Disposed

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 154/2024 in Original Application No. 283/2024 of Rajesh Sharma v. State of Haryana

NGT9 Jan 2025Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 154/2024 in Original Application No. 283/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment addresses an application challenging illegal construction violating environmental norms. The Tribunal clarified pre-clearance activities permitted for land security citing EIA Notification rules and designated SEIAA as the competent authority for violation actions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant directed to file appropriate proceedings before SEIAA Haryana regarding alleged violations.

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 154/2024 in… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No. 01

¶2

Court No. 2

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

M.A. No. 154/2024 In

¶5

Original Application No. 283/2024

¶6

RAJESH SHARMA, R/o H. No. 24, Housing Board, Sector-7, Extn Gurugram, Haryana: 122001, Phone: - 9911323400, Email: - [email protected]. …Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. STATE OF HARYANA, Through Chief Secretary, 4th Floor, Haryana Civil Secretariat, Sec-1, Chandigarh- 160001, Email: - [email protected], Phone:- 0172-2740118.

¶9

2. STATE ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY, Through Chairman, Bays No. 55-58, Parytan Bhawan, Sector-2, Panchkula, Haryana, Email:- [email protected], Phone:- 0172-2565232.

¶10

3. HARYANA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,

¶11

Through Member Secretary, Sec 6, Panchkula, Haryana:-134109 Email - [email protected], Phone - 0175-2581005.

¶12

4. HARYANA WATER RESOURCE AUTHORITY, Through Chief Executive Officer, Rear Building, 3rd Floor, HSVP, Sector-6, Panchkula, Haryana 134109, Email: ceo-hwra©hry.gov.in, Phone: 0172-2583920.

¶13

5. SIGNATURE GLOBAL BUSINESS PARK PVT LTD, Through its Managing Director, Registered office at 13th Floor, Gopal Das Bhawan, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi:- 110001, Phone:- 911149281700, Email:- [email protected]. …Respondents

¶14

¶15

Date of hearing: 09.01.2025

¶16

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶17

Applicant: Mr. Rahul Choudhary & Ms. Shreepurna Dasgupta, Advs. for Applicant in M.A No. 154/2024.

¶18

Respondent: Mr. Rahul Khurana, Advocate for HSPCB and SEIAA, Haryana.

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The applicant-Rajesh Sharma filed O.A. No. 283/2024 under Sections 14, 15, 16, 17 read with Section 18(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 seeking issuance of directions to the respondent authorities to take strict action and stop the illegal construction being raised by respondent no. 5 and impose environmental compensation on respondent no. 5 for illegal construction in violation of environmental norms.

¶21

The applicant raised the grievances that respondent no. 5-Signature Global Business Park Pvt Ltd. is raising illegal building construction of residential colonies in Village Gaduli Kalan, Sector-37D, Gurugram, Haryana in an area of 16.65625 acres (i.e. approximately 67405.45 sq meters), without obtaining prior Environmental Clearance (EC) from SEIAA, Haryana, in violation of the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification dated 14.09.2006 (EIA Notification 2006). Respondent no. 5 has also not obtained the Consent to Establish (CTE) from respondent no. 3-Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPB) and is illegally extracting ground water without obtaining the prior NOC from respondent no. 4- Haryana Water resource authority (HWRA). The Applicant made complaints dated 02.01.2024 and 04.01.2024 to the concerned authorities but no action was taken on the same.

¶22

¶23

This Tribunal disposed of the original application vide order dated

¶24

18.03.2024 and the relevant part of the order is reproduced below:-

¶25

“1. In this original application, Applicant has alleged that the Respondent No. 5 is constructing residential colony in Village Gaduli Kalan, Sector 37D, Gurugram, Haryana in an area of 16.65625 acres in violation of the environmental norms. The plea of the Applicant is that Respondent No. 5 has not obtained prior Environmental Clearance (EC) and is acting in violation of the EIA Notification, 2006 and that Respondent No. 5 has also not obtained Consent to Establish (CTE) from the Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB) and ground water NOC from HWRA for doing construction activities. In paragraph 5.3 of the petition, Applicant has alleged that new construction project is above 20,000 sq. meters (approximately 67405.45 sq. meters) and, therefore, the EIA Notification dated 14.09.2006 is attracted.

