Disposed

Sajibur Rahaman v. the State of West Bengal

NGT2 Jul 2025Original Application No. 201/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal disposed of an application alleging noise pollution from a metal box manufacturing unit. Based on inspection reports confirming high noise levels and subsequent confirmation that the unit had stopped such activities, the Tribunal passed necessary directions to ensure future compliance, noting that the issue is disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Directions to Respondents 9 & 10 to ensure no metal box manufacturing violates permissible sound levels; directed PCB to ensure strict compliance.

Sajibur Rahaman vs the State of West Bengal — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No.10

¶2

Court No.1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA

¶4

(THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)

¶5

Original Application No.201/2024/EZ

¶6

In the matter of:

¶7

Sajibur Rahaman Son of Aynul Haque Sekh, Residing at Village and PostKapasdenga, Police StationBeldanga, Dist.-Murshidabad Pin-742133

¶8

……..Applicant(s)

¶9

Versus

¶10

1. State of West Bengal, Service through the Principal Secretary, Department of Environment, 5^th Floor, Pranisampad Bhavan, Sector-III, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700091;

¶11

2. The Chief Environment Officer, Department of Environment, 5^th Floor, Pranisampad Bhavan, Sector-III, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700091;

¶12

3. The West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Through the Chairman, Paribesh Bhavan, 10A, Block-LA, Sector-III, Biddhannagar, Calcutta-700098;

¶13

4. The Member Secretary of the West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Department of Environment, Government of West Bengal, Paribesh Bhavan, 10A, Block-LA, Sector-III, Biddhannagar, Calcutta-700098;

¶14

5. The District Magistrate, Murshidabad At Berhampore, P.O.+P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin-742101;

¶15

6. The Environment Engineer, Maldah Regional Office, WBPCB, Paribesh Bhavan, Village Abhirampur, P.O.-Mokdumpur, P.S.-English Bazar, Dist.-Malda, Pin-732103;

¶16

7. General Manager, District Industries Centre, Murshidabad, 20/1, C.R. Das Road, P.O. & P.S.-Berhampore, Pin-742101;

¶17

¶18

8. The Prodhan, Kapasdanga Gram Panchyat, Office at Village & Post-Kapasdanga, P.S.-Beldanga, Dist.-Murshidabad, Pin-742133;

¶19

9. Humaun Kabir, Son of Late Robiul Haque, Residing at Village & Post-Kapasdanga, P.S.-Beldanga, Dist.-Murshidabad, Pin-742133;

¶20

10. Motibur Rahaman, Son of Late Robiul Haque,

¶21

Residing at Village & Post-Kapasdanga, P.S.-Beldanga, Dist.-Murshidabad, Pin-742133

¶22

……..Respondent(s)

¶23

Date of hearing: 02.07.2025

¶24

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER

¶25

For Applicant(s) : None

¶26

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajib Ray, Advocate for State Respondents (in Virtual Mode), Mr. Sibojyoti Chakraborty, Advocate for R-3

¶27

ORDER

¶28

This Original Application has been filed by the Applicant stating that he is a resident of Village & Post-Kapasdanga, P.S.-Beldanga, District-Murshidabad.

¶29

It is alleged that the Respondent Nos.9 and 10 are operating an Aluminium/Tin Box manufacturing unit in their factory located within a highly populated residential area adjacent to the house of the Applicant.

¶30

It is alleged that the private respondents are operating Tin Box Manufacturing Unit without holding a valid “Consent to Operate” Certificate.

¶31

The allegation further is that during its operation, the unit of the Respondent Nos.9 and 10 is producing immense sound causing noise pollution and nuisance in the locality which is injurious to the inhabitants living in the area including the Applicant.

¶32

At the time of admission, this Tribunal constituted a Committee comprising of the following members:-

¶33

¶34

i. Senior Scientist, West Bengal Pollution Control Board; and

¶35

ii. District Magistrate, District-Murshidabad or his representative not below the rank of Additional District Magistrate (ADM).

