Disposed

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) v. Union of India

NGT13 Feb 2026IA No. 470/2024 in Execution Application No. 39/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal disposed of an execution application regarding compliance with its earlier orders on Waste Tyre Management. The Court found that the CPCB and State PCBs have generally complied with directions to classify units, finalize SOPs, and initiate actions against non-compliant TPO units.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed as compliance with the Tribunal's order has been established.

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) vs Union of… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No. 21

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Execution Application No. 39/2023 (IA No 341/2025, IA No 139/2024, IA No 469/2024, IA No 470/2024) In

¶5

Original Application No. 400/2019

¶6

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Union of India & Ors.

¶9

Respondent(s)

¶10

Date of hearing: 13.02.2026

¶11

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

¶12

Applicant: Ms. Gitanjali Sanyal & Mr. Surya Gupta, Advs. for Applicant in E.A No. 39/2023

¶13

Respondents: Ms. Suman Arora, Adv. for CPCB

¶14

Mr. Pradeep Misra & Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advs. for UPPCB (Through VC) Dr. Swati Jindal Garg, Ms. Srishti Makol & Mr. Aman Kohli, Advs. for R - 1 (Through VC)

¶15

Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv. for the State of Nagaland (Through VC) Mr. Raghav Sharam, Adv. for MPPCB (Through VC)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

By this execution application, the Applicant is seeking compliance of the order dated 07.11.2022 passed in OA No. 400/2019.

¶18

In the OA, the Applicant had alleged that there was absence of proper management of end-of-life tyres/waste tyres in accordance with the environmental regulations. The Tribunal had considered the different reports which were filed in that OA and had disposed of the OA by the order dated 07.11.2022 directing as under:

¶19

“xxx ……………………………………xxx……………………………….xxx 8. It is seen that action has been taken against number of noncomplaint units but there still remains gap in the units which are noncompliant and units against whom action has been taken to close them till compliance. Such gaps need to be bridged at the earliest in the interest of rule of law and environmental good governance. Tyre Pyrolysis Oil Units (TPOs) need to follow ‘Zero Liquid’ and ‘Zero Emission’ norms. Further, carbon produced during the process needs to be utilized in cement industries. Carbon material should not be simply transported to landfills.

¶20

¶21

9. Accordingly, we direct that non-compliant units be closed till compliance expeditiously. CPCB may finalize the classification of the units so that application norms can be enforced. Revised SOP may be finalized by the CPCB and MoEF&CC in light of discussion in today’s hearing and above observations within one month. SOP may also provide for certifying the fuel quality standards of pyro-oil as per norms of the Petroleum Ministry.

¶22

The application is disposed of.

¶23

A copy of this order be forwarded to CPCB, MoEF&CC, State PCBs/PCCs by e-mail for compliance.”

¶24

Learned Counsel for the CPCB has referred to the compliance table

¶25

in respect of each of the direction as disclosed in the reply affidavit of the

¶26

CPCB dated 03.09.2025 which is as under:

¶27

“ S. *No.*	*NGT Order*	*CPCB Submission*	*Status of* *Compliance* *of the NGT* _Order _
_1. _	*Point 2 of the order:* Tribunal order dated 07.11.2022 had disposed of the OA by directing as under: “9. Accordingly, we direct that non-compliant units be closed till compliance expeditiously. CPCB may finalize the classification of the units so that application norms can be enforced. Revised SOP may be finalized by the CPCB and MoEF&CC in light of discussion in today's hearing and above observations within one month. SOP may also provide for certifying the fuel quality standards of pyro-oil as per norms of the Petroleum Ministry.”	CPCB has duly complied with the directions issued by the Hon'ble NGT while disposing the matter on 07.11.2022. In this regard CPCB has revised Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) on "Recycling of Waste Tyre Scrap for the recovery of Tyre Pyrolysis Oil, Pyro Gas and Char in Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) Units. Said SOP stipulates the following clauses for operation of TPO: 1. Siting Criteria 1.1 Siting Criteria for Advanced Batch Automated Process (ABAP) type TPO Units: 1.2 Green belt requirement 1.3 Movement of Fire-Tenders 2. Carrying Capacity of the area for siting of ABAP type TPO Units 3. Threshold limits for tyre pyrolysis oil (TPO) Units (New TPO Units and expansion in Existing TPO Units) 4. Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of ABAP type TPO Units 4.1 Minimum Requirement for environmentally sound operation 4.2 Safety Measures to be adopted. 5. Standard Operating Procedure(SOP) of Continuous Process (New & Existing) 5.1 Minimum Requirement for environmentally sound operation 5.2 Safety Measures to be adopted 6. General conditions applicable to all plants (Batch & Continuous) 7. Further CPCB stated that the Fuel Quality of TPO will be as per the specifications of BIS as and when the	Complied

