Allowed

Rambharose Tomar vs

NGT31 Jul 2024Original Application No. 309/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application regarding illegal brick kilns in UP, the Tribunal noted that closure orders were issued to 6990 non-compliant kilns. A verification report showed most were closed or dismantled, with 6521 remaining under scrutiny. The Tribunal permitted the UPPCB to impose environmental compensation on these kilns within six months.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to UPPCB to impose environmental compensation on 6521 illegally operating brick kilns within six months.

Rambharose Tomar vs — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No. 10

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 309/2022

Rambharose Tomar

Applicant

Versus

State of U.P. & Ors.

Respondent(s)

Date of hearing: 31.07.2024

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER

¶12

Respondent: Ms. Priyanka Swami, Mr. Yashvardhan Kaushik, Mr. Souresh Nagar, Mr. Shivam Singh & Mr. Shlok Mittal, Advs. for the State of UP Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Adv. for UPPCB (Through VC)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This original application was registered on the basis of the letter petition sent by one Rambharose Tomar, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh complaining about the illegal operation and violation of environmental norms, rules and regulations by the brick kilns which were named in the letter petition.

¶15

The Tribunal by order dated 06.05.2022 had formed a Joint Committee with the direction to the Committee to undertake site visit, look into the grievance of the applicant and take requisite action by following due process of law and submit factual and action taken report.

¶16

On 01.11.2022, the Tribunal had taken note of the report of the Joint Committee filed vide covering letter dated 28.10.2022. The Tribunal had also directed the UPPCB to provide requisite information disclosing the format in which that information was sought. The Tribunal had also impleaded the relevant parties including the brick kilns against whom

¶17

¶18

allegations were made in the letter petition and had issued notices to them.

¶19

The UPPCB had filed the report dated 29.03.2023 disclosing the position of brick kilns as on the date of filing of the report as under:

¶20

“3. That as per the updated inventory of Brick Kilns dated 29.03.2023, there are 19718 brick kilns established in the state out of which 11838 brick kilns have obtained Consent to Operate (CTO) from the Board and 7880 brick kilns have not obtained valid CTO under the provisions of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The updated inventory dated 29.03.2023 as per the prescribed format is attached herewith and marked as Annexure No-1 to this report.”

¶21

The Tribunal in the proceedings dated 12.02.2024 had taken note of the reports filed till 31.03.2023 and in the proceedings dated

¶22

12.02.2024 had observed as under:

¶23

“5. The updated information disclosed in the fresh report showing the position as on 31.12.2023 reflects that out of 19718 brick kilns established in the State, 12728 brick kilns have valid CTO and 6990 brick kilns have not obtained valid CTO under the Air Act, 1981 and closure orders in respect of 6990 defaulter brick kilns have been issued under the Air Act, 1981.

¶24

6. The report mentions that the closure orders against the defaulter brick kilns have been issued with a direction to the respective District Magistrates and District Heads of Police for implementation of the closure orders. The report does not disclose the final action in terms of the closure orders and number of brick kilns which have actually been closed down in pursuance of closure orders.”

¶25

Thereafter, the State of UP has now filed the compliance report disclosing the action which has been taken against the defaulting brick

¶26

kilns.

¶27

It has been pointed out by learned Counsel for the State that there were total 19718 brick kilns established in the State, out of which 12728 brick kilns have ‘Consent to Operate’ and 6990 were operating without obtaining ‘Consent to Operate’. Referring to the report dated 26.07.2024,

¶28

¶29

learned Counsel for the State of UP has pointed out that subsequently out of 6990 defaulting brick kilns, 469 brick kilns have obtained ‘Consent to Operate’ from the UPPCB. In respect of remaining 6521 brick kilns which were operating illegally, the status has been disclosed as under:

¶30

“xxx ……………………………………..xxx………………………………….…xxx 7. That the UPPCB vide letter dated 23.07.2024 has informed to the Department of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of Uttar Pradesh that the verification of the closure orders have been completed by the concerned district level officers. The summary of verification of 6,521 brick kilns have been given below:

¶31

*S. No.*	*Status Found in Verification*	*No. of Brick* *Kilns*
1.	Closed and Complying with the closure order of UPPCB	6202
2.	Dismantled	309
3.	Operational	10

¶32

The above report clearly reflects that the action of closure has now been taken against the brick kilns which were illegally operating in the State.

¶33

So far as the issue of imposition of environmental compensation on these brick kilns which have illegally operated for the past period, the submission of Counsel for the UPPCB is that within 3 weeks the action will be initiated to levy environmental compensation upon those brick kilns. Such an action must be taken in due compliance of the principles of natural justice.

¶34

Hence, we dispose of the OA permitting the UPPCB to initiate the action against the above 6521 brick kilns for imposition of environmental compensation for their past illegal operation. The UPPCB will complete the said exercise leading to passing of the final order of imposition of environmental compensation within six months and will submit the

¶35

¶36

action taken report before the Registrar General of this Tribunal on 01.02.2025 by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF. If it is found necessary, the matter will be placed before the Bench for further consideration.

¶37

The OA is accordingly disposed of.

¶38

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶39

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶40

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶41

July 31, 2024 Original Application No. 309/2022 DV

¶42

Rambharose Tomar vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambharose Tomar vs

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

Narendra Gajanan Gaude vs State of Goa

Nandagiri Cooperative Housing Society Limited Rep by Its Seceratary Smt Radhika Prasad Narala vs Principal Chief Conservator of Forest Wl

National Green Tribunal Southern Zone vs the Chief Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh

Vedhavalli vs Collector Office

Ashok Kumar Nirbhay vs

Dhruv vs

Barun Kumar Singh vs

Aditya Sareen vs

Prikshit Kumar vs Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority

Jan Kalyan Bhoomi Mukhti Foundation (Regd.) vs Ministry of Coal

Jan Kalyan Bhoomi Mukhti Foundation (Regd.) vs Ministry of Coal

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 102/2023 in Original Application No. 80/2023 of Varun Gulati vs Union of India

Dr Sandeep Kumar Gupta vs State of Haryana

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 5/2024 in Original Application No. 312/2023 of Rajesh Kumar Singh vs