Dismissed

M/S Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Gajraula Hasanpur Amroha Uttar Pradesh v. Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

NGT25 Mar 2022Appeal No. 24/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by M/s Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. against an order imposing environmental compensation. The Tribunal held that an independent inspection report confirmed continuing violations of norms, such as multiple discharge outlets and missing flow meters, validating the compensation assessment.

What did the court decide?

Loss of appeal; direction to State PCB to take coercive measures including closure, prosecution, and assessment of compensation for past violations including deterrent elements.

M/S Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Gajraula Hasanpur… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2022)

¶1

Item No. 03

¶2

(Court No. 1)

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

(By Video Conferencing)

¶5

Appeal No. 24/2020

¶6

(With report dated 10.01.2022)

¶7

M/s Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd.

¶8

Appellant

¶9

Versus

¶10

Member Secretary U.P. Pollution Control Board & Ors.

¶11

Respondent(s)

¶12

Date of hearing: 25.03.2022

¶13

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE PROF. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶14

Appellant: Mr. Amarjeet Kumar & Mr. Tarun Khurana, Advocates Respondent(s): Mr. Pradeep Misra & Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advocates for UPPCB

¶15

ORDER

¶16

[

¶17

This appeal has been preferred against the order of the U.P. State PCB dated 07.07.2020 under Section 33A read with Section 27(2) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 levying environmental compensation on ‘Polluter Pays’ principle to the extent of Rs. 22.6 lakhs for continued violation for 113 days from 21.01.2020 to 13.05.2020. The appeal was filed on 24.08.2020 and was considered on 03.09.2020 alongwith other appeals raising identical issues being Appeal No. 23/2020 and other connected matters filed by the sister concern of the appellant.

¶18

¶19

Vide order dated 03.09.2020, the Tribunal sought an independent report from CPCB and State PCB after visit to the site. The matter was thereafter considered on 12.04.2021 in the light of report filed on 19.02.2021. Since the report focused only on appeal No. 25/2020, the said appeal was dismissed and further independent report was required to be filed in the present appeal and other connected appeals being Appeal Nos. 23, 28 and 29 of 2020, which are being dealt with by separate orders today.

¶20

The report in the present appeal has been filed on 10.01.2022 with following observations, conclusions and recommendations:

¶21

“5.0 OBSERVATIONS:

¶22

A. Observations w.r.t. the sugar mill:

¶23

1. The unit is engaged in production of sugar by Double Sulphitation Process with consented capacity of 2500 TCD using sugarcane as the raw material. The unit has restricted the maximum daily discharge of treated trade effluent to 250 KLD and Cooling Tower Blow Down to 250 KLD and only one outlet is allowed for treated effluent discharge. The unit was found operational during the inspection on 07.12.2021.

¶24

2. The unit has started its crushing season 2021-22 on 06th November, 2021.

¶25

3. The unit has valid Consent to Operate under section 21/22 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (as amended) and under section 25/26 of Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (as amended) for discharge of effluent, both valid up to 31.12.2022.

¶26

4. The unit has valid Authorization issued under the provisions of Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and TransBoundary Movement) Rules, 2016 for storage and disposal of hazardous wastes valid up to 30.04.2025.

¶27

5. As per Daily Manufacturing Reports (DMRs) provided by the unit, it was observed that on the day of inspection the unit was crushing 2400 TCD of cane, which is under the consented capacity i.e. 2500 TCD. As per DMRs provided by the unit, average cane crushing from 20.11.2021 to 06.12.2022 is found to be 2382.35 TCD, which is also under the consented capacity of 2500 TCD.

¶28

6. The unit has an agreement with the Bharat Oil & Waste Management Ltd. (BOWML) for storage and disposal of hazardous wastes. The unit has permitted quantity (ton/annum)- 2.5 KL/annum of used oil under Schedule I (Category 5.1) of Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management

¶29

¶30

and Trans-Boundary Movement) Rules, 2016 as per consent issued by UPPCB.

¶31

7. The unit has one Hazardous Tank with capacity of 260 m3 .

¶32

8. The excess condensate is used in cooling tower make-up.

¶33

9. The unit has 03 boilers with capacities of 20 TPH, 20 TPH, and 30 TPH, respectively. The boilers are equipped with wet scrubber and stack height of 30 meters from ground level. The boilers of 20 TPH are equipped with individual wet scrubber and common stack with height of 30 meters from ground level.

