that the ETA committee for EC
Report is a copied Report from neighbouring appraisal, based on the EC
Project with irrelevant details as well as the appraisal SEIAA has second Public Hearing conducted on granted EC to KIADB. 19.09.2018 for grant of EC amendment is not at all complied with but simply accepted that submissions made by KIADB in obtaining the same.
4(xiii) That the committee has simply accepted The details have been
statements made by KIADB that Road No.2 covered at Para 5.1.2, page 9 &
and Road No.7 18m and 25m widened Road 10 of the Joint
which is not available and minimum of 16m Committee report dated
buffer is not provided. 24.11.2020.
As per the Revenue survey map,
the road number 2 was
originally a cart track and not a
village road and
Hence the stated citing
Guidelines may not be
applicable.
The Joint Committee has re
verified the width of the said
roads and noted that the width
of both the roads is 18 m only.
The width of the road number 7
was mentioned as 25 m by
Oversight in the report
dated 24.11.2020.
However, it is noted that,
KIADB while allotting the
Plot have stipulated a setback
of minimum 4.5 m to maximum
10 m from the'
Road to building line depends
upon the size of the plot. A copy
of allotment letter is enclosed as
Annexure-4
4(xiv) That while the committee has noted that Ministry inspected the
KIADB has provided only two compliance project in Nov, 2017 and
reports to Monitoring agencies, the report is reported Unsatisfactory.
silent on whether such reports were The details on the
satisfactory. compliance status of EC
conditions were provided' at
Para 5.1.4 page 11& 12 of the
Joint Committee Report dated
24.11.2020. After the Joint
Committee visit, KIADB is
submitting HYR regularly.
4(xv) xv. That it is pertinent to note that the KIADB had obtained EC
Committee failed to notice that EC is from SEIAA on 28.03.2016
granted for Orange and Green Category of for Establishment of Orange
industry alone which itself is against and Green category industries.
KSPCB Siting Guidelines. It was in 2019 Further, KIADB had obtained
that the Environmental Clearance was Amendment to first EC dated
amended to permit Red category industry on 28-03-2016 for Sy.No. 14/2,
survey Numbers 14/2, 14/3, 14/4, 15/2, 14/3, 14/4, 15/2, 15/3, 15/4,
15/3, 15/4, 15/5, 16, 17/1, 17/2, 17/3, 15/5, 16, 17/1, 17/2, 17/3,
17/4 and 17/5 of plot 2D-1 (i.e., Stelis 17/4 and 17/5 measuring 10
Biopharma) measuring 10 Acres only out of Acres allotted to M/s. Stelis
696.45 acres, that too in Biopharma for RED category, on
Obadenahalli village and not in 24.01.2019| from SELAA.
Raghunathapura. However, the
Committee report is totally misleading by 14 stating that the amendment also allowed M/s.Keihin Fie (P) Ltd.,is Red category industry M/ s.Keihin Fie (P) located at Sy.No.33/3, Ltd., in Raghunathapura. The Committee 35/2,36/1, 36/2, failed to notice that this industry is not 37/3,37/4,37/5,38/1,38/2, situated in Raghunathapura Village but in and 39 of Obedenahalli village, Obadenahalli village and was not permitted Kasaba Hobli, Doddaballapura under the First EC and no amendment of EC 3rd phase industrial area, is obtained for establishing the same. No KIADB, Doddaballapura taluk, material record is supported in the Bangalore rural has obtained committee Report to that effect. separate EC from FEE,GOK on 26-03-2013 to manufacture Carborators of 4,78,000 nos/month and spares of carborators of 1,60,000 nos/month. The location of industry was entered as Raghunathapura instead of Obedenahalli which is a typographical error. Since M/s.
Keihin Fie (P) Ltd had obtained separate EC on 26-03-2013 prior to first EC dated 28-03- 2016 obtained by KIADB, hence amendment to EC issued to KIADB is not required.
4(xvi) Change in venue of PH Covered at para 5.1.11 at page 18 of the Joint| Committee Report dated 24.11.2020.
