Disposed

News Item Titled "4 Vaahan Aur 2 Jcb Seaze Avaidh Ret Parivahan Par Karyavai" Appearing in Bastar Prakash Dated 29.01.2024 v. Chattisgarh Environment Conservation Board

NGT7 Aug 2025Original Application No. 74/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a suo moto application based on a news report regarding illegal sand transportation in Chhattisgarh, the Tribunal directed the State Board to finalize the matter after a hearing. It affirmed that Pollution Control Boards have the power to impose environmental damages under specific Acts.

What did the court decide?

Directed Chhattisgarh E.C.B. to follow guidelines, issue show cause notice, and finalize the matter after hearing the project proponent.

News Item Titled "4 Vaahan Aur 2 Jcb Seaze Avaidh Ret… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No.01

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (Through Video Conferencing)

¶3

Original Application No.74/2024(CZ)

¶4

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivahan Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd. 29.01.2024

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶7

…..Suo Moto

¶8

Date of Hearing: 07.08.2025

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

For Applicant (s):

None

ORDER

This Original Application is registered as suo motu on the basis of the news item titled "4 vaahan aur 2 JCB seaze, avaidh ret parivahan par karyavai" appearing in Bastar Prakash dated 29.01.2024.

¶14

The news item relates to alleged illegal excavation, transportation and storage of sand in Dhamtari District, Chhattisgarh and as per the disclosure made in the news item, the Mining Department has taken action for illegal excavation, storage and transportation of sand and have seized two JCB machines and 4 vehicles.

¶15

The news item reflects substantial issue relating to compliance of environmental norms.

¶16

¶17

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ) News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶18

Power of the Tribunal to take up the matter suo-motu has been recognized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of " Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha & Ors. " reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 897.

¶19

The matter was taken up by the Principal Bench of the Tribunal and the Chhattisgarh Environmental Conservation Board was directed to submit the factual and action taken report and matter was transferred to Central Zone Bench, Bhopal.

¶20

In compliance of the above order, the State Pollution Control Board examined the matter and submitted the report with the facts that after finding the violation of environmental laws, the environmental compensation has been assessed in accordance with the parameters laid down by the Central Pollution Control Board and this Tribunal and notices have been issued to the Project Proponent to submit the environmental compensation. It is further submitted that a show cause notice providing opportunity of hearing has been given to the Project Proponent and it should be finalized after giving opportunity to the Project Proponent.

¶21

The Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board and the State Pollution Control Board is authorized to act in accordance with the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, and can realize and collect the restitutionary and compensatory damages for the measures towards potential environmental damage in exercise of powers under Section 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts.

¶22

The power to realize the above environmental compensation has been examined by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal Nos.757-760 of 2013: ( DPCC Vs. Lodhi Property Co. Ltd. ETC. & Ors. ),

¶23

¶24

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ) News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶25

vide order dated 04.08.2025. Relevant portion of the order is quoted

¶26

below to clarify the position:-

¶27

“………………x………………x.………….x………………….

¶28

6. Issue:

¶29

8. The core question in these appeals is - whether the regulatory boards can, in exercise of powers under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act, impose and collect as restitutionary and compensatory damages fixed sums of monies or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential environmental damage?’

¶30

7. Existing Legal Regime for Pollution Control in India.

¶31

9. Under the Water Act and the Air Act, the State Boards have a broad statutory mandate to prevent, control and abate water pollution and air pollution. Under Section 17 of the Water Act, the State Boards are to shoulder enormous responsibilities and their functions are reproduced herein for ready reference -

¶32

“Section 17. Functions of State Board – (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the functions of a State Board shall be—

¶33

(a) to plan a comprehensive programme for the prevention, control or abatement of pollution of streams and wells in the State and to secure the execution thereof;

¶34

(b) to advise the State Government on any matter concerning the prevention, control or abatement of water pollution;

¶35

(c) to collect and disseminate information relating to water pollution and the prevention, control or abatement thereof;

¶36

(d) to encourage, conduct and participate in investigations and research relating to problems of water pollution and prevention, control or abatement of water pollution;