¶26

2. During the course of argument, Counsel for the Applicant could not point out as to from where the Applicant has ascertained the area of construction to be above 20,000 sq. meters. Learned Counsel for the Applicant has referred to the complaint, Annexure -A/2 (Colly) but in that complaint also no such area has been mentioned.

¶27

3. Therefore, at this stage, there is no material to support the allegation made in the OA has been filed.

¶28

4. However, since an issue relating to compliance of environmental norms has been raised, therefore, we are of the view that the Respondent No. 3, HSPCB should look into this issue and ascertain the truthfulness of the allegations and to find out if Respondent No. 5 is acting in violation of environmental norms, then take appropriate action and submit action taken report before the Registrar General of the Tribunal within a period of two months 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 found necessary, the matter will be listed for consideration before the Bench.

¶29

5. The OA is accordingly disposed of.

¶30

6. A copy of this order be forwarded to Member Secretary, HSPCB by e-mail for compliance.”

¶31

Action taken report dated 28.05.2024 was filed by the HSPCB and

¶32

the relevant part of the same reads as under:

¶33

“xx …………………….xxx……………………………………..xxx

¶34

2. Inspection of the site was conducted on 23-05-2024 by the team of Regional Officer Sh. Vijay Chaudhary, HSPCB,

¶35

¶36

Gurugram South, Sh. Divyanshu, AEE, HSPCB, Gurugram South and Sh. Sidharth Bhargava, AEE, HSPCB, Gurugram South. Copy of the Inspection report is attached as Annexure-R/1 and Photographs & Map are attached as Annexure-R/2. The findings of the inspection are as under :-

¶37

i. The Proponent M/s Signature Global Business park Pvt. Ltd. & Fantabulous Town Developers Pvt. Ltd. has obtained license for setting up of mix land use (90% residential and 10% commercial) under TOD policy over an area measuring 16.65625 Acres in the revenue estate of village-Gadauli Kalan, Sector-37D, Gurugram, Haryana.

¶38

ii. Only barricading of the project has been done.

¶39

iii. The project proponent has constructed a 24/30 meter wide internal circulation road as mentioned in letter of intent (LOI) granted to the project proponent by Directorate of Town & Country Planning, Haryana at Sr. No. 6(i) which provides that "That you shall construct 24/30 m wide internal circulation road forming part of licensed area at own cost and transfer the same free of cost to the Government". Copy is attached as Annexure-R/3.

¶40

iv. No other type of construction except as mentioned at Serial no. ii & iii done at site and project proponent has applied for grant of Environment Clearance to the project to State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) and same is pending.

¶41

3. That the PP vide letter dated 24.05.2024 has undertaken not to make any construction without obtaining Environment Clearance from SEIAA, Haryana and Consent to Establish from Haryana State Pollution Control Board. Copy is attached as Annexure-R/4.

¶42

The Report is submitted for kind consideration of this Hon'ble Tribunal. The direction passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal shall be complied with in true letter and spirit.”

¶43

After receipt of the report the Registry did not list the matter before the Bench as Learned Registrar General of this Tribunal did not consider any further order by this Tribunal to be necessary.

¶44

Miscellaneous Application No. 154/2024 has been filed by the Applicant for listing of the matter before the bench for hearing and directions on the grounds that report filed by HSPCB does not show the true facts relating to starting of construction activities under taken by the

¶45

¶46

Project Proponent without obtaining EC under EIA Notification 2006 from SEIAA, Haryana and CTE from HSPCB. Alongwith the Miscellaneous Application the applicant filed response to site visit report of the HSPCB dated 27.05.2024.