¶28

¶29

		same gets notified. CPCB circulated the revised SOP to all SPCBs/PCCs vide email dated 19.01.2024 and 20.03.2024 for its implementation. Copy of said SoP is given at*Annexure II* and CPCB said letters are given at *Annexure-III & IV). With regard to certifying the fuel quality* standard of pyrolysis oil as per norms of MoPNG/BIS, the status is given at S.No. 5 of the Table below, may kindly be referred.
_2. _	*Point 3 of the order:* “First direction in the above paragraph 9 was to expeditiously close the noncompliant units till compliance is done. Learned Counsel for the CPCB has referred to various documents and argued for about half an hour but, none of those documents are found to be relevant and at the end he has referred to annexure 4 on page no. 518 which is a communication sent by Waste Management Division to Member Secretaries of all the State PCBS/PCCs on 30.11.2023 to comply with the Tribunal’s order and take action of closure against non-compliant units and thereafter no efforts on the part of CPCB has been shown to ascertain the status concerning the action taken in compliance of the order of the Tribunal or in compliance of the communication dated 30.11.2023 sent by CPCB	CPCB issued directions dated 29.04.2025 under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and letter dated 10.07.2025 seeking compliance of revised SOPs for “Recycling of Waste scrap for the recovery of tyre pyrolysis oil, pyro gas and char in tyre pyrolysis oil (TPO) Units" and directed State Pollution Control Boards/Pollution Control Committees to: • Ensure implementation of Revised SOPs for “Recycling of Waste scrap for the recovery of Tyre Pyrolysis Oil, Pyro Gas and Char in Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) Units” dated 16/01/2024. • Immediately submit compliance status on verification of TPO Units operating in your State/UT including actions taken in accordance with aforesaid communications dated 19/01/2024 and 20/03/2024 made by CPCB. • Ensure at least yearly compliance verification of TPO Units as TPO units are under orange category and submission of compliance report to CPCB The status of compliance by TPO units in States and Union Territories is given at *Annexure V.* It is also to submit that 32 no. of SPCBs/PCCs has reported that there are presently 475 Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) units, out of which 335 units are complying, 140 are non-complying and out of the 140 non- complying units, 19 Units are self- closed and 32 have been closed by respective SPCB/PCC. As reported, actions have been initiated/under process against 89 remaining non-complying units by respective SPCB/PCC.	Partially Complied by SPCBs/PCCs
_3. _	*Point 4 of the order:* Second direction of the Tribunal was that CPCB will finalize the classification of the units so that applicable norms can be enforced.	CPCB issued direction dated 07.11.2022 and 12.02.2025 to State Pollution Control Board and Pollution Control Committees under section 18(1)(b) of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 regarding harmonization of classification of industrial sectors under Red, Orange, Green, White	Complied

