Partly allowed

Surender vs

NGT4 Jul 2024IA No. 224/2024 in Original Application No. 142/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of an interim application seeking recall of an earlier order in an environmental public interest litigation. The National Green Tribunal dismissed the recall application and directed the joint committee to verify environmental norm compliance, ordering the State to respond and listing the matter for further hearing.

What did the court decide?

I.A. No. 224/2024 dismissed; Joint Committee directed to verify compliance and submit report within one month via email.

Surender vs — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.1

¶2

(Court No. 2)

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPALBENCH, NEW DELHI.

¶4

(Through Physical Hearing with Hybrid V.C. Option)

¶5

Original Application No. 142/2024 ( I.A. No. 223/2024, I.A. No. 224/2024 )

¶6

Surender …Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. …Respondents Date of hearing: 04.07.2024

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER. HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER.

¶10

Applicant: None for the applicant.

¶11

Respondents: Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advocate for UPPCB (through VC). Mr. Mansi Chahal and Mr. S.A. Zaidi, Advocates for Project Proponent.

¶12

Application is registered based on a letter petition received by Post. ORDER

¶13

Mr. Surender has sent by post the present letter petition to this Tribunal which has been treated and registered as O.A. No. 142/2024.

¶14

Vide order dated 22.04.2024 this Tribunal impleaded respondents no. 1 to 3 and issued notices to them and also constituted a Joint Committee with direction to verify the factual position and submit its report at least one week before the date fixed i.e. 04.07.2024.

¶15

Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent filed I.A. No. 223/2024 seeking exemption from filing the English translation copies of annexures and I.A. No. 224 of 2024 seeking recalling of order dated 22.04.2024 passed by this Tribunal, on the grounds mentioned therein.

¶16

O.A. No. 142/2024 Surender Vs. State of U.P. & Ors .

¶17

-2-

¶18

I.A. No. 223/2024 was allowed vide order dated 31.05.2024 and the applicant was exempted from filing the English translation copies of annexures at that stage with direction to file the same in due course of time.

¶19

Vide order dated 31.05.2024, notice of I.A. No. 224 of 2024 was issued to the applicant and the Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent was directed to file response to the averments made in the Original Application with requisite details regarding compliance with CTO conditions and interim direction given by this Tribunal to the Joint Committee to visit the Respondent No. 3 and submit its report was ordered to remain in abeyance.

¶20

In compliance thereof response has been filed by Respondent No. 3 vide email dated 03.07.2024.

¶21

None has appeared for the applicant.

¶22

We have heard learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3-Project Proponent and gone through the material on record.

¶23

The applicant sent present letter petition dated 28.08.2023 which was registered as O.A. No. 142/2024. The applicant sent another letter petition which was registered as O.A. No. 717/2023 and disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 06.12.2023 with direction to the Chairman, UPPCB to consider representation dated 25.08.2023 of the applicant and to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Representation dated 25.08.2023 of the applicant was disposed of by the Chairman, UPPCB vide order dated 23.02.2024 on the ground that the unit was lying closed under closure order dated 18.08.2023 and was not being illegally operated in violation of closure order and RO, Ghaziabad was directed to ensure implementation of closure order dated 18.08.2023.

¶24

O.A. No. 142/2024 Surender Vs. State of U.P. & Ors .

¶25

-3-

¶26

On Appeal closure order dated 18.08.2023 was set aside by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 20.02.2024 which was upheld by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court vide order dated 13.03.2024 passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 2423 of 2024 titled as Chief Environmental Engineer UPPCB, Lucknow Vs. Appellate Authority/ Principal Secy. Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change & Anr. with liberty to UPPCB to initiate appropriate proceedings against the Project Proponent and pass a fresh order after full opportunity to Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent.

¶27

UPPCB issued letter dated 03.04.2024 to Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent allowing the unit to operate but no fresh order after giving opportunity to Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent has been passed by UPPCB so far which fact has also been conceded by learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent.

¶28

In the present application allegations of violation of the environmental norms by Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent have been made which were not specifically looked into by the Chairman, UPPCB who disposed of the representation dated 25.08.2023 mainly on the ground of the unit lying closed and there being no illegal operation thereof in violation of closure order. The allegations regarding violation of environmental norms are required to be enquired into and have not been so enquired into by UPPCB. In his response Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent has claimed compliance with CTO conditions/environmental norms but compliance status is required to be physically verified.

¶29

In the facts and circumstances of the case, we consider verification of the compliance report submitted by the Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent to be essential for just and proper adjudication of the questions involved in the case.

¶30

O.A. No. 142/2024 Surender Vs. State of U.P. & Ors .

¶31

-4-

¶32

Consequently, no ground for recalling of order dated 22.04.2024 passed by this Tribunal in the present case is made out and I.A. No. 224/2024 is dismissed.

¶33

Accordingly, the Joint Committee constituted by this Tribunal vide order dated 22.04.2024 is directed to look into the grievances of the applicant, verify the factual position with regard to the same and also compliance by Respondent No. 3- Project Proponent with CTO conditions/ environmental norms and submit its report within one month by way of email at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.

¶34

List for further consideration on 16.08.2024.

¶35

Notice be issued again to the State of UP through the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad requiring the same to file its reply/response within a period of one month by way of email as directed above.

¶36

The Applicant be informed about the date of hearing fixed and Notice be send to him for joining proceedings.

¶37

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶38

Dr.Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶39

July 4^th , 2024 AG

Surender vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surender vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Saravanan vs Tamil Nadu State Coastal Zone Management Authority

Shri Om Prakash vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Bharatiya Kisan Union Purwa through Its Sceretary vs Union of India Ministry of Jal Shakti (Government of Inida

Ratneshwar Jan Kalyan Samiti vs State of Uttrakhand

Bharat Sehrawat vs Dr Umesh Verma

Prem Mohan Gaur vs National Highways Authority of India

Pt Laxman Balyogi vs

Indotech Waste Solution vs State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority Uttar Pradesh

Vijay Kumar Sharma vs

Jagjit Singh vs

Amit Kishore and Ors. vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Surender vs

Jai Ram Dass Chawla vs Jai Ram Dass Chawla

Jairam Das Chawla vs