Disposed

Ravi Shankar and Ors. vs

NGT24 Nov 2025Original Application No. 1099/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants complained of noise and air pollution caused by a mobile tower DG set in Rohtak. The Tribunal noted the DG set had been non-operational since May 2024 upon termination of the lease. The application was dismissed as infructuous regarding active pollution, but principles regarding compliance and permissions were directed as it was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Applicant application dismissed as infructuous due to non-operation of DG Set; directed respondent not to operate tower/DG set without permissions and compliance with norms; CAQM/HSPCB directed to act

Ravi Shankar and Ors. vs — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No.05

¶2

Court No. 2

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 1099/2024

¶5

Ravi Shankar and Ors.

¶6

Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab & Ors.

¶9

Respondents

¶10

Date of hearing: 24.11.2025

¶11

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

¶12

A pplicants: Applicant No. 1- Ravi Shankar (through VC).

¶13

Respondents: Mr. Rahul Khurana and Ms. Bhavya Singla, Advocates for respondents no. 1 to 3. Mr. Shashank Garg, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ashwani Malhotra and Ms. Aradhaya, Advocates for respondent no. 4. Mr. Saurabh Balwani, Advocate for CPCB (through VC).

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Applicant- Ravi Shankar resident of H.No.A-204, Sector-34, Suncity Township-I, Rohtak, State of Haryana, made a complaint dated 01.01.2024 on Public Grievances Portal of this Tribunal which has been treated and registered as Original Application under Sections 14 and 15 of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 for exercise of suo-moto jurisdiction in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of

¶16

Greater Mumbai Versus Ankita Sinha and Others, (2022) 13 SCC 401.

¶17

The applicant raised grievances regarding causing of noise and air pollution through operation of DG set by M/s Indus Tower Ltd. in violation of environmental norms. Relevant part of the letter petition enumerating the grievances is reproduced as follows:-

¶18

“ श्रीमानजी ,

¶19

¶20

-1. रोहतक , हररयाणाननवेदनहैनकहमसैक्टर 34, सननसटीटाउननिपननवासीआपसे अनुरोध करते हैं नक हमारे ररहायिी सैक्टर / सोसाइटी में भारती एयरटेल टेलीकम्यूननकेिनका Indus Towers Limited, Bestech Business Towers, 1st Floor, Tower A, Industrial Plot No.1, Phase-9, Sector-66, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, Pin code 160059 द्वारास्थानपतमोबाईलटावरहै।यहमोबाईल टावरनबजलीकेद्वारासंचानलतनहोकरजनरेटरसैटसेसंचानलतनकयाजारहाहै।जनरेटर सैटकेद्वाराचलाएजानेकेकारणइससेअत्यानधकमात्रामेंध्वननएवंवायुप्रदूषणफैलरहा हैनजसकारणसेमोबाईलटावरकेपासस्थस्थतमकानोंमेंरहनेवालोंकोकाफीपरेिाननयों का सामना करना पडरहाहै।इस मोबाईल टावर केनबल्कुल ननकट स्थस्थत केमकानोंमें रहनेवालेव्यस्थियोंकोलगातारजनरेटरसैटकेचलतेरहनेसेरातमेंठीकप्रकारसेआराम / सोनेमेंभीनदक्कतोंकासामनाकरनापडरहाहै।

¶21

अतः हमारा आपसेसादर अनुरोधहैनकहमारेररहायिीसैक्टर / सोसाइटीमेंस्थस्थतइस भारती एयरटेल टेलीकम्यूननकेिन के मोबाईल टॉवर को जोनक Indus Towers Limited, Bestech Business Towers, 1st Floor, Tower A, Industrial Plot No.1, Phase-9, Sector-66, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, Pin code 160059 द्वारा स्थानपत नकया गयाहैइसकोजनरेटर सैट कीबजाय नबजली / बैटरीसे संचानलतकरवानेकाकष्टकरें।इसकेनलएहमसबआपकेआभारीरहेंगें।

