Disposed

Naveen Kumar. S/O Sh. Rajpal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh

NGT4 Dec 2020Original Application No. 77/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tribunal directed orders for remedial action against unscientific waste dumping in village Ganwri, Meerut. Directs waste removal completion, environmental compensation, health survey, waste segregation, and RDF processing to energy plants.

What did the court decide?

Completion of waste removal within three months; recovery of environmental compensation; health survey; waste-to-energy plant processing; waste segregation.

Naveen Kumar. S/O Sh. Rajpal Singh vs State of Uttar… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2020)

¶1

Court No. 1

¶2

Item No. 02

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 77/2019

¶5

(With report dated 27.11.2020)

Naveen Kumar & Anr.

Applicant(s)

Versus

Union of India & Ors.

¶10

Respondent(s)

¶11

Date of hearing: 04.12.2020

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER

¶13

Applicant(s):

¶14

Respondent(s):

¶15

Mr. Akash Vashishtha, Advocate

¶16

Mr. Pradeep Misra and Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advocates for UPPCB Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate with Mr. Manish Bansal, Municipal Commissioner, Meerut Nagar Nigam

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The issue for consideration is the remedial action against unscientific dumping of solid waste in village Ganwri on the bank of river Kaali, in Meerut District in UP, creating health hazard. It is also alleged that 22 deaths have taken place and 200 people have been taken ill.

¶19

The matter has been considered by the Tribunal on several occasions in the light of status reports filed by the authorities. On 16.09.2019, the Tribunal considered the status of progress and found the state of affairs to be unsatisfactory. It was observed:

¶20

¶21

“2. The matter was reviewed 03.07.2019 in the light of report dated 15.04.2019 filed by the State PCB to the effect that waste was dumped in unscientific and unhygienic manner. The State PCB had required the Nagar Nigam to pay compensation of Rs. 24 lakhs for damage to the environment. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner, Nagar Nigam to remain present in person along with compliance report.

¶22

3. The status report handed over during the hearing is to the effect that some steps have been taken and further time is required. It is also stated that the Nagar Nigam is seeking review against compensation of environmental damage. Since the compensation is for the past damage, it is made clear that the State PCB may not review the order without permission of the Tribunal. Review can be considered only if there is error in the finding of assessment of damage found by the State PCB.

¶23

List for further consideration on 01.11.2019. The Commissioner, Nagar Nigam may remain present in person on the next date of hearing.”

¶24

The matter was thereafter considered on 01.09.2020 in light of the status report filed by the Meerut Nagar Nigam mentioning the remedial steps taken in the matter. However, the Applicant sought further directions by stating that the problem still continued.

¶25

The Tribunal accordingly directed as follows:-

¶26

“5. In view of above, let further remedial action be taken in the matter by the concerned Municipal Council, to be overseen by the State PCB. The Oversight Committee constituted in terms of order dated 16.03.20201 by this Tribunal headed by justice SVS Rathore, former Judge of the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow may furnish an independent report before the next date by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF. An advance copy of the report be given to the Secretary Urban Development so that an action taken report/response is filed.”

¶27

In pursuance of the above, the Oversight Committee has filed a report on 27.11.2020. The report shows that the Committee held a meeting on 08.10.2020 and reviewed the progress. The recommendations in the report are :-

¶28

¶29

“ VI. RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE COMMITTEE

¶30

1. The progress of legacy waste removal at Gawri, Meerut is slow which should be enhanced by taking immediate steps. Municipal Commissioner, Meerut must ensure that within three months' time the work is complete. In case of any delay, he shall be held liable for the same.

¶31

2. UPPCB be directed to issue a notice for realization of EC to the Dept. of Urban Development and Principal Secretary Urban Development department be directed to ensure that the said amount is deposited within a month.

¶32

3. The RDF generated in legacy waste processing is being sent to a plant set up by M/S Bijendra Energy which converts waste into energy. Such small plants to be replicated in other parts of the State.

¶33

4. Legacy waste is hazardous to human as well as environmental health. Considering the number of healthrelated aspect in this case Hon'ble NGT had directed to conduct a health survey in the area. However, till date, no such survey has taken place. Necessary action be taken within 15 days.

¶34

5. The Committee recommends UPPCB to conduct a fresh inspection of the site and submit a detailed report within a month.

¶35

Waste segregation be promoted and practiced in each part of the State. CEEBROS Boulevard3 in Thoraipakkam, Tamil Nadu is 352-unit community which has been practicing waste segregation since last few years. It won a green award for its efforts from Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. Such models if found feasible be replicated in Uttar Pradesh.”

¶36

There is no objection or other response to the report of the oversight Committee. Accordingly, we direct the Municipal Commissioner, Meerut to ensure further action. The State PCB may recover the environmental compensation. The RDF generated in the legacy waste be sent to the Waste to Energy Plant. Small plants be set up in other parts of the States, which action may be planned and overseen

¶37

¶38

by the Principal Secretary, Urban Development. Health Survey may be conducted, as already directed. The State PCB may conduct further inspection. Waste segregation may be ensured following the best practices at other places. We request the Oversight Committee to further monitor the situation after three months.

¶39

The application is disposed of.

¶40

A copy of this order be forwarded to Justice SVS Rathore, former Judge of the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow, heading the Oversight Committee, the Principal Secretary, Urban Development, UP, the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Meerut and the UPPCB by e-mail for compliance.

¶41

Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP

¶42

S.K. Singh, JM

¶43

Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM

¶44

December 04, 2020 Original Application No. 77/2019 SN

¶45

Naveen Kumar. S/O Sh. Rajpal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen Kumar. S/O Sh. Rajpal Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R P Singhal vs NCT of Delhi

Narendra Singh Chandel vs New Okhla Industrial Development Authority

Subhas Dattasubhas Datta vs State of West Bengal and Others

Re: Dust Pollution Arising Out of Dry Sweeping of Roads in Metro Cities vs .

Simran Aggrwal vs Hari Shankar Steel Corporation

Gulshan Hinduja vs New Okhla Industrial Development Authority

Yogendra Kumar vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Gafuruddin Ahmed vs East Delhi Municipal Corporation

R P Singhal vs NCT of Delhi

Narendra Singh Chandel vs New Okhla Industrial Development Authority

Mahendra Singh vs State of Haryana

Brijesh Pandey vs M/S. Hari Shankar Stone Works

Brijesh Pandey vs M/S. Hari Shankar Stone Works

Brijesh Pandey vs M/S. Hari Shankar Stone Works