¶34

10. The unit has installed Wet Scrubber as air pollution control device in which effluent of spray pond overflow was being used.

¶35

11. The unit has established Environmental Management Cell for proper monitoring and management of issues related with environment in the unit premises. 12. The team has observed Environmental Laboratory well equipped with analytical reagents and necessary equipment used for analyzing various parameters of sugar effluent i.e. pH, COD, BOD, TSS, etc.

¶36

13. The unit has used excess Condensate generated from sugar mill, which was cooled through cooling tower and used as raw water.

¶37

14. The unit has separate Sulphate Removal System (SRS) installed for treatment of spray pond overflow, which is treated in the following order: Spray pond overflow → Water collection tank → Reaction mixture (addition of lime, alum and poly electrolyte) → Micro settler → ETP equalization tank.

¶38

15. The unit has installed Sulphate Removal System (SRS) with capacity of 250 KLD. The treated effluent from SRS outlet is combined with ETP equalization tank.

¶39

16. The team has observed that separate flow meters were not installed for mill house and boiling house to calculate the effluent generation from these processing units.

¶40

17. As informed by unit representative, the generated boiler ash was disposed to fill the low lying areas.

¶41

18. After the tertiary treatment unit, the joint inspection team observed an outlet channel opened towards the agricultural field and the treated effluent from lagoon is also having discharge point for irrigation purpose (Pic-8).

¶42

19. It was observed that the ash handling system at wet scrubber was not proper and it needs maintenance.

¶43

20. The team has observed that the unit has not implemented the color coding of pipelines for water distribution network in the ETP.

¶44

B. Observations w.r.t. the Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP):

¶45

1. The ETP was found operational during the visit.

¶46

2. The unit is having ETP with treatment capacity of 500 KLD for treatment of effluent generated from various sections of sugar

¶47

¶48

mill. No separate flow meters were installed at Mill House, Boiling House, hence effluent generation from both the sections cannot be calculated separately. However, flow meter was found installed between Equalization Tank and Primary Clarifier for inlet effluent monitoring and flow meter was also installed after ACF to monitor actual treated effluent.

¶49

3. The unit has one impermeable Lagoon having capacity of 6000 m3 (60 m x 40 m x 2.5 m) to store treated effluent. Flow meter was found installed at the outlet of the Lagoon, although it was not in operation. However, as per representative of unit, the total treated water is being recycled into the sugar process.

¶50

4. The total average (actual) effluent generation at ETP inlet is 180.88 KLD during 20.12.2021 to 06.12.2021. The average treated effluent discharge is 164.18 KLD during 20.12.2021 to 06.12.2021 which is reused in process as well as for irrigation purpose.

¶51

5. The ETP comprises of Bar screen → Oil & Grease trap with Mech. Oil Skimmer → Equalization tank with air grid → Flash Mixer → Flocculation Mixer → Primary clarifier tube settler →Anaerobic Tank → Aeration Tank with diffuser → Secondary Clarifier → Chlorination → Multi Grade Filter → Activated Carbon Filter →Treated water storage Lagoon.

¶52

6. Flow meter was found installed between equalization tank and primary clarifier for ETP inlet flow measurement (Totalizer= 6150 m³ ) and outlet (Totalizer= 3006 m³ )

¶53

C. Compliance status w.r.t. discharge norms: Compliance/Noncompliance:

¶54

1. Analysis results of sample collected from Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) are shown in Table-1 below:

¶55

Table- 1: Analysis results of samples collected from Effluent

¶56

Treatment Plant (ETP)

