Allowed

Dr Gaurav Thakral vs

NGT9 Sept 2024Original Application No. 143/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Impleadment of M/s City Plaza and M/s Gaur Sons Infrastructure Private Limited as respondents. Directions granted to shift OWC machines and solid waste collection from basement to another suitable place within 45 days. Compliance report to be submitted.

What did the court decide?

Forty-five days' time granted to respondents to shift OWC machines and waste collection from basement; UPPCB to submit compliance report within ten days.

Dr Gaurav Thakral vs — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.05

¶2

Court No. 2

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No.143/2024

¶5

Dr. Gaurav Thakral Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of UP & Ors. Respondents

¶8

Date of hearing: 09.09.2024

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶10

Applicant(s): None

¶11

Respondent(s): Mr. Pradeep Misra, Advocate for UPPCB (through VC) Mr. Amit Tiwari, Advocate for Respondent No. 5 and 6 (through VC)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Original Application was registered exercising suo-moto jurisdiction in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Versus Ankita Sinha and Others, (2022) 13 SCC 401 under Sections 14 and 15 of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as „ NGT Act, 2010 ‟) on a letter petition dated 04.10.2023 received from Dr. Gaurav Thakral, Adyaksh, City Plaza Vyapar Mandal.

¶14

Complainant had stated that M/s Gaur Sons Promoters Pvt. Ltd. has constructed a commercial complex namely City Plaza at Commercial Pocket C-2 Gaur City Plot No.GH-1, Sector 4, Grater Noida West, District

¶15

¶16

Gautambudh Nagar, State of Uttar Pradesh, Maintenance of said commercial complex is with Developer. Commercial complex is generating huge quantity of solid waste but Developer has not made any arrangement for its handling, management, processing, and disposal in an effective manner and thereby violating provisions of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as „ SWM Rules, 2016 ‟)read with Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as „ EP Act, 1986 ‟) and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as „ Air Act, 1981 ‟). It is also said that Promoter/Developer has made an open solid waste dumping centre at the set back of City Plaza Market (Fire Service Area) which is contrary to the sanctioned map and also Rules, applicable in this regard.

¶17

Complaint was entertained by Tribunal by taking cognizance of complaint on 23.04.2024. It impleaded following as respondents (1) State of Uttar Pradesh through the Chief Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh, (2) Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gautam Budh Nagar, (3) UPPCB and (4) District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶18

Notices were issued to respondents requiring them to file their responses.

¶19

Further Tribunal found it appropriate to obtain a factual report and accordingly constituted a Joint Committee comprising representatives of Municipal Corporation, Gautam Budh Nagar, Central Pollution Control Board, (hereinafter referred to as „ CPCB ‟) Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (hereinafter referred to as „ UPPCB ‟) and District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar Committee was required to submit its report at least one week before the next date.

¶20

Accordingly, Joint Committee report dated 17.05.2024 was submitted through Regional Officer, UPPCB, Greater Noida.

¶21

¶22

Joint Committee carried out inspection of site on 17.05.2024 and found collection, segregation and disposal of municipal waste, generated from the project, by the project proponent, which was shifted to basement area of Multilayer Car Parking, adjacent to commercial complex. Observations made by Committee and its recommendations in the report are as under:

¶23

Main observations of the Joint Committee are as follows :

¶24

i. “Site inspection was carried out on dated 17.05.2024. It was found that collection, segregation and disposal of municipal waste generated from project is being done by the project proponent.

¶25

ii. It was found that work of collection of waste has now been shifted in basement area of multilayer car parking adjacent to commercial complex and that’s why no foul smell was observed in that area in question.

¶26

iii. Bleaching powder/ anti odour chemicals is being applied to control foul smell in Organic Waste Converter (OWC) section in nearby area.

¶27

iv. No foul smell was observed due to handling and operation or Organic Waste Converter (OWC) section in nearby area.

¶28

v. It was informed by project proponent the dry waste is being sent to authorized vendor but no record/agreement was provided by project proponent to regarding disposal of dry waste through authorized vendor.

¶29

vi. Logbook is being maintained regarding quantity of daily generation, duration of operation of OWC per day, electricity consumption per day and disposal of MSW (dry-270 kg and wet-70 kg) and OWC machine capacity is 250 kg/day. vii. Project proponent has addressed shortcomings raised by complainant and complainant has expressed his satisfaction through his letter dated 17.05.2024, copy of same is annexed as Annexure-1.

¶30

Recommendations :

¶31

Project proponent shall ensure to provide adequate numbers of dust bins for effective collection of MSW generated from the complex.

¶32

¶33

Shops keepers shall ensure segregation of waste at source in dry and wet dust bin separately.

¶34

Project proponent shall ensure operation of OWC machine effectively on regular basis to avoid any foul smell problem in future.

¶35

Project proponent shall ensure proper disposal of dry waste through authorized vendor of Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority.”

