Disposed

Rajender v. Union of India

NGT10 Feb 2026IA No. 834/2025 in Execution Application No. 76/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an execution application to enforce an order directing the HSPCB to consider a grievance regarding a Biogas Plant's construction near residences. The Tribunal directed the authority to conduct inspection and provide a hearing within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed HSPCB to comply with previous order by conducting spot inspection and giving hearing opportunity within eight weeks.

Rajender vs Union of India — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No. 33 Court No. 1

¶2

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶3

Execution Application No. 76/2025 (I.A. no 774/2025, 834/2025 & 836/2025) In Original Application No. 584/2023

Rajender

Applicant

Versus

Union of India & Ors. Respondent(s)

¶8

Date of hearing: 10.02.2026

¶9

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

¶10

Applicant: Mr. Daleep Dhyani & Ms. Lakshita Sharma, Advs. Respondents: Mr. Rahul Khurana & Ms. Bhavya Singla, Advs. for R - 3 & 4 Mr. Saurabh Balwani, Adv. for CPCB (Through VC) Mr. Sourav Tyagi, Adv. for R - 5 & 8

¶11

ORDER

¶12

By this execution application, the applicant is seeking compliance of the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in O.A. No. 584/2023.

¶13

In the OA the applicant had raised a grievance against the Biogas Plant which was being constructed on Khasra No. 577 in Village Kajal Heri, Tehsil and District Fatehabad, Haryana.

¶14

The applicant had alleged that, he is residing near the site of construction of Biogas Plant and there are residential houses within 300 meters of the proposed Biogas Plant. The Tribunal vide order dated 03.10.2023 had disposed of the OA by directing as under:

¶15

“3. Hence, at this stage, we dispose of the present applicant by directing Nodal Officer, HSPCB, Fatehabad to duly consider the complaint of the applicant in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The applicant is directed to submit a fresh copy of the complaint along with the copy of this order to the competent authority.”

¶16

The applicant alleges that the above order has not been complied

¶17

with.

¶18

¶19

During the course of hearing, the guidelines issued by the CPCB namely “Environmental Guidelines for Compressed Biogas Plant (CBG) Bio-CNG Plants” issued in March 2022 have been referred to, which provide for the distance criteria also.

¶20

It has been pointed out by the Counsel for the HSPCB that the show cause notice dated 20.11.2023 (page 298) was issued to Respondent No. 8, mentioning therein the issue of siting criteria and distance from the residence but nothing has been placed on record by the HSPCB reflecting upon the outcome of the proceedings in pursuance of the show cause notice.

¶21

The HSPCB in its compliance report dated 09.02.2026 has also taken the plea that it is a white category unit which does not require CTE or CTO, however the guidelines which are issued by the CPCB in respect of such units are required to be complied with by them.

¶22

Hence, we dispose of this Execution Application, directing HSPCB to duly comply with the order dated 03.10.2023 passed in OA No. 584/2023 and take an appropriate decision on the complaint of the applicant, annexure R-2 page 296 by carrying out the spot inspection and giving an opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties. Let this exercise be completed within a period of eight weeks.

¶23

The Execution Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶24

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶25

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶26

February 10, 2026 EA No. 76/2025 in OA No. 584/2023 HB.

¶27

Rajender v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajender 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arvind Singh vs Union of India

Mahavir Singh vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Sayyed Mohammed Sabir Usman vs Union of India through Secretary Moef & Cc

1. Jhadeswar Pradhan S/O Rasanand Pradhan Aged About 60YEARS vs 1. State of Odisha Represented by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Saheen Tarannum vs State of Odisha

Aziz Khan vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee (Dpcc)

News Item Published in the Hindu Authored by Shri Jacob Koshy Titled More River Stretches Are Now Critically Polluted: Cpcb vs Centeral Pollution Control Board

Sonya Gosh vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Arvind Singh vs Union of India

Sundr vs Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

Mahavir Singh vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Ved Prakash Aggarwal vs Municipal Commissioner Nagar Nigam Ghaziabad

Society Fdevelopment of Human Resource vs State of Haryana

News Item Titled "Gurgaon a Groundwater ,Dark Zone, But Extraction Over 2 Times the Limit" Appearing in Times of India Dated 05.08.2025 vs