¶22

English translation of the above quoited relevant part of the letter

¶23

petition made by the Registry of this Tribunal reads as under:-

¶24

“Sir, we, residents of Sector 34, Suncity Township-1, Rohtak, Haryana, request you that in our residential sector/society, there is a mobile tower of Bharti Airtel Telecommunications installed by Indus Towers Limited, Bestech Business Towers, 1st Floor, Tower A, Industrial Plot No.1, Phase-9, Sector-66, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, Pin code 160059. This mobile tower is not powered by electricity but by a generator set. Due to being powered by the generator set, it is causing excessive noise and air pollution, due to which the residents of the houses located near the mobile tower are facing a lot of problems. The people living in the houses located very close to this mobile tower are facing problems in sleeping properly at night due to the continuous operation of the generator set. Therefore, we respectfully request you to arrange for this Bharti Airtel Telecommunications mobile tower located in our residential sector/society, which has been installed by Indus Towers Limited, Bestech Business Towers, 1st Floor, Tower A, Industrial Plot No.1, Phase-9, Sector-66, SAS Nagar (Mohali), Punjab, Pin code 160059, to be powered by electricity/battery instead of a generator set. We will be grateful for this.”

¶25

This Tribunal, being of the view that the averments made in the letter

¶26

petition raised substantial questions relating to environment, considered it appropriate to seek a report from a Joint Committee comprising Haryana

¶27

¶28

State Pollution Control Board, Central Pollution Control Board and District Magistrate, Rohtak and directed the Joint Committee to visit the site, collect relevant information and to submit its report within one month.

¶29

In compliance thereof, report of the Joint Committee was filed by CPCB vide email dated 11.12.2024. The relevant part of the observations, findings and recommendations of the Joint Committee is reproduced as under:-

¶30

“ 3.0 Observations and Findings:

¶31

Based on the site visit, following are the observations:

¶32

3.1 Installation of Mobile Tower:

¶33

The mobile tower has been erected by M/s Indus Towers Limited, Bestech Business Towers, 1st Floor, Tower A, Industrial Plot No.1, Phase-9, Sector 66, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab at Suncity Township-1, Sector 34, Rohtak, Haryana.

¶34

The mobile tower is erected at the land of Sh. Kaptan Singh. Copy of lease deed dated, 22-05-2018 for a period of 15 years from 22-05-2018 to 21-05-2033 between M/s Indus Towers Limited and Sh. Kaptan Singh, Village PO Bohar, District Rohtak is enclosed as Annexure-II.

¶35

The said lease deed has been terminated by M/s Indus Towers Limited with effect from 06-07-2024. Copy of the notice for termination of agreement is enclosed as Annexure III.

¶36

The mobile tower was found in non-operational condition during visit.

¶37

The mobile tower along with Diesel Generator Set (DG set) has been erected in the premises adjacent to the complainant house approx 5 meter away from the boundary wall of house.

¶38

No supporting document was provided by M/s Indus Towers Limited with reference to permission for mobile tower from district administration. As informed by the district administration, permission as per Communication & Connectivity Infrastructure Policy 2017 (as revised in 2023) for the State of Haryana, has not been granted to M/s Indus Towers Limited for erecting the mobile tower.

¶39

3.2 Diesel Generator Set:

¶40

During the visit, one Diesel Generator Set (Jaycee Punching Solution Pvt. Ltd. Make) of 15 KVA capacity was found installed at the site which was not in operational condition.

¶41

The DG Set was found equipped with acoustic enclosures and type approved as per GSR 371 (E) dated, 17.05.2002 (Noise limit for diesel generator sets up to 1000 KVA).

¶42

It was informed by local people that DG set used to run approx 18 hours per day. Further, it was observed that no electricity connection was available for operating the mobile tower.

¶43

¶44

In view of no electricity connection at site, it is understood that the DG set was being used as a source of power and not as a backup which is a violation of direction no. 76 dated 29-09-2023 (amended on 22-02-2024), issued by Commission for Air Quality Management in National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas (CAQM) regarding "Review of regulations for use of DG sets in NCR. Copy of direction is enclosed as Annexure IV.