¶36

District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar also submitted its report dated 20.05.2024 which is nothing but reiteration of Joint Committee‟s Report dated 07.05.2024.

¶37

Record shows that before inspection of Joint Committee solid waste dumping area was shifted by Developer to basement of project.

¶38

When the matter was taken up on 24.05.2024, Tribunal found that „Project‟ as well as the „Developer‟ both should be impleaded as respondents and accordingly impleaded M/s City Plaza as respondent 5 and Developer-M/s Gaur Sons Infrastructure Private Limited as respondent 6. Both newly impleaded respondents were granted time to file their responses.

¶39

A combined reply dated 25.07.2024 has been filed on behalf of respondents 5 and 6 stating that respondents 5 and 6 are ensuring to observe environment safety standards; waste generated from source was collected at a place wherefrom authorized agency used to pick the sam; to meet the grievance of the complainant with regard to foul smell an Organic Waste Converter (hereinafter referred to as „ OWC ‟) machine of 250 kg is being operated on a regular basis within the project complex as per SWM Rules, 2016; approximately 60-70 kg. wet waste is being routinely processed through the said machine which consistently

¶40

¶41

generates approximately 10 to 15 kg of organic composed which is subsequently utilized within project gardens and horticulture activities.

¶42

Respondents 5 and 6 were also issued a letter dated 17.05.2024 by UPPCB i.e., Joint Committee Report and in compliance thereof respondents 5 and 6 have ensured that a comprehensive waste management system is put in place. Four dustbins are placed on every floor of premises and total 20 dustbins have been placed across the entire building complex. Dustbins are in conformity with the requirement for segregation of dry and wet waste. Extensive plantation has been carried out by planting 500 saplings in the complex and plants have been placed on each floor. Shopkeepers are being made aware of requirement of making segregation of waste at source into dry and wet waste separately, OWC machines is consistently operating and disposal of dry waste generated from complex is regularly being deposited with the authorized agency of Greater Noida.

¶43

Respondent 6 has placed on record its letter dated 22.05.2024 (on page 54) whereby reply sent to UPPCB towards compliance of SWM Rules, 2016 and it deals with the following aspects.

¶44

“1. We have ensured comprehensive waste management. There are four dustbins on every floor. A total of 20 dustbins are there across the entire building complex. The dustbins are in conformity with the requirements for segregation of dry and wet waste. The relevant photographs in support of the same are being annexed herewith as Annexure-1.

¶45

2. We have already informed and made aware the shopkeepers of the requirement to segregate waste at source into dry and wet dustbins separately and we have again reminded them of these requirements pursuant to your letter. An acknowledgement of the receipt of the reminder by the shopkeepers is attached herewith as Annexure-2.

¶46

3. The Organic Waste Converter (OWC) machine is consistently and effectively operated on a regular basis within the project complex as per the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.

¶47

¶48

Approximately 60-70 kgs wet waste is being routinely processed through the OWC machine, which consistently generates approximately 15-20 kgs of organic compost. This compost is subsequently utilized and applied within the project’s gardens and horticulture activities. In addition, we remain vigilant to ensure the continual and proper functioning of the OWC machine to avoid any potential odor issues in the future.

¶49

4. The disposal of dry waste generated from the complex is regularly being deposited with the authorized agency of the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority.”

¶50

The only question remains to be considered thereafter was “whether the basement can be utilized for handling solid waste by placing OWC machines for collection/dumping of solid waste thereat” and on this aspect, matter was taken up on 22.08.2024.

¶51

Learned Counsels appearing for respondents 5 and 6 requested to grant some time to seek instructions.

¶52

Today, Shri Amit Tiwari Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondents 5 and 6 and stated that respondent 5 and 6 are making arrangement for shifting of OWC machines and collection of solid waste at a suitable place, other than the basement, in the complex premises and for this purpose 45 days‟ time be allowed. He assured that within 45 days, requisite arrangement shall be made and OWC machines and collection of solid waste shall stand shifted to another suitable place to ensure sanitation and hygiene in the complex particularly in car parking area.

¶53

We allow respondents 5 and 6, forty five days time for the aforesaid purpose and direct UPPCB to ensure compliance of the said direction within ten days after forty five days or if the arrangement is done by respondents 5 and 6 earlier thereto and information is given to UPPCB and thereafter, a compliance Report shall be submitted by UPPCB as well as respondents 5 and 6 with Registrar General of this Tribunal. If any

¶54

¶55

further order is required, Registrar General shall place the matter before the Bench.

¶56

With above directions, this Original Application is disposed of.

¶57

Sudhir Agarwal, JM

¶58

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶59

September 09, 2024 Original Application No.143/2024 M

¶60

Dr Gaurav Thakral vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Gaurav Thakral vs

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

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

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

Nadeem Ahmad Dar vs

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

Kaushalya Sharma vs Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority

Kaushalya Sharma vs Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority

Satish Kumar vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change