Disposed

Jot Singh Bist vs

NGT21 Sept 2026IA No. 702/2026 in Original Application No. 44/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal reviewed compliance with its earlier directions in an application concerning environmental damage from illegal muck dumping. The MoEF&CC filed a quarterly report but not the additional report on forest destruction and encroachment. The UKSPCB did not file its report on environmental compensation recovery. The Chief Secretary, Uttarakhand sought time to comply with the fund allocation direction. The Tribunal impleaded the State of Uttarakhand and the PCCF (HoFF) as additional respondents and adjourned the matter for further hearing.

What did the court decide?

Time granted to respondents to file additional reports and compliance affidavits; State of Uttarakhand and PCCF (HoFF) impleaded as respondents; matter listed for further hearing on 04.11.2026.

Jot Singh Bist vs — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Court No. 2

¶2

Item No.01

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 44/2024 (M.A. No 44/2026 and I.A. No. 702/2026)

Jot Singh Bist

Applicant

Versus

Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change & Ors. Respondents

¶9

Date of hearing: 21.09.2026

¶10

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

¶11

Applicant: None for the Applicant.

¶12

Respondents: Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha, Advocate (through V.C.) and Mr. Animesh Rajoriya, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Mr. Mukesh Verma, Advocate for Respondent no. 2. Mr. Adiraj Bali, Advocate for Respondent no. 3 (through V.C.). Mr. Ananya Thapliyal, Advocate for Respondent no. 4. Mr. Ajay, GM, RVNL, Mr. M.K. Bahukhandi, Forest Coordinator and Mr. Vijay Dangwal, Geologist for respondent no. 4. Mr. Varun Chugh (through V.C.) and Mr. Shubham Singh, Advocates for respondent no. 5.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

In compliance of order dated 16.07.2026, second Quarterly Report

¶15

dated 15.09.2026 has been filed by respondent no. 1-MoEF&CC.

¶16

I.A. No. 702/2026 has been filed by respondent no. 4-Rail Vikas Nigam Limited (RVNL).

¶17

I.A. No. 702/2026 is allowed to the extent that the detailed

¶18

project report Annexure-II is taken on record .

¶19

However, additional report regarding action taken with regard to destruction and encroachment on the forest area and illegal dumping of muck in the forest areas has not been filed by respondent no. 1-MoEF&CC

¶20

and learned Counsel for respondent no. 1 seeks some more time for filing of the additional report, which request is allowed and the same may be filed at least one day before the next date of hearing fixed.

¶21

¶22

Vide order dated 16.07.2026, respondent no. 2–UKSPCB was directed to file additional action taken report with regard to action taken for imposition and recovery of environmental compensation on respondent no. 4-RVNL and respondent no. 5-MEIL for illegal dumping of muck in violation of environmental norms.

¶23

However, respondent no. 2-UKSPCB has not filed additional action taken report and learned Counsel for respondent no. 2-UKSPCB seeks some more time, which request is allowed and the same may be filed at least one day before the next date of hearing fixed.

¶24

Learned Counsels for respondents no. 4 and 5 also seek some more time for filing of their responses, which request is allowed and the same may be filed at least one day before the next date of hearing fixed. 8. Vide order dated 16.07.2026, the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand was directed to issue appropriate instructions for making the amount of Rs. 2,03,96,111/- available to the Committee of Experts for utilization towards for restoration/rejuvenation of Chopra Gadhera of Village Jawari and remediation of the environmental damage caused and to file report in this regard.

¶25

Learned Counsel appearing for respondent no. 3-District Magistrate, Rudraprayag has also appeared for the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand seeks some more time to comply with the directions given by this Tribunal vide order dated 16.07.2026, which request is allowed and affidavit regarding compliance in this regard may be filed at least one day before the next date of hearing fixed.

¶26

Vide order dated 12.05.2026, the O.A. was revived for further order. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we consider presence of the State of Uttarakhand through the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (HoFF), Government of Uttarakhand to be essential for securing just and proper

¶27

¶28

compliance with the orders already passed by this Tribunal. Accordingly, the State of Uttarakhand through the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (HoFF), Government of Uttarakhand are impleaded as respondents no. 6 and 7.

¶29

The Registry is directed to amend the memo of parties accordingly.

¶30

Mr. Adhiraj Bali, learned Counsel appearing for respondent no. 3- District Magistrate, Rudraprayag has accepted notices on behalf of newly impleaded respondents no. 6 and 7.

¶31

Responses by newly impleaded respondents no. 6 and 7 may be filed

¶32

at least one day before the next date of hearing fixed.

¶33

List on 04.11.2026 for further hearing.

¶34

A copy of this order may also be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand and the Member Secretary, UKSPCB by email

¶35

for requisite compliance.

¶36

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶37

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶38

September 21^st , 2026 Original Application No. 44/2024 (M.A. No 44/2026 & I.A. No. 702/2026) SN

¶39

Jot Singh Bist vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jot Singh Bist 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

Vihaan Milk and Milk Processing vs the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board

Biplab Kumar Chowdhury vs the State of West Bengal

Serajul Islam vs the State of West Bengal

Atanu Borthakur vs State of Assam

M/S Visen Industries Limited Kancheepuram District TN-602105 : Represented by Its Authorized Signatory Mr. C. Sanjeevi Kumar Deputy General Manager. vs Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board

Kgs Jeevanandham vs the State of Tamil Nadu Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department

Kgs Jeevanandham vs the State of Tamil Nadu Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department

Kgs Jeevanandham vs the State of Tamil Nadu Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department

Deepak vs Public Works Division

S Venkateswarlu vs

Amit Sharma vs

Bikramjit Singh Shergill vs .

Bikramjit Singh Shergill vs .

Tilak Raj Adhana and Ors. vs