Dismissed

Kahar Samaj Panch Committee v. 1. Thdc India Ltd. (Formerly Tehari Hydro Development Corporation Ltd)

NGT9 Sept 2024Original Application No. 126/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal dismissed an original application challenging a floating solar panel project in an Eco-Sensitive Zone. The applicant disputed the Ministry of Environment's admission that the activity was permitted and sought a detailed written reply, which the court found unnecessary as no law prohibited such projects.

What did the court decide?

The original application is rejected at the admission stage itself.

Kahar Samaj Panch Committee vs 1. Thdc India Ltd… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

(Pune Bench)

¶2

Item No: 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE

¶4

[Through Physical Hearing (with Hybrid Option)]

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.126 OF 2024 (WZ)

¶6

Kahar Samaj Panch Committee …. Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

THDC India Ltd. (Formerly Tehari Hydro Development Corporation Ltd.) & Ors.

¶9

Date of Hearing : 09.09.2024

¶10

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. VIJAY KULKARNI, EXPERT MEMBER

¶11

Applicant : Ms. Shriya Awale, Advocate

¶12

Respondents : Mr. Pushkal Mishra, Advocate for R-2/MoEF&CC

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This order is being passed in continuation of our previous order dated 12.07.2024.

¶15

By our previous order dated 12.07.2024, we had directed respondent No.2 – the Secretary, MoEF&CC as well as respondent No.4 – the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, M.S., to submit a report as to whether the project in question is falling within the Eco-Sensitive Zone and as to whether the same is permissible activity. In compliance of that direction, the Registry had issued notice to these two respondents and in response thereto, from the side of respondent No.2-MoEF&CC, learned counsel Mr. Pushkal Mishra has appeared and prayed that the matter may be taken up at the end of the Board and till then, he would file the reply/report. Accordingly, we had kept back the matter till end of the Board.

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

When the matter was again taken up at the end of the board today, learned counsel Mr. Pushkal Mishra appearing for respondent No.2 – MoEF&CC sent us an e-mail dated 09.09.2024, annexing therewith a copy of the Notification dated 12.07.2017 and drew our attention to Clause (4) of the Notification relating to _prohibited, regulated and promoted activities_ ’, which are given in a table given therebelow and at serial no.35 thereof under the head C. Promoted Activities ’, against the activity _use of renewable energy and fuels_ ’, the description is recorded as bio gas, solar light etc. to be actively promoted ’. Based on that, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has admitted that the present project being related to solar light is a permitted activity and the same may not be treated to be a prohibited activity.

¶18

At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant is not satisfied with the said reply given on behalf of respondent No.2 and states that this is contempt of this Tribunal’s order as respondent No.2 has not filed a detailed written reply despite this Tribunal’s order. She further states that she should be granted some time to file written submissions. We failed to appreciate her request because we had already heard her in the morning session today and made repeated queries as to whether there is any law prohibiting setting up of a floating solar panel project in Eco-Sensitive Zone, to which she stated that there is no law laying down that such kind of project should be established in the Eco-Sensitive Zone. We are not convinced with the argument advanced by her because there is no clear law shown by her laying down that such kind of project is a prohibited activity in the Eco-Sensitive Zone. In view of that, this Original Application cannot be entertained.

¶19

Even if we consider the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant to be true, the fact as to whether a floating solar panel project (a

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

power plant) being set up is falling in Eco-Sensitive Zone was needed to be clarified by her by showing relevant legal position in that regard. Since she could not show any law prohibiting such kind of activity in Eco-Sensitive Zone, we do not find any force in the present Original Application. The same

¶22

is rejected at the admission stage itself.

¶23

No order as to costs.

¶24

Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM

¶25

Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM

¶26

September 09, 2024 O.A. No.126/2024(WZ) npj

¶27

Page 3 of 3

Kahar Samaj Panch Committee v. 1. Thdc India Ltd. (Formerly Tehari Hydro Development Corporation Ltd)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kahar Samaj Panch Committee v. 1. Thdc India Ltd. (Formerly Tehari Hydro Development Corporation Ltd)

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

Prayag Hospital & Research Center Pvt. Ltd. vs Union of India

News Item Titled "4 Die in Chhattisgarh Mine Collapse" Appearing in the Times of India Dated 28.02.2024 vs Chattisgarh Environment Conservation Board

Jitendra @ Raja Lilhare vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Nadeem Ahmad Dar vs

Harender Kumar vs

News Item Titled "Gurdaspur Video of Illegal Sand Mining Goes Viral Probe on" Appearing in Babushahi Dated 07.02.2024 vs

Milind Thakre vs State of Madhya Pradesh through Its Principal Secretary (Forest)

Navnath Andre Kankonkar (Gomes) vs Moef

News Item Titled Four Suffocate to Death Cleaning Sewage Plant in MumbaiS Virar Appearing in the Times of India Dated 10.04.2024 vs Central Pollution Control Board through Its Member Secretary

Reagan Rodrigues Represented by His Poa Rousseau Rodrigues vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Reagan Rodrigues Represented by His Poa Rousseau Rodrigues vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Dilip Tukaram Vede Patil vs Pmc through Municipal Commissioner

Mr Dilip Tukaran Vede Patil vs Diamond Rmc Plant

Navnath Andre Kankonkar (Gomes) vs Moef