¶57

Sample Analysis	Color (Hazen)	Sulphur/ Sulphate ( mg/L)	pH	COD (mg/L)	BOD (mg/L)	TSS (mg/L)	TDS (mg/L)	O & G (mg/L)	MLSS/ MLVSS (mg/L)
ETP Inlet	32	97	3.9	4469	2354	370	2232	-	-
Aeration Tank	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	MLSS- 2399
Secondary Clarifier Outlet	10	118	7.6	56	21	13	672	-	-
ETP Outlet	17	104	7.2	59	18	14	500	BDL	-
Lagoon	16	86	7.5	122	42	48	516	-	-
OCEMS	-	-	8.01	78.6	7.2	8.8	-	-	-
Notified standards for land disposal Heavy Metal ETP inlet	- As- BDL, mg/l, Ni- 0	- Cd- BDL, Co- .01 mg/l, Pb-	5.5 - 8.5 BDL, Cr 0.08 mg/l	250 - 0.02 mg/ , Sb- BDL	100 l, Cu- 0.32 , Se- BDL,	100 mg/l, Fe- 38 V- BDL, Zn	2100 .32 mg/l, M - 0.16 mg/l	10 n- 0.39	-
Heavy Metal ETP outlet	As- BDL, Pb- BDL,	Cd- BDL, Co- Sb- BDL, Se-	BDL, Cr BDL, V-	- BDL, Cu BDL, Zn-	- BDL, Fe- BDL	0.18 mg/l,	Mn- BDL, N	i- BDL,

¶58

¶59

2. The analysis results of samples collected from ETP outlet (pH7.2, COD- 59 mg/l, BOD- 18 mg/l, TSS- 14 mg/l, TDS- 500 mg/l and Oil & Grease- BDL) and lagoon (pH- 7.5, COD- 122 mg/l, BOD- 42 mg/l, TSS- 48 mg/l, TDS- 516 mg/l) are complying with the notified standards for land discharge i.e. pH- 5.5-8.5, COD- 250 mg/l, TSS- 100 mg/l, TDS- 2100 mg/l and Oil & Grease- 10 mg/l.

¶60

3. MLSS value of 2399 mg/l in Aeration Tank of ETP indicates presence of biomass near desired level (2500-3000 mg/l).

¶61

4. Based on calculation, the unit is also complying with the conditions of effluent discharge i.e. 164.18 KLD (68.91 Lit/T of cane crushed) against restricted quantity of treated effluent i.e. 250 KLD and Cooling Tower Blow Down i.e. 60.12 KLD against restricted quantity of 250 KLD as per water consent issued by UPPCB to the unit.

¶62

5. The unit has installed Online Continuous Effluent Monitoring System (OCEMS) at ETP outlet. The team observed and noted the OCEMS readings as pH-8.01, COD-78.6, BOD- 7.2, TSS8.8, TOC- 17.9 and Flow- 5.8 m3 /hr.

¶63

Table-2: Analysis results of sample collected from SRS inlet

¶64

Sample Analysis	Color (Hazen)	Sulphur/ Sulphate ( mg/L)	pH	COD (mg/L)	BOD (mg/L)	TSS (mg/L)	TDS (mg/L)	O & G (mg/L)	MLSS/ MLVSS (mg/L)
SRS Inlet	26	933	6.6	369	107	171	1976	-	-

¶65

6. The analysis results of sample collected from SRS inlet shows pH- 6.6, COD- 369 mg/l, BOD107 mg/l, TSS- 171 mg/l, TDS1976 mg/l. At the time of inspection, no flow from the outlet of SRS was observed therefore sample from the outlet of SRS was not collected.

¶66

D. Sludge management system:

¶67

1. Sludge is collected from ETP section in the following order of stages: Primary clarifier + Secondary clarifier → Sludge drying bed → Naturally dried.

¶68

2. The activated sludge is being recirculated to Aeration tank through recirculation pump and Filtrate from sludge drying bed is again received in Equalization tank for treatment.

¶69

3. The ETP has provision of manual sludge handling system. The unit is having 06 nos. of sludge drying beds having capacity of 156 m³ (26 m³ x 06 nos.) and sludge is distributed to farmers as organic manure.

¶70

E. Observations w.r.t. the fresh water withdrawal, Ground water analysis

¶71

1. The unit has obtained NOC from Uttar Pradesh Ground Water Department (UPGWD) for one bore well to withdraw ground

¶72

¶73

water to meet the domestic and sugar mill fresh water requirement.

¶74

2. The unit has installed one Bore-well for fresh water source in the unit premises, which is used for supply of fresh water in the unit for sugar manufacturing process as well as for domestic purposes.

¶75

3. It was observed that fresh water consumption in sugar plant was replaced by ETP treated water and steam condensate as well as excess condensate except human requirements and laboratory, which was fulfilled by fresh water from bore-well.