¶36

The Committee was directed to visit the site and submit its Report with regard to the allegations made in the Original Application.

¶37

Affidavit dated 04.01.2025 has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No.5, District Magistrate & Collector, Murshidabad bringing on record the Report of the Committee of an Inspection carried out on 27.11.2024. The Inspection Report reads as under:-

¶38

“Report of the committee constituted by Hon’ble National Green Tribunal in connection to case OA 201/2024(EZ) through order passed on 03.10.2024

¶39

Name & Address of the unit	*M/s Bhai Bhai Metal*
	Prop: Janab Humayun Kabir and Janab Matibur Rahman Vill- Kapasdanga, P.O.-
	Kapasdanga, Dist.-Murshidaba, PIN- 742133
Name of the Inspecting	Dr. Dipanjan Maulik,
Officer(s)	Senior Environment Engineer and in-Charge Malda RO, West Bengal Pollution Control Board Md. Samsur Rahman Additional District Magistrate (Zilla Parishad) Murshidabad
Accompanying Officer with	Block Development Officer,
the investigating team	Beldanga-I and Inspection-in- Charge Beldanga Police

¶40

¶41

	Station were present at the time of inspection
Date and time of inspection	27/11/2024, 13:15 hrs. to 14:10 hrs.
Electric supply authority	WBSEDCL
Name of the local body	Kapasdanga Gram Panchayat, Beldanga Block-1
Nature of complaint	Sound pollution
Nature of the area	Kapasdanga Gram Panchayat, Beldanga Block-1
Person met during inspection	Jahanara Khatun (wife of complainant Janab Sajibur Rahaman) Janab Hamayun Kabir and Janab Matibur Rahman (Owners of the unit) A group of local residents (Name of each individual was not mentioned)
Nature of complaint	Sound pollution
Nature of the area	Predominantly Residential
Status of Consent to	As per the present industry
Establish/ Consent to	categorization followed in
Operate	state of West Bengal this type
	of activity falls in “white”
	category. This is a dry
	mechanical process without
	painting and, therefore, this
	unit is not required to obtain
	Consent to Establish/
	Consent to Operate from
	WBPCB. However, the unit is
	required to submit an
	intimation to the WBPCB
	about their activities. In
	present case no such
	intimation could be found

¶42

¶43

	back at Malda Regional Office of WBPCB.
Reference of inspection	Order passed by Hon’ble
	National Green Tribunal (EZ)
	on 03.10.2024 in connection
	to OA 201/2024/EZ.

¶44

About the Unit: This unit is engaged in manufacturing of boxes/trunks by using Aluminium/Tin metal sheet (approx. Lat 23.912558 E, 88.275158 N). Metal boxes are manufactured manually by hammering. The number of boxes produced per day vary as per the orders received by the owners of the unit. This unit is residential area. There is residential house adjacent to this place of metal box manufacturing. There is also residential house just at the opposite side of the road where metal boxes are manufactured.

¶45

Observation: During inspection, it has been found that the unit manufactures the boxes in open varandah of the house of the owners. Complainant was not at home during this visit. However, his wife and the other residents complained about the annoyance caused by this manufacturing unit to the committee members from morning to evening.

¶46

The owners of the said unit were asked to produce one box from the scratch for monitoring the sound level during manufacturing. Average sound level produced during such operation was 109 dB(A) at the location of metal Box Manufacturing, which clearly surpasses the permissible limit set for residential area 55 dB(A). The ambient noise level was in range of 46 dB(A) – 74.93 dB(A), when everyone was quite for a minute to when vehicles is passing through the road. The noise level was monitored in operating conditions near the open window of the house in opposite site of the road which is approximately 5 meters from the source of noise generation. Average reading in the sound limiter was 82.51 dB(A) during the monitoring. This house is marked as “II” in the Figure 1. The sound was also monitored at the house of

¶47

¶48

complainant, which is adjacent to this metal Box manufacturing, and here sound level was 79.24 dB(A). This house is marked as “I”. The current sound level monitoring device provides the latitude and longitude in open atmosphere only and the location is accordingly provided in this report. Noise level during hammering marginally changed when the jute sacks were used for during manufacturing because this is no a sufficient measure for noise control in an open area.