¶45

Further, the stack height of the DG set was not as prescribed in "Emission Regulations Part IV", Comprehensive Industry Document Series (COINDS/26/86-87), published by CPCB.

¶46

Joint Committee also interacted with the complainant Sh Ravi Shankar, resident of Suncity Township and it was informed by him that the DG Set is not in operation at site since May 2024 and no problem of air or noise pollution is caused due to DG set since then.

¶47

4.0 Recommendations:

¶48

1. M/s Indus Towers Limited shall not operate the mobile tower unless;

¶49

a. Necessary permission from the District Administration is obtained. b. Stack of DG set with required height as prescribed in CPCB's document "Emission Regulations Part IV", (COINDS/26/86-87) is installed. 2. DG set shall not be operated as regular power supply source and shall be used only as a power back-up in case of power failure.

¶50

3. M/s Indus Towers Limited shall ensure that during operation of DG set at site, there should be compliance of the Noise norms as per GSR 371 (E) dated, 17.05.2002 (Noise limit for diesel generator sets up to 1000 KVA).”

¶51

In view of the averments made in the application and observations made in the report of the Joint Committee, (1) State of Haryana through Secretary Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of Haryana; (2) Member Secretary, Haryana State Pollution Control Board; (3) District Magistrate, Rohtak; and (4) M/s. Indus Towers Ltd. were impleaded as respondents no. 1 to 4 vide order dated 13.01.2025.

¶52

Vide order dated 29.05.2025, Mr. Kaptan Singh, S/o Mir Singh, R/o Village Bohar, Tehsil and District Rohtak was impleaded as respondent no.5 and notice was ordered to be served on respondent no.5 through the District Magistrate, Rohtak. The District Magistrate, Rohtak has submitted its report dated 13.11.2025 regarding refusal by respondent no.5 to receive

¶53

¶54

the notice. Previously, notice has been served on respondent no. 5 through his family member.

¶55

8. None has appeared for respondent no.5 despite due service and no

¶56

response has been filed by.

¶57

9. Respondent no.4 filed reply dated 13.08.2025. The relevant part of

¶58

the reply reads as under:-

¶59

“xxx…………………………………..xxx……………………………………xxx 2. The Respondent No. 4 is a duly registered Category-I Infrastructure Provider ("IP-I") with the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India for providing passive telecommunication infrastructure to licensees/mobile telecom operators providing active infrastructure, such as BSNL, Airtel, Reliance Jio, Vodafone Idea, etc. on a non-discriminatory and sharing basis. 3.

¶60

In the Application, the Applicants have alleged that the operation of a Digital Generator Set ("DG Set") installed by the Respondent No. 4 at Khewat No. 864//937, Khatauni No. 938, Kila No. 103//116, Village Bohar, Tehsil District Rohtak, Haryana ("Leased Premises") is causing noise and air pollution in the surrounding area. The Respondent No. 4 denies all the averments and allegations made by the Applicants. Unless specifically set forth and traversed, nothing contained in the Application shall be deemed to be admitted for want of specific denial. 4. At the outset itself, it is relevant to bring to the attention of this Hon'ble Tribunal that the subject DG Set concerning which the Application was filed by the Applicants is not in operation since 12 May 2024.

¶61

5. In fact, the non-operational state of the DG Set has been admitted by the Applicant No. 1 during the hearing dated 29 May 2025 and recorded in the Order dated 29 May 2025 passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal. The relevant extracts of the Order dated 29 May 2025 are extracted below:

¶62

"The applicant has submitted that the tower and DG sets are not operational but the same have not yet been removed."

¶63

6. In view of the admitted position that the DG Set is not in operation since 12 May 2024, no cause of action survives against Respondent No. 4. Accordingly, the present application is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.

