Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: MPPCB in Balram Raikwar vs State Of M P Ors on 9 May, 2013Matching Fragments
28. Taking into consideration, the entire issue which has been considered above, we have constituted a committee consisting of Shri R.S.Kori, Zonal Officer, CPCB, Bhopal and Shri Manoj Kumar Mandrai, Executive Engineer, MPPCB, Bhopal and Shri V.S.Rai, Regional Officer, MPPCB, Sagar to inspect the project proponent's factory to find out and give reply for the two questions raised : (a) as to whether plantation of 3000 trees are sufficient to meet the environmental protection norms and as to whether sufficient space and infrastructure is available for the same; (b) whether the scheme proposed by the project proponent for the purpose of treatment of the discharge of the effluent is acceptable and what is the present status of the treatment plant and nature of pollution being caused.
32. All these factors show that not only the SPCB has failed to give the exact position but also made us to form a conclusion that the project proponent has complied with the conditions. Even though, we have no hesitation to set aside the impugned order for the reasons stated above, ultimately it is for MPPCB to decide about the proposal given by the project proponent for extension by giving due opportunity to the project proponent.
33. In so far, it relates to the right of the project proponent to continue with the existing 3 KL per day on molasses basis for which the permission was legally granted and even though the period of licence has expired on 31.12.2012 and project proponent has made an application for renewal for which the MPPCB has not taken any decision so far action and therefore, it should be taken that licence will continue till such time and final decision is taken. Be that as it may, it is always open to the SPCB to take any decision based on fresh inspection. But it remains a fact that the project proponent is certainly entitled to run the existing 3 KL per day on molasses basis but the question is as to whether he should be allowed to run in this situation as stated in the joint report or unless and until the project proponent comply with certain conditions. We are of the view that the minimum requirement of plantation of 3000 trees must be done by the project proponent so as to enable it to run 3 KL per day on molasses basis and that should be done within the time specified by us. It is now seen that in respect of conducting 8 KL per day on grain basis, the requirement of land by the project proponent is much more. We make it clear that it is for MPPCB to decide the said requirement at the appropriate time. However, in the existing land, we are of the view that on the polluter pay principle, the project proponent should be directed to plant sufficient number of trees.
34. For all the abovesaid reasons we pass the following orders:
(1) Application No. 10 of 2013, M/s Cox India Ltd. stands allowed and the impugned order passed by the MPPCB dated 07.12.2006 stands set aside.
(2) It would be open to MPPCB to give proper notice to the project proponent and after hearing him and giving him sufficient opportunity including the opportunity to remove the defects and comply with various conditions, the MPPCB shall pass appropriate order regarding the proposal of the project proponent for extension.
36. We find it relevant to refer, in particular, Section 17 of Water Act,1974 & Air Act, 1981 wherein the role of SPCB has been defined as multi faceted one, including, enforcement and compliance, environmental monitoring, information dissemination, environmental awareness and environmental advocacy. It is needless to say that all these functions require strong Research and Development support in environment science and technology. We find it, therefore, necessary to observe that MPPCB shall form a separate research wing with adequate manpower and budget support, where all such essential activities are carried out internally or by associating with leading education and research institutes. It is needless to say that technical and scientifically sound information generated through such efforts will improve the environmental governance of MPPCB and make it ready to face increasing challenges of environmental degradation and protection in effective and efficient manner. We hope that the MPPCB will take it in correct spirit and do the needful for the purpose.