Partly allowed

News Item Titled "Nayar River Is Vanishing - a Yatra Reveals Conservation Goes Beyond Science and Policy" Appearing in the Down to Earth Dated 03.06.2025. vs

NGT2 Sept 2026IA No. 668/2026 in Original Application No. 295/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses an interim application in a suo motu matter concerning the Nayar River. The Tribunal allowed an application exempting the Principal Secretary from personal appearance. It granted respondents an extension to file detailed responses addressing river demarcation, catchment rehabilitation, encroachments, and water reuse.

What did the court decide?

Application for exemption from personal appearance allowed; respondents granted two months to file additional responses regarding Nayar River ecology and management.

News Item Titled "Nayar River Is Vanishing - a Yatra… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.02

¶2

Court No. 2

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 295/2025 (I.A. No. 668/2026)

¶5

News Item Titled "Nayar River Is Vanishing- A Yatra Reveals Conservation Goes Beyond Science and Policy" Appearing in the Down to Earth dated 03.06.2025.

¶6

Suo Motu

¶7

Versus

¶8

Central Pollution Control Board & Ors. Respondents

¶9

Date of hearing: 02.09.2026

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER

¶11

Applicant: Suo Motu.

¶12

Respondents: Mr. Anuj Bhandari, Advocate for respondent no.1 (through VC). Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate for respondent no. 2 (through VC). Ms. Payal Bhatia Mohanty, Advocate for respondent no.3 (through VC).

¶13

None for respondent no. 4 Mr. Gi. Gi. George and Mr. Rachit Soni, Advocates for respondent no.5. (through V.C.) None for respondent no. 6. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate for respondent no.7. Mr. Adhiraj Bali, Advocate for respondents no. 8 to 10 and 12. Mr. Saurabh Chandra, Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation Department, Govt. of Uttarakhand and Ms. Swati Srivastava Bhaduria, District Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Vide order dated 02.07.2026, this Tribunal impleaded (i) State of Uttarakhand through Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand, (ii) Secretary, Irrigation and Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Uttarakhand (iii) Principal Secretary, Environment, Government of Uttarakhand, (iv) Project Director, State Programme Management Group Uttarakhand, Member, State Ganga Committee, (v) the District Magistratecum-Deputy Collector, Chairperson, District Ganga Committee, Pauri

¶16

¶17

Garhwal as respondents no. 8 to 12 and ordered issuance of notices to them requiring them to file their responses.

¶18

Compliance affidavit dated 25.08.2026 has been filed by respondent no. 9-Irrigation Department, Uttarakhand and compliance affidavit dated 31.08.2026 has been filed by respondent no. 12-District Magistrate-cumChairperson, District Ganga Committee, Pauri Garhwal.

¶19

However, responses have not been filed by newly impleaded respondents no. 8, 10 and 11. 4. Vide order dated 02.07.2026, this Tribunal ordered personal appearance of Secretary, Irrigation and Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Uttarakhand and the District Magistrate-cum-Deputy Collector, Chairperson, District Ganga Committee, Pauri Garhwal before this Tribunal physically or through V.C..

¶20

I.A. No. 668/2026 has been filed by Mr. R. Meenakshi, Sundaram, Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Uttarakhand praying for exemption from personal appearance. 6. In view of the reasons mentioned, I.A. No. 668/2026 is allowed and Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Uttarakhand is exempted from personal appearance. 7. Mr. Saurabh Chandra, Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation and Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Uttarakhand and Ms. Swati Srivastava Bhaduria, District Magistrate-cum-Deputy Collector, Chairperson, District Ganga Committee, Pauri Garhwal have appeared before this Tribunal through V.C. and we have heard the submissions made by them and they have assured to look into all relevant aspects and take appropriate remedial action.

¶21

Learned Counsel for the respondents no. 8 to 10 and 12 seeks time for filing additional responses with all requisite details.

¶22

¶23

Additional responses may be filed by respondents no. 8 to 10 and 12 within two months with all requisite details with reference to all relevant aspects pertaining to riverine ecology and aquatic life and in particular the issues of (i) identification /demarcation of area of Nayar River and its translation on GIS Map; (ii) rehabilitation and management of its catchment area; (iii) encroachments on the same and removal thereof; (iv) tapping of all drains discharging in River Nayar by construction of STPs etc.; (v) review of existing treatment facilities for treatment of industrial effluents and domestic sewage and improvements required to be made and (vi) reuse of treated water from STPs/CETPs for irrigation by connecting the same to irrigation canals/channels and industrial purposes by laying down pipelines connecting the concerned industries as the case may be.

¶24

List on 26.11.2026 for further hearing.

¶25

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶26

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶27

September 02^nd , 2026 Original Application No. 295/2025 (I.A. No. 668/2026) SN

¶28

News Item Titled "Nayar River Is Vanishing - a Yatra Reveals Conservation Goes Beyond Science and Policy" Appearing in the Down to Earth Dated 03.06.2025. vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

News Item Titled "Nayar River Is Vanishing - a Yatra Reveals Conservation Goes Beyond Science and Policy" Appearing in the Down to Earth Dated 03.06.2025. vs

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

Vaibhav Baban Satam vs Environment Department Government of Maharashtra

Maa Durga Stone Crusher through Its Proprietor vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Monu Raja vs Union of India through Ministry of Environment Forest & Climate Change

Monu Raja vs Union of India through Ministry of Environment Forest & Climate Change

Bluebird Software Private Limited vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Bluebird Software Private Limited vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Bluebird Software Private Limited vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Bluebird Software Private Limited vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Maa Durga Stone Crusher through Its Proprietor vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Shiv Kumar Dubey vs Union of India

Shiv Kumar Dubey vs Union of India

Abhay Sharma vs

Chelluri Nukaraju vs

Boby Varghese vs