¶64

7. It is also relevant to note that the Respondent No. 4 had terminated the lease deed by way of which the DG Set was installed at the Leased Premises ("Lease Deed"). The said Lease Deed was executed by the Respondent No. 4 with Mr. Kaptan Singh i.e., the owner of the Leased Premises and terminated by the Respondent No. 4 by way of termination letter dated 06 June 2024. A copy of the termination letter is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-1. 8.

¶65

¶66

In the letter of termination, the Respondent No. 4 specifically called upon the Respondent No. 5 to provide unhindered access to the Leased Premises for removal of the mobile tower equipment and the DG Set. However, despite issuance of the termination note, the Respondent No. 4 has not been able to dismantle or retrieve its equipment due to the civil dispute being raised by the owner of the Leased Premises. 9.

¶67

Pertinently, during the hearing dated 29 May 2025, the Respondent No. 4 also apprised this Hon'ble Tribunal that on account of some civil dispute, the owner of the leased premises i.e., Mr. Kaptan Singh is not allowing the Respondent No. 4 to remove the mobile tower equipment and DG Set.

¶68

10. In view of this, this Hon'ble Tribunal considered that the presence of the owner of the Leased Premises would be necessary. Accordingly, this Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to implead the owner of the Leased Premises, Mr. Kaptan Singh as Respondent No. 5 to the present proceedings.

¶69

11. It's relevant to note that in view of the ongoing disputes with the Respondent No. 5, the Respondent No. 4 has initiated pre-litigation mediation under the applicable law in order to amicably resolve the matter. The mediation is titled as Indus Tower Limited through Jaibir Singh v. Kaptan Singh bearing Pre-litigation Mediation No. 25 of 2025 and the same is pending before the Ld. Mediator. Copies of orders passed by the Ld. Mediator is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-2 (Colly.). 12. It is evident from the above that Respondent No. 4 is actively pursuing lawful and appropriate remedies to resolve the dispute arising out of the Lease Deed and recover its equipment including the DG Set from the Leased Premises.

¶70

13. Without prejudice to the foregoing, it is submitted that the reliefs sought by the Applicants in their letter petition dated 01 January 2024 i.e., a request for a direction restraining Respondent No. 4 from using the DG Set and to instead adopt electric battery-based alternatives have become wholly infructuous in view of the non-operation of the DG Set and termination of the Lease Deed. The Respondent No. 4 is not and does not intend to operate from the Leased Premises in future as well. As such, nothing further survives in the matter.”

¶71

We have arguments addressed by learned counsels for respondents and we have gone through the material on record carefully.

¶72

It may be observed here that respondent no.5 has not appeared before this Tribunal despite due service and has not filed any response to the original application filed by the applicant and has not filed any objections to the report of the Joint Committee and has also not filed any

¶73

¶74

response to the reply filed by respondent no. 4-M/s Indus Towers Ltd. Consequently, there is no challenge to correctness of observations/findings made by the Joint Committee and submissions made by respondent no. 4- M/s Indus Towers Ltd. which, in the absence of any material to challenge the correctness/veracity thereof, deserve according of due credence by this Tribunal.

¶75

In the present case, the mobile tower in question was erected by respondent no. 4- m/s Indus Towers Ltd. in the land of respondent no. 5- Sh. Kaptan Singh in terms of lease deed dated 22-05-2018 executed for a period of 15 years from 22-05-2018 to 21-05-2033 between them. The said lease deed has been terminated by M/s Indus Towers Limited with effect from 06-07-2024.

¶76

It may be observed here that as mentioned by the Joint Committee permission as per Communication & Connectivity Infrastructure Policy 2017 (as revised in 2023) for the State of Haryana was not granted by the District Administration to M/s Indus Towers Limited for erecting the mobile tower.

