Disposed

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 72/2025 in Original Application No. 497/2022 of Sunny Yadav vs

NGT8 Apr 2026Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 72/2025 in Original Application No. 497/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal disposed of a miscellaneous application concerning three brick kilns in Uttar Pradesh regarding environmental violations. The Tribunal confirmed that the UPPCB had taken necessary actions, including imposing environmental compensation and scrutiny of operational status, thereby fulfilling the Tribunal's earlier orders.

What did the court decide?

The miscellaneous application was disposed of upon confirmation that the requisite action had been taken by the UPPCB.

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 72/2025 in… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No. 27

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

M.A. No. 72/2025 In

¶5

Original Application No. 497/2022

¶6

Sunny Yadav Applicant

Versus

State of U.P. & Ors.

Respondent(s)

Date of hearing: 08.04.2026

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶12

Applicant: None Present

¶13

Respondents: Mr. Pradeep Misra & Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advs. for UPPCB

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Misc. Application has been registered on the basis of the action taken report dated 06.08.2024 filed by the UPPCB in compliance of the order of the Tribunal dated 22.04.2024 passed in OA No. 497/2022.

¶16

The OA was registered on the basis of the letter petition sent by one of the residents of Punjabi Colony, District Mainpuri, Uttar Pradesh. In the letter petition, a complaint was made against the violation of environmental norms and illegal operation against the following three brick Kilns:

¶17

(i) Dayal Brick Kiln, Nagriya, District Mainpuri;

¶18

(ii) Shiv Brick Kiln, Ghitoli, District Mainpuri and

¶19

(iii) Govind Brick Kiln and Tiles, Devmai, District Mainpuri

¶20

The Tribunal had constituted the Joint Committee and had

¶21

considered the report of the Joint Committee and found that these brick kilns were not complying with the environmental norms. Therefore, by the order dated 22.04.2024, the OA No. 497/2022 was disposed of recording

¶22

¶23

the statement of Counsel for the UPPCB as under and directing the UPPCB

¶24

to file the action taken report before the Registrar General of the Tribunal:

¶25

“7. Learned Counsel appearing for UPPCB has fairly admitted that the UPPCB has option to take action of imposition of EC, passing of closure order and prosecution in case of violation. He submits that now appropriate action will be taken for the violations of the norms and non-compliance of the consent condition within two months.

¶26

8. Let the action taken report be filed by the Member Secretary, UPPCB within three months before the Registrar General of the Tribunal by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF and if found necessary, the matter may be listed before the Bench.”

¶27

On the basis of the action taken report dated 06.08.2024, the present MA has been registered. In the action taken report, though it was disclosed that the show cause notice for imposition of environmental compensation was issued but the final order for imposition of environmental compensation was not disclosed.

¶28

During the pendency of the MA, the requisite action has been taken and the affidavit dated 07.04.2026 has been filed by the UPPCB disclosing as under:

¶29

“4. That in compliance of above direction the UPPCB has filed its Reply-cum-response dated 26.09.2025 before this Hon'ble Tribunal for consideration wherein it was stated as follows:

¶30

S No.	Name of Brick Kiln	Letter of EC _Imposition _	Amount of EC Imposed (Rs.)
1.	M/s. Govind Brick Works. Village Devamayi, Post Odenya Mandal, Tehsil and Mainpuri. District	11.06.2025	Rs. 1,75,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Seventy Five Thousand Only)
2.	M/s. Shiv ent Bhatta, Village-Ghitauli, Tehsil and district Mainpuri.	11.06.2025	Rs. 1,75,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Seventy thousand Only). Five
3.	M/s. Dayal Brick and Tiles, Village Nagariya, Post Dharau, tehsil and District Mainpuri.	11.06.2025	Rs. 1,75,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Seventy Five thousand Only).

¶31

¶32

5. That it was further stated in the said affidavit that in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 757-760 of 2013; DPCC Vs. Lodhi Properties Co. Ltd. and other connected matters, Environmental Compensation could not be imposed and recovered till the rules are framed by Government of India.

¶33

Thus in view of the said facts mentioned in the affidavit dated 26.09.2025 filed on behalf of UPPCB, it is most respectfully submitted that this Hon'ble Tribunal may direct the aforesaid brick kilns to deposit the said amount of Environmental Compensation with UPPCB.

¶34

6. That again the matter came up for hearing on 05.01.2026 when this Hon'ble Tribunal has passed the following order:

¶35

"1. Learned Counsel for UPPCB has submitted that in view of the order dated 04.08.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 757-760/2013, DPCC vs. Lodhi Property Company Ltd. & Ors., EC cannot be imposed by UPPCB till framing of the rules in this regard.

¶36

2. Member Secretary, UPPCB is directed to file action taken report within two months with respect to the aspects of passing of closure orders and filing of complaints in case of environmental violations in terms of statement recorded in para 7 of order dated 24.04.2024..."