¶30

¶31

		and Blue categories. As per said classification, Tyre Pyrolysis Units have been categorised as “Orange Category”. CPCB vide letter dated 30.11.2023 requested all the SPCBs/PCCs directing for adoption and implementation of uniform categorization for TPO units.
_4. _	*Point 5 of the order:* “The third direction of the Tribunal was to finalize the revised SOP”	In compliance with the Hon’ble NGT directions, CPCB revised the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) Units after conducting extensive study of seven (07) Tyre Pyrolysis Oil Units (TPO) Units comprising of three (03) advance batch automated tyre pyrolysis units, three (03) existing batch TPO units and one (01) continuous tyre pyrolysis unit under the guidance of expert committee comprising of experts from NEERI and IIT Delhi. Findings of study carried out by SPCBs in 70 TPO units were also incorporated. The suggestions made by the petitioner & directions issued by the Hon'ble NGT vide its order dated 07-11- 2022, were included. The Standard Operating Producers (SOPs) were placed in public domain on the website of the CPCB on 27-10-2022 for seeking comments and the relevant comments have been incorporated in the SOP. The SOP after incorporating comments of the stakeholder was further sent to expert for their comments. After incorporating their comments, the SOPs were finalized. The revised SOP has been forwarded to SPCBs/PCCs for its implementation. The copy of revised SOPs is annexed as *ANNEXURE-II.* The revised SoP stipulates the concept of Advanced Batch Automated Process (ABAP) for the improvement in Environmental performance of the Tyre Pyrolysis Oil Units. As per the revised SOPs, the TPO Unit having cumulative maximum batch capacity up to 60 tonnes per day (TPD) only be allowed within a premises and this is applicable for new ABAP type Units /expansion in existing batch type TPO Unit. Further, beyond the cumulative batch capacity of 60 TPD, only continuous process type TPO unit be allowed in case of setting up of new ABAP type units or expansion in existing TPO Unit in a single premises.	Complied
_5. _	*Point 6 of the order:* Fourth direction was to provide for certifying the fuel quality standards of pyro-oil as per norms of the Petroleum Ministry in the SOP. Nothing has been pointed out to show that this direction has been	• That the CPCB in its revised SoP has already mentioned that the TPO will comply with the fuel quality specifications as and when specified by BIS & MoPNG. • Further, CPCB is pursuing the matter related to Fuel quality specification before MoPNG & BIS. And has sent letters and reminder letters dated	Complied

¶32

¶33

complied with by CPCB except writing on	13.12.2023 & 20.03.2024 to both BIS & MoPNG
13.12.2023 to the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (MO PNGRB) seeking the details.	. • CPCB convened a meeting through virtual mode on 11.03.2024 and was attended by Expert Member from NEERI, Oil sector expert (Former Scientist ‘F’ CSIR-IIP Dehradun), Officials from MoEF&CC, MoPNG, BIS, SPCBs/PCCs & CPCB, whereby, discussions were concluded over usage of Tyre Pyrolysis Oil and status of its inclusion in the list of approved fuels as issued by SPCBs/PCCs. The experts and other participants in the meeting were of the opinion that Tyre Pyrolysis Oil can be compared with Furnace Oil (FO) and can be used as its substitute in those industries where FO has been permitted. It was also observed that Tyre Pyrolysis Oil has lower carbon number, lower Sulphur content and hence emissions (PM and Sox) from usage of Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) are expected to be lower than that of emissions from FO. Hence, SPCBs/PCCs may consider permitting Tyre Pyrolysis Oil also in such industries where FO has been permitted and adequate air pollution control system has been installed to meet the specified emission norms. The minutes of the meeting dated 11.03.2024 including Typical proposed Tyre Pyrolysis Oil specification as proposed by the fuel quality experts at*Annexure* *VI.* • That MoPNG vide its letter dated 08.04.2024 has informed that BIS has moved a proposal or framing specifications for Pyrolysis Oil produced from waste tyres, Plastics & Biomass. As per discussions held in the technical committee of "Petroleum and their related products of synthetic or biological or natural origin - PCD 03 (Petroleum, Coal, and Related Product Development) of BIS", a study has been proposed for framing the specifications of Pyrolysis Oil produced from all the three sources involving all the stakeholders.
	• CPCB has again written to BIS on 06.05.2025 seeking status on finalisation of specifications of Tyre Pyrolysis Oil for regulating its usage for industrial processes. CPCB also shared Typical proposed Tyre Pyrolysis Oil Specification as proposed during meeting held on 11.03.2024. • BIS vide its email dated 28.05.2025 informed that an R&D project (Project ID: PCD 0256) has been awarded to the National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli. The project titled “Study on Pyrolysis Oil for Determination of

