Allowed

Sri Arun Kumar Dutta v. the State of West Bengal

NGT18 Nov 2024IA No. 84/2024 in Original Application No. 162/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The NGT Eastern Zone Bench allowed an interlocutory application to implead additional respondents in a public interest litigation concerning a water body. The court constituted a Fact Finding Committee to investigate allegations of illegal construction, filling, and water pollution.

What did the court decide?

Impleadment of additional respondents allowed; Fact Finding Committee constituted to investigate allegations; notice issued.

Sri Arun Kumar Dutta vs the State of West Bengal — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.01

¶2

Court No.1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA

¶4

(THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)

¶5

Original Application No.162/2024/EZ (I.A. No.84/2024/EZ)

¶6

Sri Arun Kumar Dutta & Ors.

¶7

Applicant(s) Versus

¶8

The State of West Bengal & Ors. Respondent(s)

¶9

Date of hearing: 18.11.2024

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER

¶11

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sobhan Majumder, Adv. (in Virtual Mode)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

I.A. No.84/2024/EZ

¶14

The Interlocutory Application has been taken up. The prayer in the I.A. is for liberty to implead the persons mentioned at Item No.1 to 20 in the prayer in the array of Respondents as Respondents.

¶15

The allegations in the Original Application is that the Applicants who are seven in number are co-owners of a waterbody (Jhil) namely Ashram Jhil measuring about 37.408 acres. The details of the Plot Nos. and Dag Nos. with Area has been given in para 05 of

¶16

the Original Application which is as under: -

¶17

*Sl.No.*	*Dag No.*	*Khatian* *No.*	*Mouza*	*Nature*	*Area.*
1.	1231	559	Oshmanpur	Pukur	0.55 Acr
2.	296	449	-do-	Pukur	2.52 Acr
3.	1077	449	-do-	Pukur	1.23 Acr
4.	1075	449	-do-	Pukur	4.71 Acr
5.	1074	449	-do-	Pukur	0.93 Acr
6.	1073	449	-do-	Pukur	4.11 Acr
7.	1231	559	-do-	Pukur	0.55 Acr
8.	1215	449	-do-	Pukurpar	0.11 Acr
9.	1297	449	-do-	Path	0.01 Acr
10.	201/2156	1557	Ghola	Pukur/Jhil	1.46 Acar
11.	201/2158	1557	-do-	Jhil	1.78 Acar
12.	201/2160	1557	-do-	Jhil	4.05 Acar
13.	201/2156	1559	-do-	Jhil	1.46 Acar
14.	201/2158	1559	-do-	Jhil	1.78 Acar

¶18

¶19

15.	201/2160	1559	-do-	Jhil	4.05 Acar
16.	361/878	449	Oshmanpur	Jhil	3.71 Acar
17.	361/879	449	-do-	Jhil	0.57 Acar
18.	361/880	449	-do-	Pukur	2.52 Acar
19.	361/882	449	-do-	Pukur	1.40 Acar
20.	361/875	449	-do-	Pukur	1.30 Acar
21.	361/889	449	-do-	Pukur	4.94 Acar
22.	361/885	449	-do-	Pukur	0.46 Acar
23.	361/886	449	-do-	Pukur	4.22 Acar

¶20

The said waterbody is stated to be situated on 1, 2 and 3, Azad Hind Nagar, Post Office – Agarpara, Police Station – Ghola, District – 24 Parganas (North), Kolkata – 700109 within Ward No.27, Holding No.218 and 219 of Panihati Municipality.

¶21

The allegation is that the Respondent Nos.9 to 17 in addition to the proposed Respondents are rank-trespassers and do not have any lawful right, title and interest over any portion of the said waterbody and have made construction on the waterbody by filling it up and changing its nature and character as waterbody.

