Disposed

Brahmanand Tiwari v. Moefcc Regional Office Nagpur

NGT3 Apr 2024Original Application No. 59/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant filed objections against a Joint Committee Report alleging corruption and false findings regarding pollution by a factory. Dismissing these as unsubstantiated wild allegations, the National Green Tribunal upheld its previous order directing the industry to comply with environmental recommendations and the Pollution Control Board to report on compliance.

What did the court decide?

Disposed on the direction that the MPCB ensure the DFPCL adheres to the compliance timelines for the Joint Committee report recommendations and submits a compliance report after the deadline.

Brahmanand Tiwari vs Moefcc Regional Office Nagpur — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

(Pune Bench)

¶2

Item No.9

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE

¶4

THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)

¶5

Original Application No.59/2023(WZ) Earlier O.A. No.589/2022(PB) LP

Brahmanand Tiwari

…..Applicant

Versus

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶10

….Respondent(s)

¶11

Date of hearing: 03.04.2024

¶12

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

¶13

Applicant : None appeared Respondent(s) : Mr. Vilas Jadhav, Advocate for R-5/MPCB Mr. Ajay Gadegaonkar, Advocate for R-6/PP

¶14

ORDER

¶15

We are passing this order in continuation to our previous orders dated 29.05.2023 and 04.08.2023.

¶16

None has appeared from the side of applicant despite repeated calls, although in compliance with our previous order dated 04.08.2023 read-with order dated 12.10.2023, the applicant has filed reply-cumstatement of the objections to the final report submitted by the Joint Committee dated 30.10.2023, a copy of which is said to have been downloaded by the learned counsel for respondent No.5- MPCB from the website of NGT.

¶17

In the said objection, wild allegations are made by the applicant against the Committee Members such as being unethical, corrupt, indolent and that all of them are undergoing departmental investigation for disproportionate assets. Applicant has also filed his complaint to the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Anti-Corruption Bureau as well.

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

It is also alleged in this reply-cum-objections by the applicant that the officials of MPCB have been bribed by the other four officials, who have signed the Joint Committee report and that the said report is false, frivolous and incorrect. The applicant wanted to be a part of the Joint Committee and wanted to remain associated at the time of inspection. But the Joint Committee did not inform to him about the date when the inspection was made. The Joint Committee instead of preparing its investigation report has taken money from the company and did the work of making the company's marketing plan and portfolio. The situation has now become very pathetic in Taloja and surrounding areas where people are suffering from cancer and other serious ailments due to toxic chemicals being released into the air by the DFPCL (M/s. Deepak Fertilizers & Petrochemical Corporation Ltd.- respondent No.6). The said company is manufacturing Nitric Acid, Iso Propyl Alcohol (IPA), food grade Liquid Carbon Dioxide and Methanol, which fall under the 'red' category’. Local residents have been complaining about strong chemical odour emanating from the manufacturing units. If some impartial person is sent to the site, that person can see that tons of poisonous contaminated smoke is spewing from the chimneys. An amount of Rs.4 crore has been given as a bribe to prepare this false report. The local people of Taloja, Navi Mumbai are hearing that the accredited lab is following the instructions of the Members of Joint Committee. There is a need of gathering data on the types of hazards such as possible environmental damage and harmful effect on human health.

¶20

It is also alleged in this reply-cum-objections by the applicant that the DFPCL has so far affected the lives of thousands of local residents of Taloja, who are suffering from incurable diseases and many have lost their lives. The DFPCL’s Continuous Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations(CAAQMS) are not working properly. The authenticity of CAAQMS

¶21

Page 2 of 4

¶22

cannot be considered true, as the impartiality and neutrality of this Joint Committee is highly questionable. The company's various CAAQMS are likely to be calibrated in a way that is favourable to the company. Therefore, the findings of the Joint Committee Report should not be used to make any decision about the DFPCL's future. The Joint Committee did not adopt the correct and scientific method of assessment.