¶37

(e) to collaborate with the Central Board in organising the training of persons engaged or to be engaged in programmes relating to prevention, control or abatement of water pollution and to organise mass education programmes relating thereto;

¶38

(f) to inspect sewage or trade effluents, works and plants for the treatment of sewage and trade effluents and to review plans, specifications or other data relating to plants set up for the

¶39

¶40

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶41

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶42

treatment of water, works for the purification thereof and the system for the disposal of sewage or trade effluents or in connection with the grant of any consent as required by this Act; (g) to lay down, modify or annul effluent standards for the sewage and trade effluents and for the quality of receiving waters (not being water in an inter-State stream) resulting from the discharge of effluents and to classify waters of the State;

¶43

(h) to evolve economical and reliable methods of treatment of sewage and trade effluents, having regard to the peculiar conditions of soils, climate and water resources of different regions and more especially the prevailing flow characteristics of water in streams and wells which render it impossible to attain even the minimum degree of dilution;

¶44

(i) to evolve methods of utilisation of sewage and suitable trade effluents in agriculture;

¶45

(j) to evolve efficient methods of disposal of sewage and trade effluents on land, as are necessary on account of the predominant conditions of scant stream flows that do not provide for major part of the year the minimum degree of dilution;

¶46

(k) to lay down standards of treatment of sewage and trade effluents to be discharged into any particular stream taking into account the minimum fair weather dilution available in that stream and the tolerance limits of pollution permissible in the water of the stream, after the discharge of such effluents;

¶47

(l) to make, vary or revoke any order—

¶48

(i) for the prevention, control or abatement of discharges of waste into streams or wells;

¶49

(ii) requiring any person concerned to construct new systems for the disposal of sewage and trade effluents or to modify, alter or extend any such existing system or adopt such remedial measures as are necessary to prevent, control or abate water pollution;

¶50

(m) to lay down effluent standards to be complied with by persons while causing discharge of sewage or sullage or both and to lay down, modify or annul effluent standards for the sewage and trade effluents;

¶51

(n) to advise the State Government with respect to the location of any industry the carrying on of which is likely to pollute a stream or well;

¶52

(o) to perform such other functions as may be prescribed or as

¶53

¶54

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶55

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶56

may, from time to time, be entrusted to it by the Central Board or the State Government.

¶57

(2) The Board may establish or recognize a laboratory or laboratories to enable the Board to perform its functions under this section efficiently, including the analysis of samples of water from any stream or well or of samples of any sewage or trade effluents.”

¶58

10. Section 17 of the Air Act9, substantially similar to its equivalent under the Water Act, also indicates the crucial responsibilities of the State Boards in discharge of their mandate. Chapter V of the Water Act and Chapter IV of the Air Act include provisions that prescribe the regulatory powers of the State Boards. These powers include the power to issue, modify or withdraw consent10, power to obtain information11, power of entry and inspection12 and power to take samples13.

¶59

8. Insertion of Sections 33A & 31A in Water and Air Acts.

¶60

11. In 1988, both Acts were amended. Notably, through amendments the State Boards were further empowered to give directions under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A14 of the Air Act. These two provisions are identically worded. Section 33A of the Water Act is as under;

¶61

"Section 33A. Power to give directions.- Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, but subject to the provisions of this Act, and to any directions that the Central Government may give in this behalf, a Board may, in the exercise of its powers and performance of its functions under this Act, issue any directions in writing to any person, officer or authority, and such person, officer or authority shall be bound to comply with such directions.

¶62

Explanation. For the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that the power to issue directions under this section includes the power to direct-

¶63

(a) the closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process; or

¶64

(b) the stoppage or regulation of supply of electricity, water or any other service."