¶77

During the visit the Joint Committee found that one Diesel Generator Set (Jaycee Punching Solution Pvt. Ltd. Make) of 15 KVA capacity was installed at the site. The DG Set was found to be equipped with acoustic enclosures approved as per GSR 371 (E) dated, 17.05.2002. It was observed by the Joint Committee that no electricity connection was available for operating the mobile tower; that as informed by the local people, DG set was being operated about 18 hours a day and that respondent no. 4- M/s Indus Towers Ltd. violated direction no. 76 dated 29-09-2023 (amended on 22-02-2024), issued by Commission for Air Quality Management in National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas

¶78

¶79

(CAQM) regarding "Review of regulations for use of DG sets in NCR by using DG set as source of power and not as a backup. Further, the Joint Committee also found that the stack height of the DG set was not as prescribed in "Emission Regulations Part IV", Comprehensive Industry Document Series (COINDS/26/86-87), published by CPCB.

¶80

In view of the adverse environmental impact of the above mentioned violations of the order/environmental norms, the CAQM and the HSPCB are directed to take appropriate action against respondent no.4-M/s Indus Towers Ltd. for past violations in accordance with law.

¶81

Since the lease deed has been terminated by respondent no.4-M/s Indus Towers Ltd. and the DG Set is not in operation at the site since May 2024, we are of the considered view that no further action is required to be taken by this Tribunal on the present original application at this stage for prevention and control of noise and air pollution.

¶82

However, it may be observed here that the Joint Committee

¶83

constituted by this Tribunal made the following recommendations:-

¶84

“4.0 Recommendations:

¶85

1. M/s Indus Towers Limited shall not operate the mobile tower unless;

¶86

¶87

2. DG set shall not be operated as regular power supply source and shall be used only as a power back-up in case of power failure. 3. M/s Indus Towers Limited shall ensure that during operation of DG set at site, there should be compliance of the Noise norms as per GSR 371 (E) dated, 17.05.2002 (Noise limit for diesel generator sets up to 1000 KVA).”

¶88

¶89

In view of the above discussion, this original application is disposed of with the directions that respondent no. 4 shall not operate the mobile tower and DG set at the site in question without obtaining requisite permissions, compliance with environmental norms, recommendations made by the Joint Committee constituted by this Tribunal and also permission of this Tribunal and respondent no. 3- the District Magistrate, Rohtak is directed to ensure due compliance of this order by respondent no. 4- M/s Indus Towers Ltd. However, respondent no.4-M/s Indus Towers Ltd. shall be entitled to re-locate the mobile tower and DG set in question with requisite permissions and due compliance with environmental norms subject to the orders of the concerned Civil Court/Appellate Court/Higher Court to be passed in the litigation pending between respondent no. 4-M/s Indus Towers Ltd. and respondent no. 5-Mr. Kaptan Singh.

¶90

A copy of this order may be sent to respondent no. 3- the District Magistrate, Rohtak and the Managing Director of respondent no. 4- M/s Indus Towers Ltd. by email for requisite compliance.

¶91

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶92

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶93

November 24^th , 2025 Original Application No. 1099/2024 AB

¶94

Ravi Shankar and Ors. vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Shankar and Ors. vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surab vs State of Rajasthan

Ajinkya Dilip Barne vs Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation

Vishal S. Rajemahadik vs Maharasthra Pollution Control Board

Dheeraj Tiwari vs Chhattishgarh Environment Conservation Board

Sameer Sharma vs Shakuntalam Landcraft Pvt. Ltd.

News Item Titled Raat Me Ped Kaat Jhadiyon Me Chipa Dete Hain Moka Milte Hi Thikane Laga Rahe Lakdi Jagah Jagah Dikhe Thunth Appearing in Dainik Bhaskar Dated 29TH August 2025 vs State of Madhya Pradesh

News Item Titled "22 Saal Se Band Company Mein Kaat Diye 1 Hazaar Se Jyada Ped Noida Mein Van Vibhag Ne Jabt Kiya Kate Pedo Se Bhara Truck" Appearing in Navbharat Times Dated 11.06.2024 vs

Rakesh Kaushal vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 128/2025 in Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 9/2025 of Charan Singh vs

Neeraj Chaudhary vs

Ashok Patel vs

Sanjay Nautiyal vs

Vivek Singh vs

Anmol Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh