Dismissed

Manoj Tyagi and Ors. vs

NGT9 Sept 2025Original Application No. 1107/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants alleged illegal tree cutting and pond filling in UP. Tribunal relied on Joint Committee reports confirming trees were cut with permission and ponds are free from encroachment and rejuvenated. Application dismissed as no further action required.

What did the court decide?

No further action required on the original application as allegations were found unsubstantiated by joint committee and departmental records.

Manoj Tyagi and Ors. vs — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

Court No. 2

¶2

Item No. 03

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 1107/2024

¶5

Manoj Tyagi and Ors. Applicants

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. Respondents

¶8

Date of hearing: 09.09.2025

¶9

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

¶10

Applicants: None for the Applicants.

¶11

Respondents: Mr. Ankit Verma, Advocate for District Magistrate, Pilibhit.

¶12

Ms. Sthavi Asthana, Advocate for UPPCB.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The applicants- Manoj Tyagi and others have sent a letter petition dated 29.01.2024 to this Tribunal which has been treated and registered as Original Application under Sections 14 and 15 of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.

¶15

The applicants have pointed out three incidents in the letter petition treated and registered as original application. Some miscreants have illegally cut green trees standing in green belt in Gata No.1202/3/1, Area 1.532 hectare in village Deshnagar. Pond in Gohania croissant has been filled for plotting and construction purposes. Pond near road from Theka

¶16

¶17

Choki to Nehru Park near Sanjay Nagar Colony has been filled in by land Mafias and illegal plotting has been done.

¶18

In view of involvement of substantial questions relating to environment arising out of implementation of enactments mentioned in Schedule I of NGT, Act 2010, this Tribunal constituted a Joint Committee comprising District Magistrate, Pilitbhit and Uttar Pradesh State Pollution Control Board to collect relevant information, visit the site, and also verify the status of ponds from record mentioning its area number etc., and submit a factual report within one month.

¶19

In compliance of order dated 14.11.2024, report of the Joint Committee was filed by the District Magistrate, Pilibhit vide affidavit dated 10.12.2024.

¶20

This Tribunal considered the report of the Joint Committee. With respect to Issue No.1 regarding illegal cutting of trees, the Joint Committee submitted that the trees were cut in accordance with permission granted. With respect to Issues No.2 and 3, the Joint Committee mentioned that both Gata no. 148 (1.007 ha) and Gata no 1282/1 (0.975 ha) exist on spot as ‘pond’ and there is no encroachment over the same. The Joint Committee relied on the verification made by representative of the Revenue Department on the spot but name of the representative was not mentioned. The copy of the relevant Revenue record was also not produced. In its report, the Joint Committee mentioned about cancellation of Entries in favour of Khatedar by the Court of SDM, Sadar, Pilibhit vide order dated 14.02.2024 but it was not mentioned whether any appeal/revision has been filed against the said order or not. In the report, the Joint Committee mentioned that Gata No. 1282/1 (0.975 ha) exists as ‘pond’ but at the same time, Joint Committee mentioned that one hut of the lessee existed on

¶21

¶22

above said Gata which was removed on 14.10.2024. However, no details regarding lease and removal of hut were given. The applicants alleged that above said pond had been given on lease for fish farming but the Joint Committee did not respond as to whether said pond had been given on lease for fish farming. Accordingly, the Joint Committee was directed to make further verification and submit its report with copies of relevant records with other relevant documents.

¶23

In compliance thereof, additional affidavit dated 13.01.2025 has been filed by D.M, Pilibhit. The relevant part of the additional affidavit reads as under:-

¶24

“ 6. That during the inspection, the committee was informed by the officials of the Revenue Department that Gram Desh Nagar Andar Chungi situated at Gata No.1282/1 admeasuring area of 0.975 hectare is recorded submerged land under category 6(1) and is pond. Earlier entries were done under category 3 and it came to be recorded in the name of few lease holders Which was valid only for five years.

¶25

7. That the entries which were done in the name of lease holders was cancelled by the order dated 14.02.2024 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate Pilibhit and the aforesaid gata no. was again restored and recorded as pond in the revenue records as it was earlier under category 6(1) of the UP land records manual. A copy of order dated 14.02.2024 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate Pilibhit is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-2.

¶26

8. That being aggrieved by the cancellation order dated 14.02.2024 passed by the Sub Divisional Pilibhit, the lease holders preferred an appeal no.C202412000000345 titled as Sanjeev Kumar and Ors v/s State before the Additional Commissioner Administration Bareilly, wherein the order dated 14.02.2024 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate was upheld vide order dated 29.02.2024. A copy of order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner Administration Bareilly is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-3.