complied with by CPCB
except
writing
on

13.12.2023 & 20.03.2024 to both BIS &
MoPNG

13.12.2023 to the Ministry
of Petroleum and Natural
Gas Regulatory Board (MO
PNGRB)
seeking the details.

.
•
CPCB convened a meeting through
virtual mode on 11.03.2024 and was
attended by Expert Member from NEERI,
Oil sector expert (Former Scientist ‘F’
CSIR-IIP
Dehradun),
Officials
from
MoEF&CC, MoPNG, BIS, SPCBs/PCCs &
CPCB,
whereby,
discussions
were
concluded over usage of Tyre Pyrolysis
Oil and status of its inclusion in the list
of
approved
fuels
as
issued
by
SPCBs/PCCs. The experts and other
participants in the meeting were of the
opinion that Tyre Pyrolysis Oil can be
compared with Furnace Oil (FO) and can
be used as its substitute in those
industries where FO has been permitted.
It was also observed that Tyre Pyrolysis
Oil has lower carbon number, lower
Sulphur content and hence emissions
(PM and Sox) from usage of Tyre
Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) are expected to be
lower than that of emissions from FO.
Hence,
SPCBs/PCCs
may
consider
permitting Tyre Pyrolysis Oil also in such
industries where FO has been permitted
and adequate air pollution control
system has been installed to meet the
specified emission norms. The minutes
of
the
meeting
dated
11.03.2024
including
Typical
proposed
Tyre
Pyrolysis Oil specification as proposed
by the fuel quality experts atAnnexure
VI.
•
That MoPNG vide its letter dated
08.04.2024 has informed that BIS has
moved
a
proposal
or
framing
specifications for Pyrolysis Oil produced
from waste tyres, Plastics & Biomass.
As per discussions held in the technical
committee
of
"Petroleum
and
their
related
products
of
synthetic
or
biological or natural origin - PCD 03
(Petroleum, Coal, and Related Product
Development) of BIS", a study has been
proposed for framing the specifications
of Pyrolysis Oil produced from all the
three
sources
involving
all
the
stakeholders.

•
CPCB has again written to BIS on
06.05.2025
seeking
status
on
finalisation of specifications of Tyre
Pyrolysis Oil for regulating its usage for
industrial processes. CPCB also shared
Typical proposed Tyre Pyrolysis Oil
Specification
as
proposed
during
meeting held on 11.03.2024.
•
BIS vide its email dated 28.05.2025
informed that an R&D project (Project ID:
PCD 0256) has been awarded to the
National
Institute
of
Technology,
Tiruchirappalli. The project titled “Study
on Pyrolysis Oil for Determination of

¶34

¶35

Correlation Amongst Feedstock
Composition, Manufacturing
Technology, and Performance
Characteristics,”*commenced on 18*
*February 2025 and is scheduled for*
*completion* *within* *four* *months*.
Based on the outcomes of the study, the
fuel quality standards for TPO will be specified.
• Further BIS vide its email dated
03.09.2025 informed that the said R&D
project for development of fuel quality
standards for pyrolysis oil is still in
progress. NIT Tiruchirappalli has
requested an extension of the project
duration, and it is now expected to be
completed by the end of November 2025
(Copy of BIS email dated 03.09.2025 is given at Annexure VII).