¶65

12. The directions contemplated under Sections 33A and 31A of the

¶66

¶67

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶68

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶69

Water and Air Acts must be in furtherance of the powers and functions of the Boards and they must be in writing. These provisions, declares that the power to issue directions will include the power to direct closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process. Further, this power extends to directing the stoppage or regulation of supply of electricity, water or any other service. The power to give directions has been worded broadly, and it allows the Boards significant flexibility in deciding the nature of directions. The legislative intention of granting these powers through the 1988 amendment can be inferred from the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Water Act, which reads as follows –

¶70

"2. The Water Act is implemented by the Central and State Governments and the Central and State Pollution Control Boards. Over the past few years, the implementing agencies have experienced some more administrative and practical difficulties in effectively implementing the provisions of the Act. The ways and means to remove these difficulties have been thoroughly examined in consultation with the implementing agencies. Taking into account the views expressed, it is proposed to amend certain provisions of the Act in order to remove such difficulties.....

¶71

3. The Bill, inter alia, seeks to make the following amendments in the Act, namely:-

¶72

(iv) in order to effectively prevent water pollution, the penal provisions of the Act are proposed to be made stricter and bring them at par with the punishments prescribed in the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as amended by Act 47 of 1987;

¶73

(vi) it is proposed to empower the Boards to give directions to any person, officer or authority including the power to direct closure or regulation of offending industry, operation or process or stoppage or regulation of supply of services such as water and electricity;"

¶74

13. Similar objective is expressed for the amendment introduced in the Air Act.

¶75

14. An appeal against directions issued under Section 33A of the Water Act by the State Board can be filed before the National Green Tribunal under Section 33B, introduced in 201016. Unlike the Water

¶76

¶77

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶78

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶79

Act there is no specific Appeal provision against directions issued under Section 31A of the Air Act. This asymmetry must be addressed legislatively.

¶80

15. Offences and penalties under the two Acts, and the related procedures, are covered in Chapter VII of the Water Act and Chapter VI of the Air Act. These chapters have undergone significant and substantial amendments. Prior to the amendments, the two Acts stipulated penalties in the form of imprisonment, monetary fine or both for offences under the statute. Courts could only take cognizance of an offence if a complaint was filed by a Board or any officer authorized by it, or by any person who had given notice of the alleged offence and of his intention to make a complaint. No court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial magistrate of the first class can try an offence punishable under the two Acts. Be that as it may, for the present purpose we have to examine and interpret Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts.

¶81

9. Interpretation of and for Environmental Institutions.

¶82

16. Our constitutionalism bears the hallmark of an expansive interpretation of fundamental rights. But such creative expansion is only a job half done if the depth of the remedies, consequent upon infringement, remain shallow. In other words, remedial jurisprudence must keep pace with expanding rights and regulatory challenges. It is not sufficient that courts adopt injunctory, mandatory and compensatory remedies, but our regulators also must be empowered in that regard. However, the legislative grammar must be elastic for us to infuse the regulators with power to fashion different remedies. This infusion must also be tampered with the necessary guidelines and parameters of exercise of remedial powers, failing which such infusion would aid arbitrary use. Our firm view is that remedial powers or restitutionary directives are a necessary concomitant of both the fundamental rights of citizens who suffer environmental wrongs and an equal concomitant of the duties of a statutory regulator, which are informed by Part IV A of the constitution. To that extent, the functions and powers of a regulator must be inspired by the obligation in Part IV A and Article 48 A. The State’s ‘endeavour to protect and improve the environment’ will be partial, if it does not encompass a duty to restitute.

¶83

17. Of all the duties imposed under Article 51A, the obligation to

¶84

¶85

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ) News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶86

conserve and protect water and air, is perhaps the most significant, amidst our climate change crisis. The Water Act and the Air Act institutionalised all efforts and actions that need to be taken to protect air that we breathe and water that we consume by creating the Pollution Control Boards. These Boards functioning as our environment regulators are expected to act with institutional foresight by evolving necessary policy perspectives and action plans. Working with perpetual seal and succession, they are to develop and retain institutional memory so that they can act on the basis of the experience, data and information that they would have gathered and processed. Institutional expertise is critical, and these bodies are to employ human resource which have domain expertise and talent. These bodies are intended to maintain institutional integrity by taking independent and objective decisions without governmental or industrial control. These values flow naturally if there is institutional transparency and accountability. It is in this perspective that we need to interpret Section 33A of the Water Act and 31A of the Air Act.