4(xvii) That the committee failed to notice the The Single Plot-2 has been earlier EC which shows the layout Map| divided by KIADB as 2A, 2B, wherein PLOT-2 is shown as a SINGLE 2C, 2D. And the Plot 2A has PLOT of 82 acres for which EC was obtained been allotted to M/s Kapsi earlier but for EC amendment is mentioning coating, 23 allotted to M/s. only 10 acres allotted to M/s Stelis Klauz Speciality, 2C allotted to Biopharma at PLOT 2D-1 meaning there are M/s. YG cutting tools, and 2D several other industries which are already had been divided into two plots allotted at Plot 2 A, 2B, 2C, 2D and so on i.e. 2D1 allotted to M/s Stelis where in many industries are established Biopharma and 2D2 has been and are in operation without following the sub-divided into 2D 2 P1 and proper procedures in accordance with law 2D 2P2.The plot 2D2P1 is are illegal and unauthorized including the allotted to M/s CS Aerotherm Plot 2D-1. Pvt Ltd and 2D2 P2 is allotted to M/s Advance Cable Technologies Pvt Itd. Both the plots are vacant as on date. The above said industries falls under orange category except M/s Stelis Biopharma which was earlier under orange category and only after amendment to first EC, M/s Stelis Biopharma has been categorized under red category 4(xviii) That the committee failed to notice the The EC amendment is obtained development in the said Plot 2 is without to plot 2D1 which belongs to M/s Obtaining EC amendment in the scope of the Stelis Biopharma and remaining project and layout approval from the plots 2A, 2B, 2C are allotted to competent Planning Authority. orange category by KIADB and 2D2P1 and -- 2D2P2 are vacant.
Hence 7 EC amendment is not required for the plots i.e. 2A, 2B, and 2C.
154(xix) That the committee failed to notice that the Obadenahalli Tank fall under Obadenahalli Tank is mentioned in the minor tanks earlier Tor for which earlier EC is granted but now denies the same under the pretext of Major/Minor Tanks 4(xx) That. the Committee has assessed the Command Area from 40| Ha to environmental compensation as 2000 Ha) as per irrigation Rs.1,53,98,438/- which itself is not in department letter No. commensurate with the violations. 289/20/09/2021, Bashettyhalli Pattana Panchayth' letter No. 152 dated 27th May 2021. As per Bashettyhalli Pattana Panchayth letter, the tanks at Sv No. 62 and 06 of Obadenahalli village with area 2.90 Hectares and at Sy No. 55 with area 2.08 Ha are designated as small tanks, which doesn't attracts siting guidelines for Orange category industries. 'Annexure-
54(xxi) That the comimittee failed to notice, in the | The KIADB had commenced first place, that the land acquisition is not activities prior n | to EC and permissible without the grant of proper EC hence Environmental from conmpetent authority and CFE for the compensation has been worked establishment of Industrial Area by KIADB out and reported t | in the Joint which is against the Order of the Hon'ble Committee Report dated Apex. 24.11.2020 at e para 5.2, page 21-22.
4(xxii) That the Committee failed to notice that the development works started without grant of EC and CFE is for the establishment of Industrial area which is RED Category industry as per CPCB categorization.
4(xxiii) That the Committee failed to notice that the other development works like SWD, street lights, power lines, plot demarcation are all started without the grant of EC and CFE but considered only the Roads 4(xxiv) That the Committee failed to notice that the KIADB had allotted land to M/s development and establishment of certain Keihinfie (P) Ltd, on 31.07.2012. industries have started under the guise of M/s Keihinfie (P) Ltd had CFE, if any, without the grant of proper EC obtained EC on 26.03.2013 from from competent authority as well as the CFE SEIAA and KSPCB has issued for the industrial area. CFE on 09.01.2013 with conditions to obtain required statutory clearances before taking up construction and CFO on 20.11.2014. M/s Stellis Biopharma Pvt. Ltd. had obtained CFE from KSPCB under Orange category on 28.09.2016 and CFO on 07.07.2017. KIADB have obtained amendment to EC in respect of M/s Stellis Biopharma Pvt. ltd. on 24.01.2019 issued by SEIAA for Red category. KSPCB has issued CFE- Expansion on 06.02.2020 under Red category followed by CFO on 11.09.2020. KIADB has obtained first EC on 28.03.2016 from SEIAA, amendment to EC on 24.01.2019 and CFE from KSPCB on 16.08.2016. Other industries have started after 16 obtaining EC by KIADB from SEIAA and CFE from KSPCB.