¶47

In the response the applicant has submitted that while disposing of original application vide order dated 18.03.2024 this Tribunal directed that if necessary the matter will be considered before this bench. On 27.05.2024, the HSPCB filed Action Taken Report which was uploaded on the NGT Website on 02.06.2024. However, the matter was not listed before this Tribunal. The Report filed by the HSPCB is not showing true facts related to starting of construction activities under taken by the Project Proponent. Action Taken Report filed by HSPCB on the basis of site inspection dated 23.05.2024 has only recorded construction of road in the proposed project area. However, it failed to record digging of large pits, levelling of the land, construction of internal circulation road 24/30m road and 6 mtr road, construction of plinth for structure undertaken prior to obtaining of environmental clearance. Additional documents were filed by the Applicant on 08.01.2025.

¶48

Learned Counsel has submitted that the activities such as digging of large pits, levelling of the land, construction of internal circulation road 24/30m road and 6 mtr road, construction of plinth for structure were started by the Project Proponent prior to obtaining of environmental clearance and the report fails to record these constructions and fails to consider the violations of the EIA Notification, 2006 and learned Counsel for the Applicant has prayed for taking of appropriate action for violations of EIA Notification, 2006 and violations of EC conditions.

¶49

¶50

In its report HSPCB has mentioned that Project Proponent has done barricading of the project and constructed a 24/30 meter wide intercirculation road as mentioned at serial no. 6 (1) in Letter of Intent (LoI) granted to Project Proponent and no other type of construction has been done by the Project Proponent.

¶51

EIA Notification 2006 prohibits any construction work and preparation of land by the project management except for securing the land which by itself implies that construction work and preparation of land to the extent the same is necessary for securing the land is permitted.

¶52

It may also be observed here that MoEF & CC has issued O.M. No. F. No. IA3-22/10/2022-IA.III [E 177258] dated 29.03.2022 regarding activities which can be undertaken for securing the land prior to grant of Environmental Clearance-regarding.

¶53

“As per the provisions of Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification 2006, the project or activities [New/Expansion/ Modernization/ change of product-mix or raw material mix] listed in the Schedule to the said Notification would require prior Environment Clearance (EC) from the concerned Competent Authority before undertaking any construction work or preparation of land by the project proponent, except for securing the land.

¶54

2. In this regard, Office Memorandum No. J- 11011/41/2006-IAJI(I) dated 19/08/2010 clarified that while securing the land, no activity relating to any project covered under EIA Notification, 2006 including civil construction can be undertaken at the site without prior EC except fencing of the site to protect it from getting encroached and construction of temporary shed(s) for the guard(s).

¶55

3. Over a period of time, various options other than conventional barbed wire and wall fencing, have come into existence, viz., use of pre-fabricated structures, pre-cast compound wall etc. Further, in order to secure the land, the project proponent may need to have water and electricity connection. In view of the same, it has been decided by the Competent Authority in the Ministry to explicitly clarify that following activities can be undertaken by the project proponent for securing the land.

¶56

¶57

i. Fencing of the project site by boundary wall using civil construction, barbed wire or precast/ prefabricated components.

¶58

ii. Construction of temporary sheds using pre-fabricated / modular structure, for site office/guards and storing material and machinery.

¶59

iii. Provision of temporary electricity and water supply for site office/guards only.

¶60

4. The above activities shall be undertaken subject to the following:

¶61

i. The land should be in the legal possession of the project proponent and all statutory approvals in respect of the project site should have been obtained.

¶62

ii. In case of involvement of any forest land, no activity shall be initiated at the site till the Stage II Forest Clearance is obtained under the relevant provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. In case of applicability of Wildlife Clearance, necessary permission from Standing Committee for National Board for Wildlife (SCNBWL) shall be obtained under the provisions of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.

¶63

iii. In case of felling of trees if any, requisite permission from the Forest Department/ Statutory Authorities of the concerned State Government shall be obtained.

¶64

iv. The investment made by the Project Proponent on the above, in anticipation of the applicable clearances under the relevant provisions of the Acts/Rules, shall be entirely at the cost and risk of the proponent.

