Disposed

Mohd Maqbool Rather v. Ut of J&K through Pollution Control Committee

NGT8 Apr 2025Original Application No. 145/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this noise pollution complaint, the applicant alleged that a rice husking unit operated in violation of a previous closure order and joint committee recommendations. The National Green Tribunal directed the Member Secretary, J&K PCC, to investigate and take appropriate action within two months by following natural justice principles.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Member Secretary, J&K PCC to consider the complaint, verify the ground position, and take appropriate action within two months by following natural justice.

Mohd Maqbool Rather vs Ut of J&K through Pollution… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No. 04

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 145/2025

¶5

Mohammad Maqbool Rather Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

UT of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.

¶8

Respondent(s)

¶9

Date of hearing: 08.04.2025

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER

¶11

Applicant: Mr. Mohammad Maqbool Rather, in person (Through VC) Respondent: Mr. Ghansham Singh, Member Secretary, J&K PCC (Through VC)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

In this original application, the applicant has alleged that one Mr. Rafeeq Ahmad Rather is operating a Rice husking, spice grinding and Atta Chakki unit near the residence of the applicant and is causing noise pollution. The submission of the applicant is that earlier the closure order dated 12.09.2022 (Annexure E – 2) was passed against the said operator but subsequently, it was withdrawn by the order dated 21.11.2023. The applicant has referred to the report of the Joint Committee dated 16.05.2024, which was appointed on complaint against withdrawal of the closure order. The Joint Committee had made following recommendations:-

¶14

1) “Strict Action must be initiated against all the officials who had helped the complainant in breaching the privacy of the office and provided easy access to the official records/documents related to the case available at the district office PCC, Kupwara.

¶15

2) Fresh Noise Level Monitoring needs to be conducted as per the Protocol for Ambient Level Noise Monitoring issued by CPCB.

¶16

3) Closure Order withdrawn by the Competent Authority needs to be honored and consent case of the applicant may be processed as per the extent rules after ensuring that all the PCDs/PCMs are adopted and required documents are submitted. Moreover, the unit shall not operate between 6 pm to 8 am.

¶17

4) The activity shall be restricted to Rice Husking Only.

¶18

5) Unit may not be allowed to operate without consent from J&K PCC.”

¶19

¶20

The submission of the applicant is that the recommendations have not been followed and the applicant has subsequently made the complaint dated 03.03.2025 to the Respondent No. 2 – Member Secretary, Jammu & Kashmir Pollution Control Committee (J&K PCC), but on that compliant also no action has been taken.

¶21

We take note of the fact that neither the complete details of the violator have been given nor the violator has been impleaded as respondent in this OA.

¶22

The Member Secretary, J&K PCC Committee present virtually has submitted that he will look into the complaint and will take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶23

Hence, we dispose of the OA directing the Member Secretary, J&K PCC to duly consider the complaint of the applicant dated 03.03.2025, ascertain the correct position at the ground level and take appropriate action after duly following the principles of natural justice in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from today.

¶24

OA is accordingly disposed of.

¶25

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Member Secretary, J&K

¶26

PCC.

¶27

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶28

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶29

April 8, 2025 Original Application No. 145/2025 AS..

¶30

Mohd Maqbool Rather v. Ut of J&K through Pollution Control Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Maqbool Rather v. Ut of J&K through Pollution Control Committee

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

A Muthuvel vs Tamilnadu Pollution Control Board

Janardan Chandar Patil vs Union of India Department of Environment Forest and Wild Life through Secretary

Dr Pg Najpande vs Union of India through Secretary

Satyam Shekhar vs District Conservator Forest Alwar

Akhilesh Kumar vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Chief Secretary

News Item Titled "77 Cases of Illegal Felling of Conifer Trees Reported in J & K,S Doda" Appearing in the Daily Excelsior Dated 27.11.2024. vs

Mr. Shashikant Vitthal Kamble vs Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (Moef & Cc) New Delhi.

National Green Tribunal Southern Zone vs the Principal Secretary to Government of Kerala Environment Department

Sohan Lal Son of Jagira and Others vs State of Haryana

News Item Titled "Up Gives Permission to Fell 112000 Trees for Road Along Upper Ganga Canal" Appearing in Hindustan Times Dated 01.02.2024 vs

News Item Titled "Up Gives Permission to Fell 112000 Trees for Road Along Upper Ganga Canal" Appearing in Hindustan Times Dated 01.02.2024 vs

Vipin Kumar Saxena vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Resident,S Welfare Association (Regd.) Sector 99 Noida Uttar Pradesh vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (Noida)