¶36

The Tribunal in the earlier proceedings had noted the anomaly in respect of the Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) units as disclosed by the CPCB in their different replies and had asked the CPCB to clarify it. The CPCB has clarified it in its reply affidavit dated 11.02.2026 furnishing the following explanation:

¶37

“CPCB'S RESPONSE ΤΟ ΑΝΟΜALY OF TOTAL NUMBER OF ΤΡΟ UNITS AS OBSERVED VIDE THE HON'BLE NGT ORDER DATED 19.11.2025:

¶38

8. To recapitulate the matter once again, the chronology and briefs of the Compliance Reports submitted before the Hon'ble NGT are as follows:

¶39

i. Compliance Status as submitted vide CPCB's report dated 05.11.2022 (757 TPO Units were reported)

¶40

Based on reports submitted by 35 SPCBs/PCCs there are 757 Tyre Pyrolysis units (TPO Units) situated in 17 states of the country. Maximum number of units are in the state of UP (148) followed by Haryana (101), Rajasthan (95) and Maharashtra (85).

¶41

17 SPCBs/PCCs namely Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, M.P, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, U.P & Uttarakhand have reported TPO units in their states/UTs.

¶42

18 SPCBs/PCCs namely, Arunachal Pradesh, Andaman & Nicobar, Bihar, Chandigarh, Delhi, Daman & Diu Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Goa, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Lakshadweep, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Puducherry, Sikkim, Tripura and West Bengal informed that there is no TPO unit in their State/UT.

¶43

¶44

Out of 757 units, 349 units are complying with consent conditions and SOP of MoEF &CC, 216 units are noncomplying. non-complying Actions against directions/show cause notices have been issued. Many of the non-complying units have been closed.

¶45

Around 192 TPO units are closed. Most of the closed units are closed in compliance of CPCB's directions dated 04.12. 2019.

¶46

Out of total 757 units, 749 units are operating on batch process and 08 units are based on continuous process. Detailed compliance status is provided in Annexure-1A.

¶47

ii. Compliance Status as submitted vide CPCB's report dated 18.01.2024 (736 TPO Units were reported)

¶48

Based on reports submitted by 36 SPCBs/PCCs there are 736 tyre pyrolysis oil (TPO) unit operating in 18 states/UTs namely Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, M.P, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, U.P & Uttarakhand.

¶49

18 SPCBs/PCCs namely, Arunachal Pradesh, Andaman & Nicobar, Bihar, Chandigarh, Delhi, Daman & Diu Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Puducherry, Sikkim, Tripura and West Bengal.informed that there is no operating TPO unit in their State/UT.

¶50

Out of 736 operational units, 513 units are complying, 134 are non-complying and 89 Units are self-closed.

¶51

Out of 134 non-complying units, 91 has been closed by the respective SPCB/PCC, and actions have been initiated/under process against remaining 43 noncomplying units. submitted by SPCBs/PCCs".

¶52

Detailed compliance status is provided in Annexure-IB.

¶53

iii. Compliance Status as submitted vide CPCB report dated 03.09.2025 (475 TPO Units were reported)

¶54

31 SPCBs/PCCs, namely Arunachal Pradesh, Andaman & Nicobar, Assam, Bihar, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Daman & Diu Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Delhi, Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Odisha, Puducherry, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal, have submitted the compliance status report.

¶55

The remaining 05 SPCBs/PCCs, namely Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttarakhand, have not submitted their compliance status report.

¶56

Among the 31 SPCBs/PCCs who submitted their reports, 475 TPO units were reported in 14 states/UTs

¶57

¶58

namely Assam, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, H.P, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, M.P, Nagaland, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, & U.P.

¶59

17 SPCBs/PCCs namely, Arunachal Pradesh, Andaman & Nicobar, Bihar, Chandigarh, Delhi, Daman & Diu Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Goa, Gujarat, Ladakh, Lakshadweep. Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Puducherry, Sikkim, Tripura and West Bengal informed that there is no TPO unit in their State/UT.

¶60

Out of 475 Tyre Pyrolysis Units, 335 Units are reported to be complying, 140 units are non-complying.