¶65

5. However, the above dispensation would not entitle the project proponent to claim fait accompli with regard to grant of EC or any other applicable permission from any concerned statutory authority and further, the works of the aforesaid nature shall have no bearing on appraisal of the project for grant of EC which shall follow the due process and procedure as laid down in EIA Notification 2006, as amended.”

¶66

In the course of hearing learned Counsel for the Applicant has admitted that complaints were made to SEIAA Haryana regarding illegal construction by the project management but no action has been taken on the same and EC has been granted to the Project Proponent on 02.07.2024 by SEIAA, Haryana and CTE has been granted on 07.08.2024 to the Project Proponent by HSPCB.

¶67

¶68

MoEF&CC has vide Notification dated 28.02.2014 has delegated the power of looking into violations of EIA Notification, 2006 and EC conditions to SEIAA. The relevant part of the notification reads as under:-

¶69

“S.O. 637(E).-ln exercise of the powers conferred by section 23 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986), the Central Government hereby delegates the powers vested in it under section 5 of the said Act to all the State and Union Territory Environment Impact Assessment Authorities (Hereinafter referred to as the said Authorities) constituted by the Central Government under sub-section (3) of section 3 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, to issue show cause notice to project proponents in case of violation of the conditions of the environment clearances issued by the said Authorities to projects or activities within-their jurisdiction and to issue directions to the said project proponents for, keeping such environment clearances in abeyance or withdrawing them, if required, for violations, subject to the condition that the Central Government may revoke such delegations of powers or may itself invoke the provisions of section 5 of the said Act, if in the opinion of the Central Government such a Course of action is necessary in the public interest.”

¶70

In view of the above said notification, in the present case action regarding alleged violations of the provisions of EIA Notification, 2006 and EC conditions and also regarding continuation of EC or keeping EC in abeyance or withdrawing the same is to be taken by SEIAA, Haryana as may be warranted by the facts and circumstances of the case. The Applicant may make appropriate representations/file appropriate proceedings regarding alleged violations of EIA Notification, 2006 and EC conditions before SEIAA, Haryana, if so desired.

¶71

In view of the above, the MA is disposed of with the direction that the Applicant may make appropriate representations/file appropriate proceedings regarding alleged violations of EIA Notification, 2006 and EC conditions before SEIAA, Haryana, if so desired, and the SEIAA, Haryana may take appropriate action on the same as may be warranted by the facts

¶72

¶73

and circumstances of the case after giving the parties opportunity of being heard in accordance with law.

¶74

For abundant caution, it is clarified that we have not gone into the merits of the allegations made by the applicant and nothing to this order may be treated as expression of any opinion on the same.

¶75

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶76

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶77

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶78

January 09, 2025 M.A. No. 154/2024 In Original Application No. 283/2024 dv

¶79

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 154/2024 in Original Application No. 283/2024 of Rajesh Sharma v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 154/2024 in Original Application No. 283/2024 of Rajesh Sharma 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 119/2024 in Original Application No. 590/2023 of Ali Mullah vs Municipality

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 118/2024 in Original Application No. 454/2022 of Jai Prakash vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 122/2024 in Original Application No. 258/2024 of Banibrata Mukherjee vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 117/2024 in Original Application No. 435/2021 of Pradeep Kadiyan vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 19/2024 in Original Application No. 194/2024 of Dr Brijmohan Sapoot Kala Sanskriti Sewa Sansthan through Authorized Representative Shri Devendra Singh vs State of Rajasthan

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 11/2025 in Original Application No. 588/2024 of Abid vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 27/2024 in Original Application No. 136/2015 of Subhas Datta vs State of West Bengal through the Chief Secretary

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 37/2023 in Original Application No. 88/2021 of Talab Bachao Abhiyan vs State of Bihar

Devendra Kumar & Anr. vs

Satya Narayan Singh vs Forest Department Firozabad

Federation of Sarita Vihar Residents Welfare Associations vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Mr Jatinder Sethi vs Union of India

News Item Titled "Tawi Barrage & Riverfront Projects in Jammu Destroying River Inviting Disaster" Appearing in Sandrp.in Dated 11.05.2024 vs

Vijay Chandel vs