¶49

Remarks:

¶50

1) This activity should not be allowed to continue in this open

¶51

Varandah. Following options are available:

¶52

Option 1: the unit should shift its activity as early as possible from current location. However, unit shall be required to also abide by permissible standard for sound in the new location.

¶53

Option 2: The unit should run its business within an enclosed room with proper sound. The unit shall have to ensure that the ambient noise level neither exceeds the permissible standard due to its manufacturing nor cause annoyance in the neighbourhood.

¶54

2) Action may be taken as deemed fit and proper.”

¶55

Under the heading ‘Observation’ , it is mentioned that the Unit of Respondent Nos.9 & 10 is manufacturing boxes in an open Varandah of the house of the owners. The Committee asked the owners of the Unit to produce one box in their presence to ascertain the sound level during manufacturing and it was found that the average sound level produced during the manufacturing operation was 109 dB(A) at the location of the metal box manufacturing which was clearly in excess of the permissible limit set for residential areas i.e. 55 dB(A); the ambient noise level was recorded in the range of 46 dB(A) – 74.93 dB(A) when everyone was quiet for

¶56

¶57

a minute to when vehicles were passing through the road; noise level was monitored in operating conditions near the open window of the house on the opposite site of the road which is approximately 5 meters from the source of noise generation and the average reading in the sound limiter was gauged at 82.51 dB(A) during monitoring. The Committee noted that the sound was also monitored at the house of the complainant, which is adjacent to the metal box manufacturing Unit and here sound level was found to be 79.24 dB(A).

¶58

The Committee also noted that at the time of inspection, the Applicant himself was not present but his wife and the other residents were present and complained about the annoyance caused due to the manufacturing of metal boxes by the private Respondent Nos.9 and 10.

¶59

The Committee, therefore, recommended that manufacturing activity should not be allowed to continue in the open Varandah and under Option 1, the Unit was required to shift its activity from the current location as early as possible and the Unit was required to abide by the permissible standard for sound at the new location OR under Option 2, the Unit should run its business within an enclosed room with proper sound insulation; the Unit shall have to ensure that ambient noise level neither exceeds the permissible standard due to its manufacturing or nor causes annoyance in the neighbourhood.

¶60

The District Magistrate & Collector, Murshidabad, in his affidavit dated 04.01.2025 has reiterated the contents of the Inspection Report and the remarks made therein.

¶61

¶62

Further affidavit dated 16.01.2025 has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No.5, District Magistrate & Collector, Murshidabad, bringing on record the service of the notices of the Tribunal upon the private Respondent Nos.9 and 10 through his letter dated 14.01.2025.

¶63

The Respondent No.3, West Bengal Pollution Control Board has filed affidavit dated 12.03.2025 bringing on record the Inspection Report of an Inspection carried out on 17.02.2025 which reads as under:-

¶64

“8.02 Follow up Action Taken Report in connection to Order passed by Hon’ble National Green Tribunal (EZA) in case OA 201/2024 (EZ) on 12.02.2025

¶65

Name & Address of the unit	*M/s Bhai Bhai Metal* Prop: Janab Humayun Kabir and Janab Matibur Rahman Vill-Kapasdanga, P.O- Kapasdanga, P.S.- Beldanga, Dist: Murshidabad, PIN-742133
Name of the Inspecting Officer(s)	Dr. Dipanjana Maulik, Senior Environmental Engineer and In-Charge
	Malda RO, West Bengal
	Pollution Control Board
Date and time of inspection	17/02/2025, 05:55 PM to 06:35 PM
Electricity supply authority	WBSEDCL
Name of the local body	Kapasdanga Gram Panchayat, Beldanga Block 1
Person met during inspection	*Jahanara Khatun* (wife of complainant Janab Sajibur Rahaman)*Janab* *Humayun Kabir* (Owners of the unit)