¶23

It is also alleged in this reply-cum-objections by the applicant that the applicant requested before this Tribunal to include the Chief Secretary of Maharashtra; the Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (Delhi); the Chairman of MPCB; the Member Secretary, CPCB; the District Collector, Raigad; and 2 other experts in the Committee. Having a valid consent from the MPCB under Water and Air Act does not necessarily mean that there is no emission of pollution by DFPCL. The level of pollution in nearby water bodies is unbearable, which can be seen as well as felt through our eyes.

¶24

We find that the above-mentioned objections are raised by the applicant with any sound proof in respect thereof because wild allegations are being levelled against the Joint Committee Members having disproportionate assets. But no prosecution document has been placed before us wherein such allegations are levelled against them and that any trial is going on against these Committee Members. The other facts, which have been stated, also lack any substantive proof. Therefore, objections made by the applicant appear to be a general nature.

¶25

As against the above, we find that the Joint Committee Report, which we had already considered in our previous order dated 04.08.2023, appears to have taken into consideration all aspects.

¶26

In view of above, we dispose of this application with the direction that respondent No.5- MPCB shall ensure that the respondent No.6-M/s.

¶27

Page 3 of 4

¶28

Deepak Fertilizers & Petrochemical Corporation Ltd. adheres to the timelines, which is given for compliance of the various recommendations made by the Joint Committee, which have already been reproduced by us in our previous order dated 04.08.2023 in para no.9 in tabular form. We also find that the recommendations, compliances of which are to be done, as has been stated in the reply affidavit dated 01.08.2023 filed by the respondent No.6 before March 2025, therefore, after expiry of the said period, the respondent No.5- MPCB shall submit a report to the Registry of this Tribunal in respect of the compliance having been done by the respondent No.6-Project Proponent, within a period of 15 days.

¶29

Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM

¶30

Dr. Vijay Kulkarni, EM

¶31

April 03, 2024 Original Application No.59/2023 (WZ) Earlier O.A. No.589/2022(PB) LP P.Kr

¶32

Page 4 of 4

Brahmanand Tiwari v. Moefcc Regional Office Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brahmanand Tiwari v. Moefcc Regional Office Nagpur

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

Behru Lal Regar vs State of Rajasthan

News Item Titled "Baghpat News Katha Mei Mitti Khanan Ko Lekar Hungama" Appearing in Amar Ujala Dated 15.02.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Pune Residents of Bavdhan Budruk Suffer Due to Drainage Water Accumulation" Appearing in Pune Times Mirror Dated 15.02.2024 vs

Tribunal on Its Own Motion Based Upon the News Crz Violations in Coastal Area of Vishakapatnam by Eenadu Published on 03RD March 2024 vs the District Collector Visakhapatnam

V Rajagopalan vs Escapade Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.

New Paper Article Published in Dainik Bhaskar Dated 16TH Oct 2023 Regarding Dumping of Waste in River Area of Kaliyasot Madhya Pradesh vs State of Madhya Pradesh

News Item Titled "Begging for Breath: Trapped Between Industries Kochi Residents Gasp for Fresh Air" Appearing in the New Indian Express Dated 23.02.2024. vs

News Item Titled "Bermo Ke Mahuataand Mai Avaidh Balu Ke Khel Mai Saikaro Tractor Se Aam Log Ho Rahe Pareshaan" Appearing in News Wing Dated 19.12.2023 vs

Kailas Chima Chakor vs State of Maharashtra

Shashikant Vitthal Kamble vs Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (Moef & Cc) New Delhi

All India Forward Block through Its General Secretary vs the State of Gujarat through Gujarat Pollution Control Board

Dakshin Gujarat Kamdar Parishad vs Rajni Prints Pvt. Ltd.

Azad Hind Mazdoor Sena vs Arya Processors Pvt. Ltd.

Dr Sarvabhoum Bagali vs Deputy Commissioner Chairman District Sand Monitoring Committee Vijayapura