¶76

4. The unit has permission to abstract groundwater from existing bore-wells at the rate of 72 m³ /hr (i.e. 105120 m³ permitted annual extraction) as per No Objection Certificate (NOC) from Uttar Pradesh Ground Water Department (UPGWD), which is valid up to November 3rd, 2026. It is observed that the unit has an average fresh water abstraction of 32.18 m³ /day (from 20.11.2021 to 06.12.2021) from existing bore-well, which is under permitted value i.e. 1728 m³ /day.

¶77

5. The unit has one piezometer well in the unit premises (Latitude – 28.708768, Longitude – 78.312365, water level reading – 19.30 m at 24.58°C). 6. The month wise details of fresh water abstraction from 20th Nov, 2021 to 06th Dec, 2021 is given in Table below:

¶78

Table- 3: Details of fresh water abstraction for industrial usage (from 20th Nov. 2021 to 06th Dec.-2021)

¶79

Bore-well No.	Fresh water abstraction (KLD)
Bore-well- I	Average- 32.18 KLD
Total consumption	Total-547 KL
Fresh water consumption in lit/T of Cane Crushed	13.5 lit/T of Cane Crushed

¶80

7. Ground water sample were collected from single bore-well installed in the unit premises. The analysis results of the samples are placed in the Table below:

¶81

Table-4: Analysis results of samples collected from Bore well within unit premises

¶82

Parameters	Hand pump located outside Sugar Mill	Bore well located inside the unit premises	BIS IS 10500:2012 (Permissible limit in absence of alternative source)
pH	7.8	7.6	6.5-8.5
Conductivity (µmho/cm)	646	429	-
COD (mg/l)	BDL	BDL	-
TSS (mg/l)	05	BDL	-
Total hardness as CaCO3 (mg/l)	327	251	600
Total alkalinity as CaCO3 (mg/l)	310	217	600

¶83

¶84

Chloride (mg/l)	22	16	1000
Sulphate (mg/l)	BDL	20	400
Fluoride (mg/l)	BDL	BDL	1.5
As (mg/l)	BDL	BDL	0.05
Cd (mg/l)	BDL	BDL	0.003
Co (mg/l)	BDL	BDL	-
Cr (mg/l)	BDL	BDL	0.05
Cu (mg/l)	BDL	BDL	1.5
Fe (mg/l)	0.15	1.68	0.3
Mn(mg/l)	0.02	BDL	0.3

¶85

6.0 CONCLUSION:

¶86

1. The unit is engaged in production of sugar by Double Sulphitation Process with consented capacity of 2500 TCD using sugarcane as raw material. The unit was found operational during the inspection.

¶87

2. The unit has valid Consent to Operate under section 21/22 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (as amended) and under section 25/26 of Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (as amended) for discharge of effluent, both valid up to 31.12.2022 and valid Authorization issued under the provisions of Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Trans-Boundary Movement) Rules, 2016 for storage and disposal of hazardous wastes valid up to 30.04.2025.

¶88

3. The unit has an agreement with the Bharat Oil & Waste Management Ltd. (BOWML) for storage and disposal of hazardous wastes.

¶89

4. The unit has established Environmental Management Cell for proper monitoring and management of issues related with environment in the unit premises.

¶90

5. The team has observed Environmental Laboratory well equipped with analytical reagents and necessary equipment used in analyzing various parameters of sugar effluent.

¶91

6. The unit has installed separate Sulphate Recovery System (SRS) with capacity of 250 KLD for treatment of spray pond overflow. It was observed that effluent from SRS outlet was added to equalization tank of ETP.

¶92

7. The unit has ETP with treatment capacity of 500 KLD for treatment of effluent generated from various sections of sugar mill. No separate flow meter was installed at Mill House and Boiling House.

¶93

8. The unit has one impermeable Lagoon having capacity of 6000 m³ (Retention time-15 days) to store treated effluent. Flow meter was found installed at the outlet of the Lagoon, although it was not in operation.

¶94

¶95

9. The average actual effluent discharge is complying with the consent condition of maximum restricted mill effluent quantity of 250 KLD as well as notified discharge norms of 200 lit/T of cane crushed.

¶96

10. Flow meter was found installed between equalization tank and primary clarifier for ETP inlet flow (Totalizer= 6150 m³ ) and outlet (Totalizer= 3006 m³ ), respectively.

