Dismissed

Ajay Kant Rohit v. State of Bihar

NGT12 Aug 2026IA No. 98/2026 in Original Application No. 45/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal dismissed the applicant's application for waiver of costs imposed on the District Magistrate for delayed compliance. The court also declined further adjournment for the Bihar State Pollution Control Board to file a delayed affidavit regarding river pollution.

What did the court decide?

Application for waiver of costs and modification of order dismissed; further adjournment denied.

Ajay Kant Rohit vs State of Bihar — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.12

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)

¶3

Original Application No.45/2025/EZ (Earlier O.A. No.36/2025/PB) (I.A. No.98/2026/EZ)

¶4

Ajay Kant Rohit Applicants

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Bihar & Ors. Respondents

¶7

Date of hearing: 12.08.2026

¶8

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

¶9

Applicants: None for the Applicant.

¶10

Respondents:Mr. Surendra Kumar, Advocate for respondents no.1 and 3 (through VC).

¶11

Ms. Amrita Pandey, Advocate for respondent no.2 (through VC).

¶12

ORDER

¶13

In compliance of order dated 22.05.2026, counter affidavit dated 25.07.2026 has been filed by respondent no.3- District Magistrate, Rohtas, Bihar.

¶14

However, costs of Rs.10,000/imposed vide order dated 22.05.2026 have not been deposited by respondent no.3- District Magistrate, Rohtas, Bihar who has filed I.A. No.98/2026/EZ for modification/recall of para 5 of order dated 22.05.2026 and waiver of costs.

¶15

Respondent no.3- District Magistrate, Rohtas, Bihar has sought waiver of cost on the grounds that respondent no.3 has now filed affidavit containing the Action Taken Report dated 25.07.2026 regarding compliance for making River Avsani pollution free. The delay in filing of the affidavit was due to slight lapses in inter-department communication.

¶16

¶17

Respondent no.3 has tendered an unconditional apology for the delay and sought modification/recall of order and waiver of costs.

¶18

This Tribunal had vide order dated 11.02.2025 issued notice of the application to respondent no.3 for filing of its response within two months. Respondent no.3 appeared through its counsel on 02.04.2025 but did not file its response despite grant of more than five effective opportunities on which vide order dated 22.05.2026 one more opportunity was granted subject to payment of costs. Costs were imposed on respondent no.3 for reasons mentioned in the order as borne out by the record. Not filing of response by Respondent no.3 resulted in disposal of the case which was required under Section 18 (3) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 to be disposed of within six months from the date of filing of the Original Application. No ground for modification/recall of para 5 of order dated 22.05.2026 and waiver of costs is made out and I.A. No.98/2026/EZ is dismissed accordingly.

¶19

Costs may be deposited with Registrar, Eastern Zone Bench, Kolkata within one month.

¶20

Vide order dated 22.05.2026, respondent no.2 was directed to file its affidavit in terms of direction given in Para 5 of order dated 04.08.2025.

¶21

We express our displeasure that despite expiry of about a year, Bihar State Pollution Control Board could not file its affidavit in terms of the direction given in Para 5 of order dated 04.08.2025.

¶22

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 seeks further adjournment for filing of its affidavit in terms of directions given in Para 5 of order dated 04.08.2025.

¶23

In the facts and circumstances of the case no ground for grant of further adjournment to respondent no.2 for filing of its affidavit in terms

¶24

¶25

of directions given in Para 5 of order dated 04.08.2025 is made out and further adjournment for the same is declined.

¶26

List on 08.09.2026 for final hearing.

¶27

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶28

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶29

Ishwar Singh, EM

¶30

August 12^th , 2026 Original Application No.45/2025/EZ (Earlier O.A. No.36/2025/PB) (I.A. No.98/2026/EZ) P

¶31

Ajay Kant Rohit v. State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kant Rohit v. State of Bihar

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

Ramesh B. Mundley vs State of Gujarat through Secretary Industries and Mines Dept

M/S. Commercial Stone Supplying Co. vs State of Gujarat through Secretary Industries and Mines Dept

Yusuf Mohamad Godad vs State of Gujarat through Secretary Industries and Mines Dept

Mohammad Yusuf Abdulla Mala vs State of Gujarat through Secretary Industries and Mines Dept

Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Ankur Sharma vs State of West Bengal through the Chief Secretary

Naval Kishore Bhargav vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Kazi Pear Ahmed vs State of West Bengal

Kumar Sanjay vs State of Jharkhand

Sri Dillip Kumar Samantaray vs State of Odisha Represented by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Lakhyajyoti Gogoi vs Moefcc

1. Alaka Mishra W/O- Harekrushna Mishra Aged About 75 Years vs 1. State of Odisha Additional Chief Secretary Revenue and Disaster Management Department Govt. of Odisha

Paribesh O Aranya Sankalp through Milan Rakshit vs State of West Bangal