Disposed

Rajaram v. State of Haryana

NGT5 Jul 2024Original Application No. 735/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Addressing an application regarding fly ash pollution at a thermal power plant, the National Green Tribunal declined to adjudicate the matter directly. The Tribunal directed the applicant to file a comprehensive complaint with the State Pollution Control Board within three months to ascertain facts and take action. If dissatisfied, the applicant can revisit the Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Complaint permitted to be filed with the Chairman, State Pollution Control Board; inquiry to be completed within three months.

Rajaram vs State of Haryana — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No. 07

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 735/2024

Rajaram

Applicant

Versus

State of Haryana Respondent

¶9

Date of hearing: 05.07.2024

¶10

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

¶11

Applicant: Mr. Tarun Cummra, Adv. for Applicant

¶12

ORDER

¶13

In this original application, the applicant being resident of Khedar, Hisar, Haryana have raised the grievance in respect of the pollution caused due to the poor handling of fly ash in the area concerned. The allegation is that the loading of fly ash in trucks/tankers is causing pollution by way of fugitive emission/spillages violating environmental norms.

¶14

The allegation is against the respondent no. 4 Rajiv Gandhi Thermal Power Plant. Learned Counsel for the applicant during the course of argument has referred to the findings of the investigating officer/inquiry officer filed as annexure A-20 stating that the fly ash was found scattered on the fly ash storage hoppers, showing leakages and unscientific storage, sprinklers not found working in the silo area, installed at the boundaries and the unit was not complying with the conditions of CTO. The findings so recorded, states that further action will be initiated after the expiry of show cause notice period. It is not on record as to what action has been taken thereafter. Learned counsel for the applicant though has submitted that repeated complaints in respect

¶15

¶16

of the violation were made to the State Pollution Control Board but from the record he could not point out any latest complaint to the State PCB along with relevant material or disclosure relating to violation of the environmental norms.

¶17

Issue which the applicant is raising needs to be considered at the first instance by the State Pollution Control Board. Hence, we dispose of the O.A. permitting the applicant to file a comprehensive complaint along with all the relevant material to the Chairman State Pollution Control Board who on receipt of the same get an inquiry conducted and ascertain correct position and take appropriate remedial/punitive action, if any violation is found. Let this exercise be completed within three month from date of receipt of the complaint. If the applicant is not satisfied with the action taken on the complaint, he would be at liberty to approach the Tribunal again along with all relevant material indicating violation of the environmental norms.

¶18

O.A. is accordingly disposed of.

¶19

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶20

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶21

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶22

July 05, 2024 O.A. No. 735/2024 HB

¶23

Rajaram v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajaram v. State of Haryana

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

Col Vijay Kumar Sehgal vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Kapil Dev vs the Municipal Commissioner

Uday Pratap Singh vs

News Item Titled "Gujarat GST Commissioner Grabs 620 Acres from Entire Village Near Maharashtra,S Mahabaleshwar" Appearing in the Free Press Journal Dated 18.05.2024 vs

Chandar Singh Bagwan vs 1. State of Madhya Pradesh Mineral Resources Department through the Principal Secretary

News Item Published in Rashtriya Sahara Dated 29.10.2023 Titled "Police Ke Sanrakshan Mei Phal - Phul Rahe Hai Safed Baloo Ke Karobaree" vs

News Item Titled " Kausambi Mei Ngt Ke Niyamo Ko Undekha Kar Ho Raha Avaidh Khanan Baalu Mafiyoo Ne Yamuna Nadi Ki Dhaara Mai Bana Diya Raasta" Appearing in Circle Samachar Dated 13.02.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Six Killed in Explosion at Firecracker Unit Near Nagpur Appearing in the Hindu Dated 13.06.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Gujarat GST Commissioner Grabs 620 Acres from Entire Village Near Maharashtra,S Mahabaleshwar" Appearing in the Free Press Journal Dated 18.05.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Environment Activists Alarmed as Trees Chopped and Burnt Near Talacauvery Wildlife Sanctuary in Kodagu" Appearing in Thehindu.Com Dated 14.05.2024 vs

Naresh Kadyan vs Central Pollution Control Board

News Item Titled "Protest Brews in Kerala Over Allowing Eucalyptus Plantations in Forest Areas of State" Appearing in the Deccan Herald Dated 20.05.2024 vs

News Item Titled "High-Rise Construction Near Ambazari Lake Raises Concerns Amid Flood Worries" Appearing in Nagpur Today Dated 21.05.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Untreated Effluents Cause Widespread Fish Mortality at Velsao Bay Rivulet" Appearing in O Herald Dated 26.05.2024 vs