Disposed

Sunil Kumar vs

NGT7 Aug 2024Original Application No. 74/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

National Green Tribunal directed Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board to reexamine environmental violations by Bajaj Hindustan Sugar Mill regarding effluent discharge, waste dumping, and SRS inefficiency, ordering an action report and potential compensation.

What did the court decide?

Order UPPCB to reexamine matter, consider recommendations, take appropriate action, impose environmental compensation, and submit action report within three months.

Sunil Kumar vs — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.15 Court No. 1

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶3

Original ApplicationNo. 74/2023

¶4

Sunil Kumar Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P.&Ors. Respondent(s)

¶7

Date of hearing: 07.08.2024

¶8

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

¶9

Respondent: Mr. Pradeep Misra & Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advs. for UPPCB (Through VC) Mr. Alok Agarwal, Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Singh, Mr. Shighra Kumar & Mr. Bhishm Pratap Singh, Advs. for Bajaj Hindustan Sugar Limited

¶10

ORDER

¶11

This O.A. has been registered as a letter petition dated 30.08.2022 received from Sh. Sunil Kumar R/o Village Nagal, District Saharanpur.

¶12

The complaint relates to sugar and distillery unit namely M/s Bajaj Hindustan Sugar Mill and Distillery unit at village Gangauli Development Block, Nagal, District Saharanpur. As per the complaint the said units were generating huge amount of fly ash & dust, discharging industrial effluent, dumping bagasse, press mud, etc. polluting the environment.

¶13

This Tribunal after considering the grievance raised, constituted a Joint Committee which submitted its report 24.01.2024. On examination of the above Joint Committee report, it revealed that there was presence of high coliform in the outlet of the STP and also substantial quantity of fly ash and press mud dumped within and outside the unit.

¶14

In view of the above the UPPCB sought for reexamination and to file a fresh report.

¶15

¶16

Based on the facts disclosed in the said report M/s Bajaj Hindustan Sugar Mill and Distillery unit were also impleaded as parties in this O.A.

¶17

The fresh report of the Joint Committee has been received on 24.04.2024. As per the report the sugar unit is crushing around 10000 TCD and producing sugar of 71435 tons, and in the process 33640 tons of molasses and 35088.6 tons of press mud is generated. The main source of water supply are two borewells wherein 214.22 KLD of water is extracted. The waste water generation is 765.59 KLD which is generated from industrial unit, (718.71 KLD) and domestic (46.88 KLD). The industrial effluent is treated in ETP and treated waste water is used for ferti irrigation in the command area of 185.5 hectors. From the report its observed that the sulphur recovery plant at its inlet carries sulphur of 1582 mg/litre and 1485 mg/litre at the outlet, hence it has been concluded that the sulphur treatment plant is not operating efficiently by the unit and required to be improved.

¶18

From the report it also can be inferred that the high sulphate waste water from the outlet of the SRS Plant is also entering the ETP inlet wherein the concentration of sulphate is 1463 mg/litre as per the table given under item 4 under subhead “Observation” of the said report. But at the outlet of the ETP the sulphate content reduces to 173 mg/litre. This clearly indicates that instead of recovering the sulphate the unit is resorting to diluting the effluent at the ETA which is not a correct practices. The counsel for UPPCB indicates that they will examine this issue.

¶19

The observations made in the Joint Committee Report are as follows.

¶20

¶21

“Observation:

¶22

1. The unit is engaged in production of sugar using cane as major raw material with consented capacity of 10000 TCD. The unit has started its cane crushing for the current crushing session (202324) on 30.10.2023.

¶23

2. The Sugar unit is meeting its fresh water requirement through two nos. of bore wells. The unit has obtained NOC from Ground Water Department, Govt. of U.P. for extraction of ground water. The unit also maintained logbook for the consumption of fresh water Copy of logbook is annexed as Annexure-2.

¶24

3. The Sugar unit has Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) of capacity 1000 KLD, comprising of Intake Chamber, Oil and Grease tank, Equalization tank, Primary Clarifier, Aeration Tank, Secondary Clarifier, Sand filter, ACF and Sludge Drying Bed. Unit has also SRS (Sulphur Removal System) for treatment of spray pond overflow effluent. Treated effluent from the ETP is used for irrigation in its farm having an area of 185.5 Hectare.

¶25

4. During visit, ETP was found operational. Samples were collected from the inlet, outlet of ETP and storage lagoon. The samples are analysed in laboratory of CPCB, RD, Lucknow for verification of compliance and the analysis report is as under:

¶26

Sample					Parameter	s
Locations	pH	Colour	SS	TDS	Chloride	Sulphate	O & G	COD	BOD
At inlet of ETP	3.77	1250	237	6271	1682	1463	--	3928	1760
Outlet of ETP	6.98	75	32.6	1360	287	173	<5	82.9	24.9
Lagoon (Storage of ETP water)	7.04	75	22.5	1386	299	247	---	61.7	14.6
Discharge standards for disposal on land	5.5	--	100	2100	--	--	10	--	100

¶27

*All values are in mg/I except pH & colour

¶28

5. As per analysis report it is clear that ETP is complying the discharge standards for disposal on land as notified G.S.R. 35 (E) dated 14.01.2016 under Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986.