¶22

It is also alleged that the Private Respondents are draining foul water from their respective houses into the said waterbody which is affecting the eco-diversity of the said waterbody. The Applicants are said to have moved an application under Section 144(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure being M.P. Case No.2073 of 2022 against one Sri Dipak Saha and Sri Surajir Paul @ Tappa, the Respondent Nos.7 and 8 herein on which the Executive Magistrate, Barrackpore, 24 Parganas (North) has vide his order dated 13.06.2022 directed the Inspector-in-Charge, Ghola Police Station to enquire the matter and to submit a Report.

¶23

It is also stated that the Applicant No.3 submitted a representation before the Executive Officer, Panihati Municipality on 03.03.2022 against the illegal and unauthorized constructions on the waterbody in question but it is alleged that no steps have been taken till date.

¶24

¶25

In this view of the matter, we allow the I.A. No.84/2024/EZ.

¶26

Let the persons proposed be impleaded in the array of Respondents in the Original Application No.162/2024/EZ as Respondent Nos.18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 37.

¶27

Matter requires consideration.

¶28

Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable within four weeks.

¶29

Mr. Sudip Kumar Dutta, learned Counsel who is present (in Virtual Mode), accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 8, State Respondents, Government of West Bengal.

¶30

Mr. Sibojyoti Chakravarti, learned Counsel who is present (in Virtual Mode), accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent No.2, West Bengal Pollution Control Board.

¶31

Issue notice to the Respondent Nos.6 and 7, Panihati Municipality as well as Respondent Nos.9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 37, Private Respondents, returnable within four weeks.

¶32

All the Respondents shall file their counter affidavits within four weeks.

¶33

Considering the allegations made, we deem it appropriate to constitute a Fact Finding Committee comprising of the following Members:-

¶34

(i) District Magistrate, 24 Parganas (North), or his representative not below the rank of Additional District Magistrate;

¶35

(ii) Senior Scientist, West Bengal State Pollution Control Board; and

¶36

(iii) The Executive Officer, Panihati Municipality or any other Senior Officer nominated by him.

¶37

¶38

The Committee shall visit the site in question and submit its Fact Finding Report within four weeks on affidavit with regard to the allegations made in the Original Application.

¶39

The District Magistrate, 24 Parganas (North) shall be the Nodal Office for all logistic purposes and for filing the Joint Inspection Report on affidavit.

¶40

If environmental violations are found, the Committee shall make appropriate recommendations and action proposed to be taken.

¶41

The Applicant shall serve e-copy/soft copy of the Original Application along with all its annexures upon Mr. Sudip Kumar Dutta and Mr. Sibojyoti Chakravarti, Counsel for the Respondents within 24 hours.

¶42

20. List on 24.12.2024.

¶43

B. Amit Sthalekar, JM

¶44

…................................. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶45

November 18 2024, Original Application No.162/2024/EZ (I.A. No.84/2024/EZ) SKB

¶46

Sri Arun Kumar Dutta v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Arun Kumar Dutta v. the State of West Bengal

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

Suo Motu Fissh Kill at Lingambudhi Lake in Mysuru vs Central Pollution Control Board Rep. by Its Chairman

Haripriya Patel vs State of Odisha

Moti Singh Shekhawat vs State of Rajasthan

Moti Singh Shekhawat vs State of Rajasthan

D5 and D8 Residents Welfare Association Model Town New Delhi vs Horticulture Department of Municipal Corporation Delhi New Delhi

D5 and D8 Residents Welfare Association Model Town New Delhi vs Horticulture Department of Municipal Corporation Delhi New Delhi

Arif Kidwai vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Utkarsh Singh Chauhan vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 21/2022 in Original Application No. 95/2021 of Ranjit Barman vs Central Pollution Control Board

Papun Kumar Sahu vs State of Odisha Represented by ItS Chief Secretary to Govt. of Odisha

Dr B Dash vs Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation

Krishna Mandal vs State of Jharkhand

Abhijit Sarkar vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Sunil Kumar Rampukar Sahu vs State of Bihar