5 That it is submitted that the Joint Committee The Joint Committee has had filed and interim report before this examined all relevant details / Hon'ble Tribunal on 29.10.2020 wherein the documents and submitted its Committee had noted as follows:- report "The Joint committee after site inspection had detailed discussion with KIADB officials and Sri. S.K. Vijaya Kumar (Applicant). After discussion the Joint committee sought the following additional information from the KIADB to deliberate on the given TORs and submit the report.
1 Copy of Topsheet showing the water bodies in the site along with buffer details.
2. A sample copy of allotment Letter to the individual industry.
3. Details of rainwater harvesting.
4. Permission letter from Central/State Ground Water Authority.
5. Details of water drawl from the borewells along with meter reading register.
6. Details of energy conservation measures along with percentage of energy saving.
7. Copy of advertisement of the issue of Environmental clearance Copy of the layout superimposed on the toposheet.
6 That the report dated 24.11.2020 is The issues raised by the however silent on these issues especially applicant relating to with respect to the huge discrepancies with discrepancies in EIA Report has the information in the Form-1, PFR and the been addressed para 5.1.14 EIA Reports and the toposheets and layout Page 19-21 of the Joint plan which were submitted by the KIADB to Committee report dated the Karnataka SEAC and SEIAA. Thus, the 24.11.2020. Joint committee failed to consider the fact that Sy.Nos.33/ 3, 35/2, etc., of KIADB had obtained EC from Raghunathapura village is not at all shown SEIAA on 28.03.2016 for in the layout Map submitted in the EIA Establishment of Orange and Report for grant of Environmental Clearance Green category industries. amendment. In fact the said survey Further, KIADB had obtained numbers have not even been acquired for Amendment to first EC dated 28- the present project which is situated outside 03-2016 for Sy.No. 14/2, 14/3, the layout Map which is submitted in the 14/4, 15/2, 15/3, 15/4, 15/5, EIA Report. On the other hand the said 16, 17/1, 17/2, 17/3, 17/4 and Sy.Nos.33/ 3, 35/s, etc. of Obadenahalli 17/5 measuring 10 Acres alloted village which is adjacent to M/s. Kiehin Fie to M/s. Stelis Biopharma for (P) Ltd. is ear-marked for KPTCL sub-station RED category, on 24.01.2019 but in reality M/s. Ajax Industries is from SEIAA. established and in operation without EC The land reserved for KPTCL amendment in the scope of project and falls in Sy Nos 53p,64p, 67p, proper Layout Plan approved by competent 68/1p, of Obadenahalli as per Planning Authority. layout map submitted to SEIAA for obtaining EC. The land reserved for KPTCL is not shifted and is vacant as of now.
As per the CFE issued by KSPCB, the location of M/ s Ajax Engineering Pvt Ltd,-Unit-3 is plot number 149, 150 and 151 of 17 KIADB 3rd Phase, Obadenahalli (Sy. No. 28/4, 28/5, 28/6, 33/1, 33/2, 33/3, 34/1, 34/2, 35/1 and 35/2 of Obadenahalli). The Industry has obtained CFE from KSPCB on 23.03.2017, CFE expansion on 21.05.2018 and CFO on 29.09.2018 under Orange Category for which EC is 7 That the joint committee has clearly found According to SEIAA, the subject certain violations of the Environmental will be taken up in Clearance dated 28.03.2016 and has Forthcoming SEIAA meeting. assessed the amount of environmental Accordingly, action taken report compensation to be paid. However, no will be submitted for kind action has been taken for the violation of the perusal of the Hon'ble National provisions of the Environment (Protection) Green Tribunal (SZ) Act, 1986 under Section 19 by the SEIAA Chennai. r/w important that the Committee conducts a proper assessment of compliance of each condition under the Environmental Clearance dated 28.03.2016 and 24.01.2019.