¶37

7. That it is respectfully submitted that the brick kilns were having the consent and due to some deficiencies like not having monitoring platform or porthole and ladder, fuel was not covered, unpaved internal road etc. which were rectified subsequently and during the period of default the Environmental Compensation has been computed and imposed but as stated hereinabove, recovery could not be made because of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶38

8. That as per brick kilns were having consent and for deficiencies in not complying with environmental norms, Environmental Compensation has already been imposed, therefore, it is not required to close down the said brick kilns.

¶39

9. That Section 37 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as it stood before amendment was as follows:

¶40

"37. Failure to comply with the provisions of Section 21 or Section 22 or with the directions issued under Section 31-A. (1) Whoever fails to comply with the provisions of Section 21 or section 22 or directions issued under Section 31-A, shall, in respect of each such failure, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year and six months but which may extend to six years and with fine, and in case the failure continues, with an additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day during which such failure continues after the conviction for the first such failure.

¶41

(2) If the failure referred to in sub-section (1) continues beyond a period of one year after the date of conviction, the offender

¶42

¶43

shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years but which may extend to seven years and with fine."

¶44

10. That Government of India amended the Air Act, 1981 by issuing a notification dated 11.08.2023 whereby The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 was enacted. The said Act was enforced w.e.f. 01.04.2024 throughout India by a notification dated 18.10.2023 issued by MoEF & CC whereby Section 37 of Air Act, 1981 was amended and the provision for prosecution has been substituted by imposing the penalty. The amended provision is reproduced herein below:

¶45

"(C) For sections 37 to 41, the following sections shall be substituted, namely:-

¶46

37. Failure to comply with provisions of section 22 or directions issued under section 31A.-(1) Whoever contravenes or does not comply with the provisions of section 22 or directions issued under section 31A, shall, in respect of each such contravention, be liable to penalty which shall not be less than ten thousand rupees, but which may extend to fifteen lakh rupees.

¶47

(2) Where any person continues contravention under subsection (1), he shall be liable to additional penalty of ten thousand rupees for every day during which such contravention continues."

¶48

True copy of notification dated 11.08.2023 publishing Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 and notification dated 18.10.2023 notifying the date of enforcement of the said Act are being enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure 1 and 2 respectively.

¶49

11. That in view of this above legal position the UPPCB is in process of taking suitable action for prosecution against the aforesaid brick kilns.

¶50

12. That in compliance to the order dated 05.01.2026 the officials of UPPCB have visited the site of brick kilns in question and carried out an inspection on 17.03.2026.

¶51

A true copy of an inspection report is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-3.

¶52

13. That during the course of inspection it was found that one brick kiln namely M/s Dayal Brick and Tiles, Village-Nagariya, PostDharau, Tehsil and District-Mainpuri was found self-closed as per its own submission dated 05.11.2025 given to Regional Office, Firozabad, while other two brick kilns namely M/s Govind Brick Works, Village-Devamai, Post-Audenmandal, Tehsil and DistrictMainpuri and M/s Shiv Brick Field, Village-Ghitoli, Tehsil and District- Mainpuri found operational and compliant with the conditions of Consent to Operate (CTO).”

¶53

¶54

The above report reveals that the requisite action has been taken by

¶55

the UPPCB. Hence, the MA is disposed of.

¶56

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶57

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM April 08, 2026 M.A. No. 72/2025 In Original Application No. 497/2022 dv

¶58

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 72/2025 in Original Application No. 497/2022 of Sunny Yadav vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 72/2025 in Original Application No. 497/2022 of Sunny Yadav vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 25/2026 in Original Application No. 70/2026 of Ashish Singh vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 1/2026 in Original Application No. 19/2026 of Anantha Seetharam Reddy vs State of Telangana Rep. by Its Principal Secretary. Irrigation and Cad Department

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 24/2026 in Execution Application No. 10/2023 of Shailesh Singh vs Central Pollution Control Board

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 6/2022 in Original Application No. 239/2021 of Navroz Kersasp Mody S/O Kersasp Mody Aged About 76 Aurodam Auroville Vanur Taluk Viluppuram - 605101 vs the Auroville Foundation Rep by Its Secretary. Auroville Foundation Bhavan Auroville Tamil Nadu

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 24/2025 in Original Application No. 219/2024 of Niraj Kumar vs Dhiraj Kumar

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 16/2026 in Original Application No. 70/2016 of Tribunal on Its Own Motion (Regarding Dumping of Garbages at Rajiv Nagar North 24-PARGANAS vs the Principal Secretary Department of Environment Govt. of West Bengal

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 29/2026 in Original Application No. 440/2023 of Naveen Kumar vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 119/2025 in Original Application No. 251/2025 of Sandeep Choudhary vs State of NCT of Delhi

Harsh Chugh vs State of Haryana

News Item Titled "Increasing Pollution Badly Affecting Water Bodies in Bhadarwah" Appearing in Greater Kashmir Dated 15.01.2024 vs

Farman Qurashi vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Jaishree Bansal vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Jaishree Bansal vs Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 27/2026 in Original Application No. 16/2014 of Shri Hazi Arif vs State of Uttar Pradesh