¶61

Out of 140 non-complying units 19 units are self-closed and 32 units have been closed by respective SPCBs/PCCs. Further actions have been initiated/ under process against 89 remaining non- complying units by respective SPCB/PCC"

¶62

Detailed compliance status is provided in Annexure-I-C

¶63

9. CPCB vide its letter dated 14.11.2025 has written to all SPCBs/PCCS wherein information on compliance status of TPO units operating in their respective state/UT as per the revised SOP on "Recycling of Waste Tyre Scrap for the Production of Tyre Pyrolysis Oil in Tyre Pyrolysis Oil (TPO) Units" was sought.

¶64

10. CPCB conducted review meeting with all the SPCBs/PCCs on 22.01.2026 for discussion on compliance status and also sought clarification w.r.t variation in reporting of compliance status.

¶65

11. In response thereto, all 36 SPCBs/PCCs submitted their compliance reports. As per the reports submitted by SPCBs/PCCs the compliance is as below:

¶66

As per submitted reports, presently there are 695 Tyre pyrolysis units located in 19 States/UTs namely Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Nagaland, Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, U.P & Uttarakhand.

¶67

There are no TPO units in 17 States/UTs namely, Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Arunachal Pradesh, Bihar, Chandigarh, DD&DNH, Delhi, Goa, Gujarat, Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Manipur, Meghalaya, Puducherry, Sikkim, Tripura & West Bengal. Mizoram,

¶68

440 units have been reported as complying.

¶69

255 units are reported as non-complying.

¶70

Out of 255 non-complying units, 25 units are self-closed and 33 units are closed by SPCB's/PCC's and action in terms of Show Cause Notice and Notices have been initiated against 197 units by the concerned SPCBs/PCCs.

¶71

Detailed compliance status is provided in Annexure-II.

¶72

COMPARISON OF COMPLIANCE REPORTS BASED ON WHICH ANOMALY HAS BEEN OBSERVED VIS-A VIS CURRENT COMPLIANCE STATUS

¶73

¶74

12. The Hon'ble NGT in its order dated 19.11.2025 has taken note of following two compliance reports submitted by CPCB:

¶75

Compliance Status as submitted vide CPCB's report dated 05.11.2022 (757 TPO Units were reported)

¶76

Compliance Status as submitted vide CPCB report dated 03.09.2025 (475 TPO Units were reported)

¶77

The comparison of above two compliance reports has been done with current compliance status of TPO units as on January 01, 2026.

¶78

Table: Comparison of Compliance Reports

¶79

S. *No.*	*Name* of *State/UT*	*Numbe* *total* *Units* *per* *757)*	*Number* *total* *Units (as* *the 475)*	of *TOP* *per*	*Number* *of total* *TOP* *Units (as* *per* *the* *695)*	*Difference*	_Remarks_*
1.	Andaman & Nicobar Islands	Nil	Nil		Nil
2.	Andhra Pradesh	39	Report submitted	not	28	-11	As reported, 11 units have been self-closed
3.	Arunachal Pradesh	Nil	Nil		Nil
4.	Assam	06	04		04	-02	As reported, 02 units have been self-closed
5.	_Bihar _	Nil	Nil		Nil
6.	Chandigarh	Nil	Nil		Nil
7.	Chhattisgarh	29	28		28	-01	As reported, 01 units have been self-closed
8.	Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Diu Daman	Nil	Nil		Nil
9.	Delhi	Nil	Nil		Nil
10.	Goa	Nil	Nil		Nil
11.	Gujarat	Nil	Nil		Nil
12.	Haryana	101	91		91	-10	As reported, these 10 units have been self- closed
13.	Himachal Pradesh	-	02		02	+2
14.	Jammu & _Kashmir _	06	06		06
15.	Jharkhand	13	12		12	-1	As reported, this 01 unit has been self-closed
16.	Karnataka	34	31		31	-3	As reported,