¶66

¶67

	Asgar Ali who lives in the
	house just opposite of the
	road to the unit, whose
	family earlier stated that
	they were experiencing
	difficulty due to this noise
	pollution, and this was also
	included in the previous
	inspection report dated
	27.11.2024, The house was
	referred as marked as “II” in
	Figure 1. Photocopy of the
	previous inspection report is attached as Annexure I.
Nature of complaint	Sound pollution.
Nature of the area	Predominantly Residential
Status of Consent to	*During* *inspection* on
Establish/Consent to Operate	*17.02.2025,* *the* *unit*
	*reported that they have*
	*stopped* *the* *noise*
	*polluting activities on site.*
	*Earlier* *unit* *used* to
	manufacture metal trunk. As
	per the present industry
	categorization followed in
	state of West Bengal this
	type of manufacturing
	activity falls in “white”
	category. This is a dry
	mechanical process without
	painting and, therefore, this
	unit is not required to obtain
	Consent to Establish/
	Consent to Operate from
	WBPCB. However, the unit is
	required to submit an
	intimation to the WBPCB

¶68

¶69

	about their activities.
Reference of inspection	Order passed by Hon’ble
	National Green Tribunal (EZ)
	on 12.02.2025 in connection
	to OA 201/2024/EZ

¶70

About the Unit: This unit used to be engaged in manufacturing of boxes/ trunks by using Aluminium/Tin metal sheet (approx. Lat 23.912558 E, 88.275158 N). Metal boxes used to be manufactured manually by hammering. The number of boxes produced per day used to vary as per the orders received by the owners of the unit. This unit is in residential area. There is residential house of the complainant adjacent to this place of metal box manufacturing. There is also residential house just at the opposite side of the road where metal boxes were manufactured (Figure I).

¶71

Observation: During inspection on 17.02.2025, it has been found that the unit has stopped the noise polluting activities of the manufacturing metal boxes by hammering in open varandah of the house of the owners. Complainant was not at home during this visit. However, his wife Jahanara Khatun and the other residents also reported that the unit has stopped the noise polluting manufacturing activities on site since the last joint inspection conducted by WBPCB and ADM, Murshidabad on 27.11.2024. This house of the complainant is marked as “I” in Figure 1. The unit is engaged in preprocessing activities at the site, without causing any annoyance to neighbours.

¶72

This house in opposite side of road to unit is marked as “II” in the Figure 1. Asgar Ali and other residents of this house “II” also stated that the unit has stopped the noise polluting activities since the last joint inspection by WBPCB and ADM, Murshidabad on 27.11.2024

¶73

Remark:

¶74

No noise polluting activities are being continued at the site. This has been stated by the local residents. Ms. Jahanara Khatun (wife of the complainant) and Janab Asgar Ali have

¶75

¶76

also shared their proof of identity (annexed to this to this report as Annexure II & III). The copy of the notice in Form II has been served by the inspecting officer to the unit as per the norms and is also attached as they have confirmed their statement in body of this notice dated 17.02.2025 (Annexure IV).

¶77

During previous inspection on 27.1 1.2024following remarks were provided in the inspection report:

¶78

1) This activity should not be allowed to continue in this open Varandah. Following options are available:

¶79

Option 1: the unit should shift its activity as early as possible from current location. However, unit shall be required to also abide by permissible standard for sound in the new location.

¶80

Option 2: The Unit should run its business within an enclosed room with proper sound insulation. The unit shall have to ensure that the ambient noise level neither exceeds the permissible standard due to its manufacturing nor cause annoyance in the neighbourhood.

¶81

These options and the legal implications proposed by the committee were also verbally clarified to the unit owners and the neighbouring residents as well on 27.11.2024 because the case is subjudice. During visit on 17.02.2025, it was learnt from the residents that Shri Rathindra Nath Adhikari, BDO (Block Development Officer), Beldanga has also visited the site on 03.01.2025 and 06.02.2025 to see the status of activities. This has also been verbally corroborated by BDO Beldanga. His confirmatory c -mail shall be forwarded on receipt of the same.