8 Thus, it is submitted that this Hon'ble Joint Committee has Tribunal may be pleased to direct the Joint examined all the relevant Committee to conduct a proper audit of the data in detail and submitted compliance status of the conditions of the the report.
environmental Clearance dated 28.03.2016. Further, in light of the clear violations of the TGR Notification, 2003 direct the Joint Committee to undertake a groundwater assessment of the area and submit a report regarding the same to this Hon'ble Tribunal. Further, in light of the clear violations of the Environmental Clearance dated 28.02.2016, this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the above titled Original Application and grant the prayers made therein.
"
Appeal No. 20/2019 (SZ)
8. The Appeal has been preferred against amended Environmental Clearance for establishment of industrial area at Doddaballapura industrial area 3rd Phase at Arehalliguddadahalli, Varadanahalli, Kolipura, Obadenahalli, Raghunathapura, Sunnaghatta villages of Devanahalli & Doddaballapura Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District by Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB) on 24.01.2019 by SEIAA, Karnataka. The amendment allows use of area in land at Survey Nos. 14/2, 14/3, 14/4, 18 15/1, 15/2, 15/3, 15/4, 15/5, 16, 17/1, 17/2, 17/3, 17/4, and 17/5 of plot D-1 measuring 10 Acres of the said industrial area for Red category industries out of the Total Industrial area of 696.45 Acres (281.84 Ha), subject to specific and general conditions. The challenge to the said amendment by way of appeal is on the plea that siting of red category industries will not be conducive to the protection of environment in the eco-sensitive area. The appellant has relied upon KSPCB guidelines prohibiting new industries within 1.5 km from the embankment of the streams, rivers, dams. With respect to ecologically and/or otherwise sensitive areas, at least a distance of 25 kms has to be maintained, and further, the condition stipulates that depending upon the geo-climatic conditions, the requisite distance shall have to be increased by the appropriate agency. The appellant has also raised the issue of infirmity in holding of public hearing and other procedural infirmities in the process of grant of EC. The appellant has relied upon Notification dated 18.11.2003 issued by the Government of Karnataka under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 issuing directions in respect of Tippagondanahalli Reservoir (TGR) catchment areas as follows:
" Zone Area Covered Nature of Authorities responsible restricted/regulated activities (1) (2) (3) (4) Zone-1 Entire a) Regulation and checking Tippagondanahalli over exploitation of Director Mines and Geology Reservoir (TGR) ground water. Department.
catchment area specified b) No fresh leases or license in Annexure to this for mining, quarrying and Notification. stone crushers shall be granted.
c) No person shall dispose
solid as well as liquid
waste in this area
without scientific 1. Department of Urban
Processing. Development
d) To ensure adoption of 2. Bangalore Water Supply rain water harvesting and sewage Board.
systems in all the new 3. Nelamangala Planning
and existing buildings, Authority.
within six months from
the date of issue of this Secretary, Department of order. Agriculture/Horticulture.
19 e) To promote organic
farming including bio-
fertilizers and bio-
pesticide.
Zone-2 Area covered within 2 No person shall carry on 1. Department of Urban
kms from the activities other than Development
Tippagondana halli Agricultural or Agriculture 2. BMRDA Reservoir (TGR) related activities without 3. Nelamangala Planning boundary prior permission Authority
4. Bangalore Development Authority
5. Directorate of Municipal Administration 3 Area covered within 1 km No person shall carry on 1. Department Urban distance from the river activities other than Development. banks of Arkavathy (only Agriculture or Agriculture 2. BMRDA related activities without 3. Nelamangala planning upto Hesarghatta tank prior permission. Authority.
from TGR) and 4. Bangalore Development
Kumudvathi. Authority
5. Directorate of Municipal
Administration.
6. Bangalore Water supply
and Sewage Board.
4 Area covered within 1 km a) Permit only those
distance from the river industrial activities 1. Department Urban
banks of Arkavathy (only which are listed as Development.
upto Hesarghatta Tank Green category, by the 2. BMRDA from TGR) and Karnataka State 3. Nelamangala planning Kumudvathi (Excluding Pollution Control Board Authority. the areas falling within with mandatory 4. Bangalore Development zone 2) adoption of rainwater Authority harvesting systems and 5. Directorate of Municipal waste water treatment Administration.
facilities. The other 6. Bangalore Water supply regulatory/civic and Sewage Board.
agencies to issue permit
only after Consent form
Establishment (CFE) is
obtained from the
KSPCB.
b) Permit new buildings
with only ground and
first floor with
mandatory adoption of "
rain water harvesting
systems.