¶97

11. The unit has utilized quantity of treated effluent from lagoon for irrigation purpose, which cannot be calculated as flow meter is not installed at Lagoon.

¶98

12. The analysis results of treated effluent sample collected from ETP outlet are complying with the standards notified in MoEF&CC Notification G.S.R. 35(E) dated 14th January, 2016.

¶99

13. The unit is having NOC from Uttar Pradesh Ground Water Department (UPGWD) for one bore well to withdraw ground water to meet the domestic and sugar mill fresh water requirement.

¶100

14. The unit has an outlet channel after the tertiary treatment unit, towards the agricultural field, however, the treated effluent from lagoon is also having discharge point for irrigation purpose (Pic no.-08). However, as per MoEF&CC notification dated 14.01.2016, only single outlet point from unit is allowed.

¶101

15. The ash handling system at wet scrubber was not proper which needs maintenance.

¶102

16. The unit has not implemented the color coding of pipelines for water distribution network in the ETP.

¶103

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS:

¶104

1. The unit shall install separate flow meters at mill house and boiling house to quantify the effluent generation.

¶105

2. The unit shall make flow meter operational at the outlet of treated effluent storage lagoon to quantify the use of treated effluent for irrigation purpose.

¶106

3. The unit shall maintain the proper record for ash disposal, sludge and press mud.

¶107

4. The unit shall have only single outlet point discharge for treated effluent from ETP as per MoEF&CC Notification G.S.R. 35(E) dated 14th January, 2016.

¶108

5. The unit shall make ample space for proper management of boiler ash. As per the observation of joint committee the boiler ash was found scattered and suspended in the air.

¶109

6. As per consent conditions, the unit has the provision to use treated effluent in process as well as in irrigation, hence it is recommended that the unit shall maintain only single outlet point for treated effluent usage. (Pic no.-08).

¶110

7. It is recommended to maintain the ash handling system at wet scrubber.

¶111

¶112

8. The unit shall implement the color coding of pipelines for water distribution network in the ETP.”

¶113

From the above, it is seen that there are continuing violations of environmental norms by the unit. No separate flow meter has been installed at mill house and boiling house as required, flow meter at the outlet of the lagoon is not operative so as to ascertain utilization of treated effluents for irrigation as per norms, there are two outlets against single allowed, ash sending system at wet scrubber is not proper. Unit has not implemented colour coding pipelines for water distribution network in the ETP. Thus, the stand of the appellant that compensation has been assessed without any basis cannot be accepted. The appeal has to be dismissed.

¶114

Apart from the above, we find it necessary to direct the State PCB to take further coercive measures against the appellant unit in the light of the violations found, including closure till compliance, prosecution and compensation for the past violations, following due process of law. Assessment of compensation should be based on the law laid down interalia in Sterlite (2013) 4 SCC 575, MC Mehta (1987) 1 SCC 395 and Goel Ganga (2018) 18 SCC 257, considering the financial capacity of the unit, nature and extent of violations and deterrent element.

¶115

The Appeal is dismissed accordingly.

¶116

Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP

Sudhir Agarwal, JM

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

Prof. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶121

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶122

March 25, 2022 Appeal No. 24/2020 DV

¶123

M/S Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Gajraula Hasanpur Amroha Uttar Pradesh v. Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Gajraula Hasanpur Amroha Uttar Pradesh v. Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gregorio Judy Fernandes Alias Bruno Fernandes vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

M/S Manisha Construction Co. vs Maharashtra Pollution Control Board

Ramiro Mascarenhas vs State of Goa

Ankush Arora vs Chandigarh Pollution Control Committee

Ramakant Kourav vs Madhya Pradesh State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (Mpseiaa) through Secretary

Ramakant Kourav S/O Rudrabhansingh Kaurav vs Madhya Pradesh State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (Seiaa)

Jayshri Gayatri Food Products Private Limited through Director Kishan Modi Son of Shri Rajendra Prasad Modi vs M.P Pollution Control Board

Society for Protection of Culture Heritage Environment Tradition and Promotion of National Awareness (Chetna) vs National Capital Territory of Delhi

M/S Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Shekhupur District Badaun Uttar Pradesh vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

M/S Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Puranpur District- Pilibhit Uttar Pradesh vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board