Dismissed

Amit Sorout v. Central Pollution Control Board

NGT6 Jul 2022Review Application No. 18/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This review application challenged an order levying environmental compensation on a brick kiln operator for operating without a valid Clear To Operate permit and mandated pollution control technology. The Tribunal upheld the compensation, citing non-compliance with environmental norms.

What did the court decide?

Review Application dismissed; environmental compensation of Rs. 20,43,750/- remains payable; I.A. No. 156/2022 also disposed.

Amit Sorout vs Central Pollution Control Board — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2022)

¶1

Item No. 01

¶2

(Court No. 1)

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Review Application No. 18/2022 IN Original Application No. 55/2021 (I.A. No. 156/2022)

¶5

Amit Sorout Applicant Versus Central Pollution Control Board & Ors. Respondent

¶6

--------M/s Mewat Brick Co, Review Applicant

¶7

Date of hearing: 06.07.2022

¶8

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

¶9

IN CHAMBER BY CIRCULATION

¶10

ORDER

¶11

This application seeks review of order dated 04.02.2022 whereby the Tribunal dealt with the grievance of operation of the brick kiln by the review applicant in violation of environmental norms and directed remedial action.

¶12

According to the Review Application, in pursuance of order of this Tribunal, the State PCB levied compensation of Rs. 25,39,063/- for the violations. According to the review applicant, the levy of compensation is ex parte without considering the view point of the applicant.

¶13

¶14

We are unable to accept the submission. Order dated 11.03.2022, Annexure A-15 filed with the Review Application shows that the unit is operating without valid CTO, without mandatory zig zag technology and has not installed Air Pollution Control Machine (APCM). Show cause notice was issued to review applicant on 14.02.2021 for levy of compensation but the unit did not reply. The order is reproduced bellows:-

¶15

“Whereas, M/s Mewat Bricks Co. Village - Neemka, Tehsil Punhana, District- Nuh (Mewat) is engaged in the manufacturing process of bricks and covered under orange category of consent management of the Board and is polluting in nature;

¶16

Whereas, the unit has obtained consent to establish from the Board vide No. HSPCB/Consent/313116118GSMWCTE5725806 dated 26.10.2018 valid for the period 26.10.2018 to 25.10.2023;

¶17

Whereas, the above said unit was inspected on 14.02.2021 by the field officer ofthe Board and found that the unit is operating illegally without obtaining valid CTO, unit has not installed adequate APCM and the unit has also not adopted zigzag technology;

¶18

Whereas, a show cause notice for closure, prosecution and imposition of environmental compensation was issued to the unit vide letter no. 103 dated 14.02.2021 and the reply not submitted by unit. The unit was closed and sealed by the Board on 27.08.2021 for the above said violations in compliance of closure order issued order endst. dated 26.08.2021;

¶19

Whereas, the Regional Officer, Nuh Region vide letter dated 12.02.2022 has sent

¶20

the calculation of environment compensation against the unit for above said violations;

¶21

Whereas, on the directions of Hon'ble NGT in the matter of OA, No.593i2017 (WP'

¶22

(CIVIL) No.375/2012, Paryavaràn Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors, CPCB has prepared Methodology for Assessing Environmental Compensation. The Methodology prepared by CPCB has been accepted by Hon'ble NGT vide orders dated 808.2019 in the same case;

¶23

Whereas, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in matter of Indian Council for Enviro

¶24

Legal Action & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., (1996) 3 SCC 212 Para 16 and in matter of Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum Vs. Union. of lndia & Ors. (1996)5 SCC 647 Para 12-18 held that

¶25

¶26

“Polluter Pay" principle is accepted principle and part of environmental law of the country even without specific statute;

¶27

Whereas, it has been ordered vide Head office order Endst. No. HSPB/PLG/2021/2343-2379 Dated 22.12.2021 to adopt the modalities/ methodology suggested by CPCB for assessment, imposing, collection and utilization of environmental compensation from the polluting units in the state of Haryana;

¶28

Whereas, a committee was constituted at head office level vide order endst.' No. HSPCB/l/94885/2022 dated 08.02.2022 to examine and finalize case of. the environment compensation submitted by the Regional officers so as to maintain the uniformity amongst similar cases. The report submitted by committee is placed before the competent authority for approval; Whereas, in compliance of above quoted orders of Hon'ble NGT, this case falls under the cases to be considered for levying environmental compensation i.e. Unit Operating without obtaining prior consent to operate under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and/or Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution Act, 1981; Whereas, the Environment Compensation Assessment Committee examined the recommendations of environmental compensation submitted by the Regional Officer in case of said unit, in its meeting held on 24.02.2022, as per provisions of above said modalities/ methodology. After deliberations, the committee finalized environmental compensation as under;

¶29

EC= P1 x N x R x S x LF= 50x 327 x 250 x 0.5 xi.0= Rs 20,43,750/where P1 Pollution Index, N = No of days of violation, R Factor in Rupees, S = Factor for scale of operation, LF = Location Factor.

¶30

In view of above, it is hereby ordered, with the directions to the unit M/s Mewat Bricks Co. Village - Neemka, Tehsil Punhana, District- N u h (Mewat) to deposit Environment compensation of Rs. 20,43,750/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh Forty Three Thousand. Seven Hundred Fifty only) with the Haryana State Pollution Control Board as Environment compensation within 01 month on account of the damage caused.

¶31

ln case of failure, the Board will be constrained to initiate action as deemed necessary in due course of law. The amount of Environment compensation is to be deposited in Saving Bank Account of the Board at INDUSIND Bank, Sector-9, Panchkula in Account Number100053543757 having IFSC Code: INDB0000164.”

¶32

The recitals in the order are not disputed by the review applicant. If such facts were incorrect, the applicant could have pointed out the same to the Board which has not been done. Once it does not have valid CTO, not installed APCM and not adopted zig-zag technology, no fault can be

¶33

¶34

found with the impugned order. Thus, no ground is made out for review of order of this Tribunal or for interfering with levying of compensation by the State PCB.

¶35

The Application is dismissed.

¶36

I.A. No. 156/2022 will also stand disposed of.

¶37

Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP

¶38

Sudhir Agarwal, JM

¶39

Prof. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶40

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶41

July 6, 2022 Review Application No. 18/2022 IN Original Application No. 55/2021 (I.A. No. 156/2022) AB

¶42

Amit Sorout v. Central Pollution Control Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Sorout v. Central Pollution Control Board

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

Salu Dsouza vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority through Its Member Secretary

Sridevi Datla vs Union of India Rep. by Its Secretary Ministry of Environment and Forests and Climate Change

Shailesh Singh vs Central Pollution Control Board

The Department of Tourism, Govt. of West Bengal, through Principal Secretary vs Subhas Datta S/O Late Banewar Datta

MD Islam vs West Bengal Pollution Control Board

Yashovardhan Shandilya Sharma S/O Shri Bhawani Shankar Sharma vs Union of India Thourgh Secretary Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas

Michael Lambert Jehan vs Central Pollution Control Board

Prafulla Samantray vs Union of India through Secretary Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

News Item Published in Times Now Dated 05TH March 2022 Titled "Rajasthan : Over 50 Crocodiles Dead in a Month Due to Construction and Beautification Activities in Kota'S Kala Talab" vs

Sajad Rasool vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 35/2022 in Appeal No. 15/2021 of Pramod vs Directorate of Geology and Mining

Amit Sorout vs Central Pollution Control Board

Devanshu Bose vs Agra Development Authority

Manoj Bansal vs State of Uttar Pradesh