9. The appeal was filed on 24.04.2019. Notice was issued on 11.10.2019 to the respondents, including SEIAA, Karnataka, KIADB, Central Ground Water Authority and State PCB. Reply has been filed by KIADB denying the allegations. The appeal was ordered to be heard with the OA and both the matters have thus been considered together in view of common issue, noted earlier.
2010. We have heard Shri Ritwick Dutta, learned Counsel for the applicants/appellants, Shri H.K. Vasanth, learned Counsel for SEIAA, Karnataka and Shri B. Dhanraj, learned Counsel for the KIADB - the Project Proponent (PP) and given our due consideration to the issue.
11. Shri Dutta submitted that report of the joint Committee dated 24.11.2020 read with further report dated 8.12.2021 is not factually and legally correct. ECs in question are in violation of TGR notification dated 18.11.2003. Establishment of industrial units is in violation of general and specific conditions of the ECs. Ground water has been illegally extracted.
No CETP has been established. Green belt has not been developed.
Violation to the extent of starting construction of road before EC is acknowledged by the joint Committee constituted by this Tribunal but compensation assessed is inadequate.
12. These contentions have been refuted by learned Counsel appearing for SEIAA, State PCB as well as the PP. They have supported the report of the joint Committee and reiterated the observations, conclusions and recommendations therein. They have submitted that the matter may be disposed of in the light of the said report.
13. On due consideration to the matter, we are unable to accept the application and the appeal except for compliance of norms and due monitoring. TGR notification issued by the Karnataka Government under Section 5 of the EP Act, 1986 provides for certain regulatory and restriction measures but there is no bar to setting up of industries. Even in absence of any restriction, due precautions need to be taken consistent with environmental concerns, in the light of the 'Sustainable Development' principle. Industries have already worked in the area for the last six years and for more than four years when the joint Committee ascertained the 21 compliance status by site visit. Status of compliance has also been ascertained after 2019 notification, including red category industries. It is found that no effluent is being discharged. Thus, CETP has not been found necessary. No doubt there is violation with regard to green belt but land has been allocated and steps taken. With regard to violations pointed out by the joint Committee, compensation has been duly assessed.
14. In view of above, we are not satisfied that a case is made out to quash the original EC or the amended EC. However, having regard to the fact that the area falls in Zone-I which is catchment area of the water reservoir, as per Notification dated 18.11.2003, all necessary precautions need to be taken in accordance with the EC conditions and also otherwise which need to be continuously monitored. It needs to be particularly ensured that the water bodies and the drainage pattern of the catchment area are not disturbed/altered so that the reservoir receives water from the catchment area without any hindrance. Further, it needs to be ensured that no groundwater is tapped in the catchment area in view of scarcity of groundwater therein.
The industrial area in question i.e. Doddaballapura Industrial area, 3rd phase, was initially meant exclusively orange and green category of industries. Later some red category industries were permitted subject to laid down conditions and safeguards. One of the consent conditions is ZLD.
Recovered water out of ZLD process must go back into the processing system with closed loop. No effluent should go out of the process even for gardening.
15. We constitute a four-member joint Committee headed by Additional Chief Secretary, Environment Department, Karnataka with Member Secretary, SEIAA, Karnataka and Member Secretary, State PCB and 22 Regional Director CPCB, Bengaluru as members for monitoring in above terms. The State PCB will be the nodal agency for coordination and compliance. The joint Committee may meet atleast once in a month to take stock of compliance status and ensure remedial action considering the above observations. Its proceedings may be placed on the website of the State PCB. Recommendations of the joint Committee may be faithfully complied. If any grievance survives, it will be open to the aggrieved parties to take remedies as per law.
The Original Application as well as Appeal stand disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to Additional Chief Secretary, Environment Department, Karnataka, Member Secretary, SEIAA, Karnataka, Member Secretary, State PCB and Regional Director CPCB, Bengaluru by e-mail for compliance.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP K. Ramakrishnan, JM Sudhir Agarwal, JM Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM Prof. A. Senthil Vel, EM July 27, 2022 Original Application No. 180/2017 (SZ) & Appeal.No.20/2019 (SZ) AB 23