Dismissed

Kazi Pear Ahmed v. State of West Bengal

NGT11 Aug 2026Original Application No. 144/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant raised a grievance against illegal brick kiln operation near a government hospital, citing air pollution violations. The Tribunal constituting a Joint Committee of the Pollution Control Board and District Magistrate to verify the complaints, inspect the site, and suggest remedial measures within one month.

What did the court decide?

Constitution of a Joint Committee to visit the site, verify grievances, and suggest remedial action within one month.

Kazi Pear Ahmed vs State of West Bengal — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No.02

¶2

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

¶3

Original Application No.144/2026/EZ

¶4

Kazi Pear Ahmed Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of West Bengal & Ors. Respondents

¶7

Date of hearing: 11.08.2026

¶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

Applicant: None for the applicant.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

Mr. Kazi Pear Ahmed has sent the present letter petition through Speed Post dated 17.03.2026 to this Tribunal, which has been treated and registered as Original Application (O.A.) No.144/2026/EZ for exercise of suo-motu jurisdiction in view of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme

¶12

Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Versus Ankita Sinha and others, (2022) 13 SCC 401 .

¶13

The applicant has raised grievance regarding illegal operation of brick kiln unit by respondent no.3-Md. Abul Kasem, Proprietor of Minar Bhata Brick Kiln, P.O Krishnapur, P.S. Lalgola, District Murshidabad. The relevant part of the O.A. enumerating grievances of the applicant is reproduced below:-

¶14

“Respondent No.3 operates a brick kiln named Minar Bhata beside Krishnapur Government Hospital.

¶15

The brick kiln is located about 200 feet from the government hospital.

¶16

¶17

A private hospital named Meherun Hospital of his wife has been constructed within or immediately adjacent to the brick-kiln premises. After objections were raised, a boundary wall was constructed between the hospital and the brick kiln allegedly to create an artificial compliance during regulatory inspections.

¶18

The brick kiln continues to emit smoke and pollutants harmful to patients and the surrounding environment.

¶19

Grounds

¶20

The operation violates environmental protections under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 and air pollution regulations enforced by the West Bengal Pollution Control Board.

¶21

Prayer

¶22

The applicant respectfully prays that the Hon’ble Tribunal may:

¶23

Direct an independent environmental inspection.

¶24

Verify the legality of Minar Bhata brick kiln and Meherun Hospital location.

¶25

Order closure or relocation of the brick kiln if found violating environmental norms.

¶26

Pass any other order necessary to protect public health and the environment.”

¶27

Vide order dated 06.07.2026, the Registry was directed to intimate the applicant about the date of hearing fixed and to ask him to appear and to produce relevant documents before this Tribunal on that date but the applicant has not appeared today personally or through duly authorized representative/Counsel and has not produced any material before this Tribunal.

¶28

However, in view of the nature and magnitude of alleged environmental allegations and also substantial environmental questions involved, we consider it appropriate to proceed further on the O.A. by taking suo motu cognizance instead of dismissing the O.A. in default for non-prosecution.

¶29

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

¶30

¶31

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.

¶32

In view of the averments made in the O.A., we consider it necessary to get the factual position verified by constituting a Joint Committee comprising the representatives of the concerned authorities which are also under statutory obligation to take appropriate remedial action on the basis thereof.

¶33

Accordingly, we constitute a Joint Committee comprising of representatives of the Member Secretary, West Bengal Pollution Control Board and the District Magistrate, Murshidabad, West Bengal and direct the same to undertake visits to the site, look into the grievances of the applicant, associate the applicant and representative of the concerned project proponent, verify the factual position and suggest appropriate remedial action.

¶34

The Joint Committee is directed to submit its report, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order, before Registrar, Eastern Zone Bench at Kolkata and in case of environmental violations to send a copy of the report to the concerned authorities. 10. On receipt of a copy of the report of the Joint Committee, the concerned authorities shall be bound to take appropriate action in accordance with law by giving opportunity of being heard to the concerned project proponent in compliance with Principles of Natural Justice within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the report of the Joint Committee and to file action taken report before learned Registrar, Eastern Zone Bench at Kolkata within next one month .

¶35

¶36

The District Magistrate, Murshidabad, West Bengal will be the nodal agency for coordination and compliance regarding submission of the report of the Joint Committee and filing of action taken reports by the concerned authorities.

¶37

The Registrar, Eastern Zone Bench at Kolkata may place the matter before the Bench if reports are not filed as directed above and also if on receipt of the reports further orders are considered to be necessary.

¶38

The present original application is disposed of accordingly.

¶39

A copy of this order along-with copy of O.A. and documents attached with the same may be sent to the Member Secretary, West Bengal State Pollution Control Board and the District Magistrate, Murshidabad, West Bengal by email for requisite compliance.

¶40

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶41

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶42

Ishwar Singh, EM

¶43

August 11^th , 2026 Original Application No.144/2026/EZ AM

¶44

Kazi Pear Ahmed v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kazi Pear Ahmed v. State of West Bengal

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

Royal Quarry Works Co. Shri Vishnubhai Kalidas Patel vs State Enviromental Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

Mahendrabhai Rudabhai Dharsandia vs State Enviromental Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

M/S. Vasudev Minerals Company C/O. Denishbhai Vinodray Buddhdev vs Seiaa

M/S. Panchvati Quarry Works C/O. Dilipbhai Jagdishbhai Patel vs Seiaa

Pratap Vaare Parshad vs State of Madhya Pradesh

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

Paryavaran Bachav Samity vs Union of India through the Secretary

Budhsen Rathour vs Torrent Power Ltd.

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 35/2026 in Original Application No. 33/2026 of Shailesh Kumar Singh vs the State of West Bengal through Principal Secretary

Sourabh Kumar vs State of Bihar

Veterans Forum for Transparency in Public Life vs State of Bihar

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

Kumar Sanjay vs State of Jharkhand