Disposed

Anjan Das v. State of Assam

NGT3 Aug 2026Original Application No. 141/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The NGT East Zone Bench refused to dismiss an application for default. Upon learning that allegations involve illegal stone crushers and potential official collusion, the Tribunal directed the Assam State Pollution Control Board to verify facts physically, associate parties, and submit a report within three months.

What did the court decide?

Instructions to the Assam State Pollution Control Board to verify facts, associate parties, take remedial action if violations exist, and submit a report within three months.

Anjan Das vs State of Assam — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.04

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No.141/2026/EZ

Anjan Das & Ors.

Applicants

Versus

State of Assam & Ors.

¶8

Respondents

¶9

Date of hearing: 03.08.2026

¶10

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

¶11

Applicants: None for the applicants.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

1. Mr. Anjan Das & Ors. have sent the present letter petition dated 30.01.2026 by post to this Tribunal, which has been treated and registered as O.A. No.141/2026/EZ for exercise of suo-motu jurisdiction in view of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Municipal

¶14

Corporation of Greater Mumbai Versus Ankita Sinha and others,

¶15

(2022) 13 SCC 401.

¶16

The applicants have raised grievances regarding illegal operation of stone crusher plants across Cachar District especially in Barak Valley, Assam in violation of environmental norms. The relevant part of the letter petition enumerating grievances of the applicants is reproduced as

¶17

below:-

¶18

“ We, the residents of Cachar District, Barak Valley, Assam, wish to bring to your kind notice a serious and ongoing environmental violation in our region.

¶19

Over the past few years, numerous stone crusher and screening plants have been established illegally across Cachar district without following statutory environmental guidelines or obtaining mandatory Environmental Clearance (EC) from the concerned authorities.

¶20

¶21

It has been observed that certain officials---including Shri Vijay Palve , DFO Cachar, Shri Sunnydeo Indradeo Choudhury, IFS, Conservator of Forest (CF), Southern Assam Circle , and Shri Arabinda Das, Regional Executive Engineer (REE), Pollution Control Board, Assam ---have allegedly been facilitating these illegal setups in exchange for monetary benefits, by passing all regulatory norms. These officials have held successive influential posts and appear to have acted in collusion to grant illegal permissions.

¶22

We demand an immediate field inquiry and cancellation of all stone crusher that have been permitted illegally by these officials and their predecessors.

¶23

The local population is suffering severely due to noise and air pollution caused by these units. We note with concern that while brick kilns and other industries in Assam are required to obtain EC from SEIAA/SEAC, Stone Crushers are being allowed to operate without any such Environment Clearance (EC) in Assam, which is a clear violation of environmental laws. While in West Bengal and other States of India following the NGT guidelines for obtaining Stone Crusher installation EC from SEIAA but not in Assam yet.

¶24

Moreover, these plants are being installed without maintaining safe distances from residential areas, highways, schools, rivers, or religious sites, in blatant disregard of the Assam Stone Crusher Established and Regulation Rules, 2013 . Even the minimal distance of 300 metres (boundary to boundary) prescribed under current norms is not being followed.

¶25

We urge implementation of stricter guidelines, including:

¶26

1. Minimum 800-1000 metres between two stone crusher boundary to avoid clustering sound.

¶27

2. At least 400-500 metres distance from Highways or PWD roads.

¶28

3. At least 150 metres from river boundaries.

¶29

4. Mandatory submission of Source of Raw Material Affidavit and NOC from the Nearest Stone Quarry mahaldar .

¶30

5. No permission on land requiring earth cutting or tree felling.

¶31

6. Proper land patta documents to be submitted before EC.

¶32

7. Minimum 500 metres from religious institutions.

¶33

Many crushers plants are being set up under the guise of Bharatmala/NHIDCL/PWD Contractors projects, claiming government priority, yet they too flout all guidelines. Unlawful earth cutting, tree felling, and environmental degradation are rampant, with evidence available via satellite imagery (attached) .

¶34

Recent reports in local news portals such as Barak Bulletin have exposed illegal earth cutting and crusher setup in Udharbond, Cacher, with alleged forest and pollution board complicity .

¶35

We request your urgent intervention to:

¶36

¶37

Immediately halt all new stone crusher permissions and make it mandatory to obtain EC for new and Existing Stone Crusher Units .

¶38

Cancel illegally operating units without maintaining boundary distance.

¶39

Ensure existing units follow revised guidelines or relocate.

¶40

Take strict action against erring officials.

¶41

We have attached Satellite Images as proof of violations, including distance measurements .”

¶42

The O.A. was taken up for hearing on 01.07.2026 but the applicants did not appear on that date on which the Registry was directed to issue notice to the applicants to appear physically or through V.C. and to produce the material available with them in support of the averments made in the O.A. before this Tribunal.

¶43

As per office report notice was sent to the applicants by speed post but the same has been received back with remark “insufficient address”.

¶44

The applicants have not appeared even today personally or through duly authorized representative/Counsel.

¶45

In view of the nature and magnitude of grievances raised and substantial environmental questions involved, we consider it appropriate to proceed further on the present O.A. instead of dismissing the same in default for non-prosecution.

¶46

We have gone through the O.A. and documents enclosed with the same.

¶47

The averments made in the O.A. raise substantial questions relating to environment arising out of the implementation of the enactments specified in Schedule-I to the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.

¶48

However, we are of the considered view that the averments made in the application require physical verification of the factual position by Assam State Pollution Control Board which is also under statutory

¶49

¶50

obligations to take prompt remedial action in case of environmental violations on the basis of such physical verification of the factual position. 10. Accordingly, Assam State Pollution Control Board is directed to look into the grievances of the applicants, associate the applicants and representative of the concerned project proponents, verify the factual position and take appropriate remedial action in case of environmental violations by following due course of law and giving opportunity of being heard to the applicants, concerned project proponents and persons adversely affected in accordance with principles of natural justice and to submit its report within three months to the learned Registrar of this Tribunal at Kolkata, who shall be at liberty to place the matter before the Bench in case the report as directed above is not submitted and also in case on receipt of such report further orders are considered to be necessary.

¶51

The present original application is disposed of accordingly with directions as mentioned above.

¶52

A copy of this order alongwith copy of O.A. and documents attached therewith may be sent to the Member Secretary, Assam State Pollution Control Board by email for requisite compliance.

¶53

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶54

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶55

Ishwar Singh, EM

¶56

August 3^rd , 2026 Original Application No.141/2026/EZ AM

¶57

Anjan Das v. State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjan Das v. State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hemraj Meena vs Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change Government of India

Haider Ali vs the Director Manglam Bdl

Hemant Kumar vs

Sanavvar vs M/S Kisti Paper Mill

Pawan Kumar and Ors. vs

R K Singh vs State of Odisha

Sukhdev Singh vs

Deepak Kumar Sharma vs

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 38/2025 in Original Application No. 178/2024 of Dr Papita Ghosh vs West Bengal Pollution Control Board

Bittu Biswakarma vs State of West Bengal

In Re Sinking B Deshi Vessel Dumps Toxic Fly Ash in River Near Ghoramara Shows Video Shared by Panchayat Member News Item Published in the Times of India Kolkata Section Dt 17 02 2025 vs State of West Bengal