¶87

10. Duty to Restitute v. Power to Punish and Penalise.

¶88

18. There is a distinction between an action for environmental damages for restitution or remediation and imposition of penalties or fines levied at the culmination of a punitive action. This Court in M.C. Mehta (supra), while referring to the provisions of the Water Act, Air Act and the Environment Protection Act observed –

¶89

“17. All the three Acts, referred to above, also contemplate the taking of the cognizance of the offences by the court. Thus, a person guilty of contravention of provisions of any of the three Acts which constitutes an offence has to be prosecuted for such offence and in case the offence is found proved then alone can he be punished with imprisonment and fine or both. The sine qua non for punishment of imprisonment and fine is a fair trial in a competent court. The punishment of imprisonment or fine can be imposed only after the person is found guilty.”

¶90

“24. Pollution is a civil wrong. By its very nature, it is a tort committed against the community as a whole. A person, therefore, who is guilty of causing pollution has to pay damages (compensation) for restoration of the environment and ecology. He has also to pay damages to those who have suffered loss on account of the act of the offender....”

¶91

……………x………………….x……………….x……………x……………

¶92

¶93

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶94

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶95

11. Principles.

¶96

27. Based on a review of precedents on this issue, the following legal position emerges –

¶97

I. There is a distinction between a direction for payment of restitutionary and compensatory damages as a remedial measure for environmental damage or as an ex-ante measure towards potential environmental damage on the one hand; and a punitive action of fine or imprisonment for violations under Chapters VII of the Water Act and VI of the Air Act on the other hand.

¶98

II. If directions in furtherance of restitutionary and compensatory measures are issued, these are not to be considered as punitive in nature. Punitive action can only be taken through the procedure prescribed in the statute for example under chapters VII and VI of the Water and Air Acts respectively.

¶99

III. Indian environmental law has assimilated23 the principle of Polluter Pays and there is also a statutory incorporation of this principle in our laws.24 The invocation of this principle is triggered in the situations25; i) when an established threshold or prescribed requirement is exceeded or breached, and it does result in environmental damage, ii) when an established threshold or prescribed requirement is not exceeded or breached, nevertheless the act in question results in environmental damage and also iii) when a potential risk or a likely adverse impact to the environment is anticipated, irrespective of whether or not prescribed thresholds or requirements are exceeded or breached. IV. Environmental regulators have a compelling duty to adopt and apply preventive measures irrespective of actual environmental damage. Ex-ante action shall be taken by these regulators and for this purpose a certain measure in exercise of powers under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts is necessary.

¶100

V. The powers of the Boards under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts are identical to that of Section 5 of the Environment Protection Act. Under Section 5, the Central Government or its delegate has the power to issue directions to the polluting industry to pay certain amounts and utilize the said fund for carrying out remedial measures. The Boards are

¶101

¶102

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ) News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶103

empowered to take similar actions under Sections 33A and 31A of the Acts.

¶104

28. Having considered the principles that govern our environmental laws and on interpretation of Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts, we are of the opinion that that the Division Bench of the High Court was not correct in restrictively reading powers of the Boards. We are of the opinion that these regulators in exercise of these powers can impose and collect, as restitutionary or compensatory damages fixed sum of monies or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential or actual environmental damage.

¶105

29. There is no doubt that Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act give the State Boards powers to issue necessary directions for environmental restoration, remediation and compensation and for the payment of costs for the same. The National Green Tribunal’s judgment in Swastik Ispat correctly identified the Boards powers to issue directions for payment of environmental damages under Section 33A of the Water Act and the Section 31A of the Air Act. A restrictive interpretation which fails to differentiate between environmental damages and punitive action significantly encumbers the Boards ability to discharge its duties.