¶29

6. Sample from Aeration Tank (AT) of ETP has also been collected and analysed in laboratory of CPCB, RD, Lucknow. The analysis results of samples are tabulated below:

¶30

Sampling locations	Parameters
	MLSS MLVSS
Aeration Tankof ETP	_4186 mg/l _ _3137mg/l _

¶31

7. The Sugar unit has installed Sulphur Removal System (SRS) for spray pond overflow effluent. Sulphur Removal System (SRS) of following units:

¶32

a) Collection Tank b) Flocculation Tank (SRS Box)

¶33

c) Micro Plate settler

¶34

¶35

8. The samples from inlet and outlet of SRS plant have been also taken to assess its efficacy. Sulphate at inlet and outlet was observed as 1582 mg/1 and 1485 mg/1 respectively. It indicates that Sulphur Treatment Plant is not operating efficiently by the unit and required to be improved.

¶36

9. Treated effluent from ETP is being used for ferti-irrigation in their own agricultural land (area of 185 -hectare ) through irrigation channel as per demand. Treated effluent is also being utilized in horticulture within the plant premise.

¶37

10. Flexible pipeline is being used for the supply of treated effluent to farmers on their command area. The Sugar unit has prepared irrigation management plan for utilization of treated effluent through National Sugar Institute on 2018.

¶38

11. The Sugar unit has got prepared ETP validation report from National Sugar Institute on 2017.

¶39

12. The unit has maintained logbook for operation of ETP and consumption of chemicals

¶40

13. Online Continuous Effluent Monitoring System (OCEMS) at the outlet of ETP is installed and connected to CPCB and SPCB server for continuous monitoring of effluent quality at outlet of ETP

¶41

14. During visit it is observed that OCEMS sensor was installed in a small tank connected to the Outlet of ETP but there was no continuous flow of effluent in the tank containing censer.

¶42

15. Boilers are connected to a stack having 65-meter height from ground level equipped with wet scrubber as APCD. OCEMS sensor has been installed at boiler stack of Sugar unit.

¶43

16. Ladder of stack for Sugar Unit boilers was not found as per the guideline issued by CPCB”.

¶44

The report has also suggested certain recommendations which are as follows:

¶45

“3.0. Concluding remarks and Recommendation:

¶46

It is evident from above observations that the Sugar unit has installed Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) for treatment of process wastewater, Sulphur Removal System (SRS) for Sulphur removal from spray pond overflow effluent and Wet scrubber at Stack as APCD. Distillery unit has also effluent treatment and disposal system containing MEE, CPU and Slop fired boiler. Water balance assessment of Sugar and Distillery unit is carried out based upon data provided by unit. Effluent generation in sugar unit is higher against ground water extraction is due to utilization of approximate 67 % of water present in the sugarcane. In distillery unit demand of ground water is reduced by utilization of CPU treated water and process recycled water as unit is based upon Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD). During visit, dumping of huge ash and press mud was still observed. On the basis of observation Joint Committee recommends the following:

¶47

1. Sugar and Distillery unit should ensure scientific handling and disposal of Fly ash, boiler bottom ash and press mud generated in the unit.

¶48

2. Regular surveillance of the unit is required.

¶49

¶50

3. The Sugar and Distillery unit should take preventive measures for reduction of fugitive emission due to handling and transportation of bagasse, fly ash, boiler bottom ash etc.

¶51

4. The Distillery unit shall restrict the concentrated spent wash storage capacity to seven days equivalent of its generated concentrated spent wash for incineration purpose. The remaining lagoons should be dismantled / levelled used for storage of concentrated spent wash.

¶52

5. The ladder on the stack for Sugar unit boilers should be as per CPCB guideline.

¶53

6. The sugar unit should properly operate Sulphur Treatment Plant.

¶54

7. The sensors of the Online Continues Emission Monitoring System (OCEMS) should be installed in continuous flow of effluent at outlet of Sugar Unit ETP for real time monitoring of ETP outlet parameter.”

¶55

In response to the report the project proponent has filed the steps taken by the unit in addressing the various issues that have been raised. With regard to the sulphur recovery system the counsel indicated that as per their in-house analysis the sulphate concentration at the inlet ranges from 298 mg/litre to 720 mg/litre and at the outlet ranges from 182 mg/litre to 572 mg/litre. On being questioned if the inhouse laboratory that has been accredited the counsel was not in a position to respond. Further he was not able to indicate the quantity of sulphate that has been recovered from the sulphate recovery system and its disposal/reuse. The counsel for the project proponent indicated that they are complying with all the environmental norms laid.

¶56

Given the above stand of the project proponent and the observations made by the Joint Committee we direct the UPPCB to reexamine the matter and consider the recommendations made and take appropriate action in accordance with the norms including imposing environmental compensation for the past violation.

¶57

An action taken report shall be submitted with the Registrar General, National Green Tribunal within three months by the UPPCB. If found necessary the matter shall be listed before the Bench.

¶58

¶59

The O.A. is accordingly disposed of.

¶60

Prakash Shrivastava, CP Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶61

August 07, 2024 O.A. No. 74/2023 HB

¶62

Sunil Kumar vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar 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

Aravalli Bachao Citizens Movement vs Union of India

Amit Kishore and Ors. vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Jmt Arjun and Adarsh Enterprises vs Medicare Environmental Management Pvt. Ltd.

Restorehealth Medicare Private Limited vs Madhya Pradesh State Environment Assessment Authority (Mpseiaa) through the Member Secretary E-5 Paryavaran Parisar Bhawan Arera Colony Bhopal (M.P.)

Sudesh Gupta vs Samandar Patel Colonizer

E.V. Sampath vs Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board Rep by Its Member Secretary

Vivek vs the President

All India Anti Corruption Organization vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Ms Slaughter House Nagar Nigam Saharanpur vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

M C Dwivedi vs

Priyank Bharati vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Chief Secretary

Attar Singh vs

Satish Kapoor vs

Vicky Son of Atul Kumar vs