¶82

The unit has been verbally directed never to resume the noise polluting activities again on site and also to inform WBPCB if any white category is started in the said location and it has been mentioned in the body of the notice of inspection in Form II (The copy of the notice served to the unit is annexed as Annexure IV). Further, a formal letter has also been issued and the copy of the

¶83

¶84

said letter is annexed as Annexure V incompliance to order dated 12.02.2025 by Hon’ble NGT (EZ).”

¶85

The Applicant and his wife who were present during inspection complained of difficulty due to noise pollution caused by the Respondent Nos.9 and 10. The Committee has noted that the manufacturing activity of metal trunks falls in the ‘White’ category and is a dry mechanical process without painting and, therefore, the Unit is not required to obtain Consent to Establish (CTE) or Consent to Operate (CTO) from the West Bengal Pollution Control Board. The Committee also noted that the Unit had now stopped the noise polluting activities at the site in question which was confirmed by Smt. Jahanara Khatun wife of the Applicant, and other residents. The Committee noted that no noise polluting activities are now being continued at the site.

¶86

We have heard the learned Counsel for the Respondents. Neither the Applicant nor his Counsel is present.

¶87

From the Inspection Report dated 27.11.2024, the allegations made in the Original Application were confirmed and directions for remedying the noise level to bring it within the permissible standards were issued by the Committee and the subsequent Report of the Inspection dated 17.02.2025, as confirmed by wife of Applicant Smt. Jahanara Khatun, and other residents is that the operation of metal box/trunk has since been stopped.

¶88

We, therefore, dispose of this Original Application with a direction to the Respondent Nos.9 and 10 to ensure that no activity of metal boxes/trunks manufacturing shall be carried out in violation of the permissible sound levels.

¶89

¶90

The West Bengal Pollution Control Board is also directed to ensure strict compliance of the recommendations made by the Committee during its Inspection dated 27.11.2024 and 17.02.2025 so that no annoyance is caused to the Applicant or his family or other residents of the area due to metal box manufacturing activity of the Respondent Nos.9 and 10.

¶91

I.As. if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

¶92

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶93

B. Amit Sthalekar, JM

¶94

Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM

¶95

July 02, 2025, Original Application No.201/2024/EZ MN

¶96

Sajibur Rahaman v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajibur Rahaman v. the State of West Bengal

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

Aryavart Foundation vs M/S Lote Parshuram Environment Protection Co-Operative Society Ltd.

News Item Titled After Bengaluru Water Crisis Hits Kolkata City as Ground Water Level Depletes in Many Areas Residents Express Concern Appearing in India Com Dated 22 04 2024 vs West Bengal Pollution Control Board

Shahid Raza vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Rishipal Malik vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Dr Sanjay Kulshresthra vs Union of India Ministry of Road Transport and Highways

Jai Gopal Rai vs State of Jharkhand

News Item Titled Threat to Tea Garden from Mining Gang Appearing in the Telegraph Dated 12 06 2024 vs Central Pollution Control Board

News Item Titled Six Killed in Explosion at Firecracker Unit Near Nagpur Appearing in the Hindu Dated 13.06.2024 vs Petroleum & Explosives Safety Organisation (Peso) through Its Administrative Head

News Item Titled After Bengaluru Water Crisis Hits Kolkata City as Ground Water Level Depletes in Many Areas Residents Express Concern Appearing in India Com Dated 22 04 2024 vs West Bengal Pollution Control Board

Sk Harun vs State of West Bengal

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 19/2025 in Original Application No. 84/2023 of Abani Kumar Sahu Aged About 38 Years S/O Surendranathsahoo vs 1. State of Odisharepresented by Additional Chief Secretary Forest Environment and Climate Change Department

Subhash Datta vs State of West Bengal

News Item Titled Threat to Tea Garden from Mining Gang Appearing in the Telegraph Dated 12 06 2024 vs Central Pollution Control Board

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 46/2024 in Original Application No. 5/2023 of K.S. Upadhyay vs Jharkhand Pollution Control Board