¶106

30. The Board’s powers under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act have to be read in light of the legal position on the application of Polluter Pays principle as formulated and explained. This means that State Board cannot impose environmental damages in case of every contravention or offence under the Water Act and Air Act. It is only when the State Board has made a determination that some form of environmental damage or harm has been caused by the erring entity, or the same is so imminent, that the State Board must initiate action under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act.

¶107

31. At this stage, we must also take note of the recent 2024 amendments26 to the Water and Air Acts. Two major changes relevant for our consideration are that of decriminalisation and introduction of the office of “Adjudicatory Officer”. Even after the amendments, in our opinion, there is no conflict between the powers of the State Boards to direct payment of environmental damages under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts and the

¶108

¶109

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶110

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶111

powers of the Adjudicating Officer to impose penalties under Chapter VII of the Water Act and Chapter VI of the Air Act. The decriminalization of offences under these Chapters has not removed the punitive nature of actions that can be taken under them. There remains a clear distinction between the nature of directions that the State Boards can issue under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts for payment of environmental damage and the determination by Adjudicating Officers. The former is compensatory in nature and will be resorted to when remedial measures are being undertaken to restore the degraded environment or pollution caused. The latter is a penalty for an offence under the law and is imposed with the objective of punishing the offender. This penalty collected here will not be specifically directed towards the restoration of the degraded environment (for instance, to decontaminate a pond that has been polluted due to discharge of untreated sewage). It will be deposited in the Environmental Protection Fund that is to be set up under Section 16 of the Environment (Protection) Act. According to Section 16(3) of the EP Act, the Fund shall be used for, (a) the promotion of awareness, education and research for the protection of environment; (b) the expenses for achieving the objects and for purposes of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981(14 of 1981) and under this Act; and (c) such other purposes, as may be prescribed.

¶112

A. Board’s Responsibility to Choose Appropriate Course of Action.

¶113

32. Given their broad statutory mandate and the significant duty towards public health and environmental protection the Boards must have the power and distinction to decide the appropriate action against a polluting entity. It is essential that the Boards function effectively and efficiently by adopting such measures as is necessary in a given situation. The Boards can decide whether a polluting entity needs to be punished by imposition of penalty or if the situation demands immediate restoration of the environmental damage by the polluter or both.

¶114

B. Powers Must Be Guided by Transparency and Non-

¶115

Arbitrariness.

¶116

33. While we hold that the Boards have the power to direct the payment of environmental damages, we make it clear that this power must always be guided by two overarching principles. First, that the

¶117

¶118

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶119

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶120

power cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner; and second, the process of exercising this power must be infused with transparency.

¶121

34. This Court has underscored the importance of strong institutional frameworks in environmental governance that are effective, accountable and transparent. In Bengaluru Development Authority v. Sudhakar Hegde, this Court held – “95. The protection of the environment is premised not only on the active role of courts, but also on robust institutional frameworks within which every stakeholder complies with its duty to ensure sustainable development. A framework of environmental governance committed to the rule of law requires a regime which has effective, accountable and transparent institutions. Equally important is responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making. Environmental governance is founded on the rule of law and emerges from the values of our Constitution. Where the health of the environment is key to preserving the right to life as a constitutionally recognised value under Article 21 of the Constitution, proper structures for environmental decisionmaking find expression in the guarantee against arbitrary action and the affirmative duty of fair treatment under Article 14 of the Constitution. Sustainable development is premised not merely on the redressal of the failure of democratic institutions in the protection of the environment, but ensuring that such failures do not take place.”

¶122

35. To ensure that the Boards impose restitutionary and the compensatory environmental damages in a fair transparent, nonarbitrary manner, with procedural certainty, necessary subordinate legislation in the form of rules and regulations must be notified. This shall include methods by which environmental damage is determined, and the consequent quantum of damages are assessed. They may also incorporate certain basic principles of natural justice for fairness in action. At present environmental damages are being levied by the Boards on the basis of certain guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board in its document “General framework for imposing environmental damage compensation” issue in December, 2022. These guidelines seem to have been issued pursuant to the directions of the NGT. It is important that these guidelines are reviewed thoroughly and issued in the form of Rules

¶123

¶124

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ) News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶125

and Regulations. This will enable declaration of a law that applies and ensures its recognition and easy implementation.