¶27

9. That the Revenue Officials further informed the joint committee that the gata no. 1282/1 has been recorded as pond in the revenue records on which one illegal hut was made by lease holder Sanjeev Kumar and others which was removed on 14.10.2024. During the inspection which was conducted on 07.01.2025, no illegal hut was found.

¶28

¶29

10. That it is further submitted that as per the information submitted by the revenue officials it was revealed that the said gata no.(1282/1) was never given on lease for fish farming.

¶30

11. That the additional Inspection report dated 07.01.2025 submitted by the joint committee to the deponent is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-4.

¶31

12. That the copy of relevant revenue record pertaining to gata no.(1282/1) is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-5.”

¶32

The above said affidavit was considered on 28.03.2025 and it was observed that in the above said affidavit, measures taken for rejuvenation of the ponds in question were not mentioned and DM, Pilibhit was directed to file within two months additional affidavit mentioning in detail the measures taken/to be taken for rejuvenation of the ponds in question.

¶33

In compliance of order dated 28.03.2025, additional reply dated 06.08.2025 has been filed by District Magistrate, Pilibhit. Relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-

¶34

“6. That in respectful compliance of the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal the joint committee again inspected both the gatas situated at Gata No.1282/1 admeasuring area of 0.975 hectares and Gata No.148 (1.007ha) on 23.07.2025. Apart from the members of the joint committee, Revenue Officials of the District Administration namely Mr Punnet Yadav, Regional Lekhpal, Mr Tej Bahadur Revenue Inspector, Mr Prakhar Singh Naib Tehsildar, Mrs Archi Gupta Tehsildar Sadar, Pilibhit were also present.

¶35

7. That during inspection on 23.07.2025 it was observed that the ponds are not encroached. The natural stream of pond was flowing and the nature of pond was not disturbed and was same as per the available revenue records. The said fact was also recorded by the committee in its earlier report. It was further informed by the Committee that the process for fish farming on leases is being done on the ponds by the Nagar Palika Parishad Pilhibhit.

¶36

8. That the second joint inspection report dated 23.07.2025 submitted by the joint committee to the deponent is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-1.

¶37

9. That the deponent herein has perused the joint committee report. Both the ponds are filled with adequate water and are free from any

¶38

¶39

kind of encroachment as alleged in the Instant Original Application; therefore the rejuvenation of the ponds is not required.”

¶40

None has appeared for the applicant in the course of hearing on the original application and none has appeared for the applicant even today.

¶41

No objections to the report of the Joint Committee and rejoinder to the replies/reports filed by the District Magistrate, Pilibhit have been filed by the applicants or any other person with the consequence that there is no ground to doubt the correctness thereof and to discard the observations/conclusions of facts recorded therein which deserve due credence.

¶42

In view of the factual position mentioned in the reports of the Joint Committee and affidavits filed by District Magistrate, Pilibhit before this Tribunal showing that trees were cut with requisite permission and that ponds are free from encroachment and stand rejuvenated, we are of the considered that no further action is required to be taken on the present original application which is disposed of accordingly.

¶43

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶44

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶45

September 09^th , 2025 Original Application No. 1107/2024 AB

¶46

Manoj Tyagi and Ors. vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Tyagi and Ors. 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

Newspaper Article Dated 19TH December 2024 Published in Dainik Bhashakr Hindi Titled as Bade Chote Talab Aur Vip Kshetron Me Bhi Saplai Wale Pani Me Microplastic vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Deepak v Rao vs Vasai Virar City Municipal Corporation

Suo Moto vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Biswajit Saha vs State of West Bengal

Bhau Madan Mehta vs Maharashtra State Infrastructure Development Corporation Msidc

Chander Mohan Sharma vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

News Item Titled Secunderabad Complex Fined for Felling Trees Appearing in the Times of India Dated 06.01.2024 vs State of Telangana through Its Secretary Moef Cc

Haider Ali vs 1. the Secretary Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 25/2025 in Original Application No. 109/2023 of Satrughan Meher S/O Late Lingaraj Meher Aged ABOUT47 Years vs 1. State of Odisha through Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Biswajit Saha vs State of West Bengal

Daso Ram Hansda vs M/S Gajanan Ferro Private Limited

Sukhbir Singh vs Union of India

Sukhbir Singh vs Union of India

Sukhbir Singh vs Union of India