¶80

¶81

17.	Kerala	01	01	01		these 03 units have been closed _by KSPCB _ 9 Units have been granted new CTO
18.	Ladakh	-	Nil	Nil		33 Units have been granted new CTO
19.	Lakshadweep	-	Nil	Nil
20.	Madhya Pradesh	64	73	73	+9
21.	Maharashtra	85	Reprot not submitted	118	+33
22.	_Manipur _	Nil	Nil	Nil
23. 24.	Meghalaya Mizoram	Nil Nil	Nil Nil	Nil Nil
25.	Nagaland	Nil	01	01	+01	Granted new CTO to 1unit
26.	Odisha	13	14	14	+01	Granted new CTO to 1unit
27.	Puducherry	Nil	Nil	Nil
28.	Punjab	18	As informed there are 19 ΤΡΟ units, however, the verification of the same is _d _	21	+03	3 Units have been granted new CTO
29.	Rajasthan	95	uner process. Reprot not submitted	39	-56	As reported 56 units have been closed by _RSPCB _
30.	Sikkim	Nil	Nil	Nil
31.	Tamil Nadu	25	17	17	-08	As reported these 08 units are self- closed.
32.	Telangana	61	65	65	+4	4 Units have been granted new CTO
33. 34.	Tripura Uttar Pradesh	Nil 148	Nil 130	Nil 130	-18	As reported these 18 units are self-closed
35. 36.	Uttarakhand West Bengal	19 Nil	Reprot not submitted Nil	14 Nil	-05	As reported these 5 units have been closed by the UKPCB
*Total*		*757*	*475*	*695*	*Net -62*	*Closed-* *115* *(50* *Self* *Closed* *+65 closed* by *SPCB/PCC)* *New Units-* 53

¶82

¶83

Net Difference -62

¶84

The above report clearly discloses that the directions issued by the Tribunal have been complied with.

¶85

Learned Counsel for the Applicant has submitted that the CPCB has wrongly categorised these units as "orange", whereas they should have been categorised as "red". No such issue has been decided by the Tribunal while passing the order dated 07.11.2022 in OA No. 400/2019. Hence, such an issue falls outside the scope of this execution application. If the Applicant is aggrieved by the categorization, he would have liberty to raise it in the appropriate proceedings.

¶86

The compliance report reveals that in respect of finalization of the fuel quality standards, the R&I project has been awarded to the National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli in the project titled "Study on Pyrolysis Oil for Determination of Correlation amongst Feedstock, Composition, Manufacturing Technology, and Performance Characteristics." The said study had commenced on 18.02.2025 and was scheduled to be complete within four months. We are hopeful that the said study must have been completed by now. Hence, the needful will be done taking into account the study result.

¶87

Since the order passed by the Tribunal has been complied with, therefore, no further order in this execution application is required which is accordingly disposed of.

¶88

The pending I.A’s, if any, will also stand disposed of.

¶89

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶90

¶91

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶92

February 13, 2026 Execution Application No. 39/2023 (IA No 341/2025, IA No 139/2024, IA No 469/2024, IA No 470/2024) In Original Application No. 400/2019 dv

¶93

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) v. Union of India

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

K.S. Mohan vs the Corporation of Coimbatore

K.S. Mohan vs the Corporation of Coimbatore

Judith vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Saheen Tarannum vs State of Odisha

Sunil S Mulye vs Union of India

The Goa River Sand Protectors Network vs the Goa State Environment Impact Assessment Authority

Ashish Kothari vs the Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Paribesh Academy vs the State of West Bengal

Punjab Non-Gazetted Forest Officers Union through Ar vs Chief Secretary Govt of Punjab

News Item Appearing in India.Com Dated 27.07.2024 Titled Saving Kashmir Brown Bears Is a Race Against Time Wildlife Sos and J & K Wildlife Protection Dept Take Challenge vs

News Item Titled "Bihar Rampant Illegal Sand Mining Threatens Gangetic River Dolphins in Gaga Tributaries" Appearing in News Click Dated 02.09.2024 vs

Gautam Shahi vs Management Committee of Raksha Enclave

Sushil Raghav vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Social Action for Forest & Environment (Safe) vs Union of India