¶126

36. These Rules must also create enabling framework for citizens to file complaints about environmental damage. Public participation in environmental protection has assumed great importance with climate change threatening to drastically disrupt our way of living. Boards, being the first line of defence against polluting activities, must provide easy accessibility and encourage public participation in their function and decision making.

¶127

37. While we have reversed the decision of the High Court on the principle of law and hold that the environmental regulators, the Pollution Control Boards, can impose and collect as restitutionary and compensatory damages fixed sums of monies or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential environmental damage in exercise of powers under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts, we issue the following consequential directions.

¶128

38. In view of the fact that the show cause notices in these cases relate to the year 2006 and those show cause notices were set- aside by the Single as well as by the Division Benches of the High Court, we are of the opinion that no purpose will be served in reviving the said show cause notices at this point of time. In the facts and circumstances of the case while we allow the appeal on the principle of law there shall not be any consequential direction for reviving the show cause notices which have been set-aside concurrently by the Single as well as by the Division Bench of the High Court. If certain amounts have been collected on the basis of the said show cause notices they shall be returned by DPCC within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, and if amounts are not deposited or collected the appellant, DPCC shall not take any further action.”

¶129

For the reasons narrated above, the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed as follows:-

¶130

………….x…………….x……………..x…………………..x……………… (b) we direct that the Pollution Control Boards can impose and collect as restitutionary and compensatory damages fixed sums of monies or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential environmental damage in exercise of powers under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts.”

¶131

¶132

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ)

¶133

News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

¶134

In view of the above facts, the Chhattisgarh Environmental Conservation Board is directed to follow the above guidelines and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Project Proponent, finalize the matter.

¶135

A copy of the order be communicated on available e-mail to the Member Secretary, State Pollution Control Board, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh Environmental Conservation Board, Chhattisgarh, for information and compliance according to above rules.

¶136

With these observations, the Original Application No.74/2024(CZ) stands disposed of accordingly.

¶137

Sheo Kumar Singh, JM

¶138

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶139

07^th August, 2025, O.A. No.74/2024(CZ) AK

¶140

¶141

O.A. No.74/2024(CZ) News Item Titled “4 Vahaan Aur 2 JCB Seaze Avvaidh Ret Parivah Par Karyavai” Appearing in Bastar Prakash dtd.29.01.2024 vs. Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board & Ors.

News Item Titled "4 Vaahan Aur 2 Jcb Seaze Avaidh Ret Parivahan Par Karyavai" Appearing in Bastar Prakash Dated 29.01.2024 v. Chattisgarh Environment Conservation Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

News Item Titled "4 Vaahan Aur 2 Jcb Seaze Avaidh Ret Parivahan Par Karyavai" Appearing in Bastar Prakash Dated 29.01.2024 v. Chattisgarh Environment Conservation Board

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

Priyadarshini Colony Sector D Residence Welfare Society vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Mukesh Kumar Tiwari vs

Ravula Lingaswamy vs Union of India

K Mariappan vs the District Collector

Ravindra Laxman Pandit vs M/S Newkem Products Corporation

Mr. Nagesh Vinayak Dhamale vs Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (Moef & Cc) New Delhi.

Diwakar Singh Rana vs Pollution Control Board

Rohit Thakran vs State of Haryana

Daulat Ram S/O Shri Kuldeep Gena vs State of Rajasthan through District Collector Ajmer

Daulat Ram S/O Shri Kuldeep Gena vs State of Rajasthan through District Collector Ajmer

Khajanchi Prasad vs Collector Katni

Diwakar Singh Rana vs Pollution Control Board

News Item Titled .the Soot Ki Jankari Par Prashashan Ki Mining Par Badi Karyvai 3 Poke Lane 4 Damper Jabst Appearing in the Sootr.Com Dated 05.O3.2024 vs M.P Pollution Control Board

Ram Singh vs State of Rajasthan