Dismissed

Nizamuddin Asmad Jalal v. Jalal Zubair Zahid Hussain

NGT31 Aug 2026Original Application No. 161/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment considers an original application against a stone crushing unit alleging non-compliance with siting criteria and environmental pollution. The bench examined affidavits from the respondent industry and MPCB, finding that the unit met siting distance requirements and ambient air quality was within limits. Consequently, the grievance lacked substantiation.

What did the court decide?

the application raising grievances regarding siting criteria and pollution was dismissed.

Nizamuddin Asmad Jalal vs Jalal Zubair Zahid Hussain — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No. 9

¶2

(Pune Bench)

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE

¶4

[THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION)]

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 161/2025 (WZ) I.A. No. 219/2026 (WZ)

¶6

Nizamuddin Asmad Jalal …..Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Jalal Zubair Zahid Hussain

¶9

….Respondents

¶10

Date of hearing: 31.08.2026

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. SUJIT KUMAR BAJPAYEE, EXPERT MEMBER

¶12

Applicant : Mr. Navid R. Mulani, Advocate Respondents : Ms. Manasi Joshi, Advocate for R-2

¶13

ORDER

¶14

From the side of Respondent No. 1- Jalal Zubair Zahid Hassan affidavit dated 27.08.2026 has been filed, wherein it is submitted that the industry of the respondent no. 1 was established in the year 2018 and hence the siting criteria for stone crusher laid down in Circular dated 04.03.2020 should not be applicable in the case in hand. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 1 is governed by the standing order dated 01.07.2003 which mentions that locality having Census code, must be taken as human habitation. Accordingly, the present respondent is fulfilling the siting criteria. The Distance Certificate issued from the side of Deputy Superintendent of Land and Record Mahad, Taluka Mahar, District Raigad, states that distance from Tol Gaothan (Census Village) is 505 Mtrs. which is fulfilling the distance criteria mentioned in the standing order 01.07.2003.

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

It is further mentioned in this affidavit that the closure direction was issued by respondent no. 2- MPCB dated 06.06.2022, which is not relevant today as pursuant to that the respondent had complied with the terms and conditions. Accordingly, restart was also issued.

¶17

It is further mentioned in this affidavit that the respondent no. 2 issued Consent to Operate on 30.11.2023 which is valid upto 30.04.2029.

¶18

All the other allegations that the respondent no. 1 is operating in excess and that dust is emitting from the stone crushing unit, causing damage to the surrounding environment are denied. The applicant’s house was built in the year 1996-97 and since then he is residing there, which is situated approximately 10 mtrs. from the road connecting village of Tal and Nandvi. This is said to be the primary reason for dust emission near the house of the applicant, which cannot solely be attributed to the activity of the respondent no. 1.

¶19

The allegation that river water from Savitri River is being used by respondent no. 1 is also denied. It is also mentioned that the lab report of the well water cannot be taken as proof because the alleged bad water quality cannot be solely attributed to the activity of respondent no. 1. The respondent no. 1 is using water from Kal River after having valid permission from the Irrigation Department.

¶20

The allegation of discharging sewage into the river is also denied.

¶21

From the side of respondent no. 2- MPCB reply affidavit dated 25.08.2026 has been filed, therein it is made clear that Ambient air quality monitoring report was carried out on 19.03.2024 and same was found to be within limits. Monitoring was carried out at the complainant’s house also on 16.07.2025 and the same was found within limits.

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

It is further mentioned that the Project Proponent has obtained Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate on 07.05.2025 for sand washing activity. Further, it is mentioned with respect to the siting criteria that the circular dated 09.06.2003 was in force during grant of consent to establish to respondent no. 1. The answering respondent had received Distance Certificate from Deputy Superintendent of Land Record Mahad, Taluka Mahad, District Raigad stating that distance of Tol Gaothan (Census Villages) is 505 Mtrs. (wrongly mentioned 592 Mtrs).

¶24

Copies of these two affidavits have already been served to the learned counsel for applicant, who does not want to file any rejoinder. Therefore, we have heard the arguments of learned counsel for applicant as well as learned counsel for other parties and in the light of the affidavits submitted by the respondents no. 1 and respondent no. 2, it is quite evident that the siting criteria of the stone crushing unit to be located beyond 500 Mtrs. from the house habitation has been met in the case in hand and besides that the ambient quality is also found to be not adverse to the Project Proponent and therefore, the grievance which has been raised by the learned counsel for applicant in his application not found too well to be substantiated. Accordingly, we dismiss this application.

¶25

Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM

¶26

Dr. Sujit Kumar Bajpayee, EM

¶27

August 31, 2026 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 161/2025 (WZ) I.A. No. 219/2026 (WZ)

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Nizamuddin Asmad Jalal v. Jalal Zubair Zahid Hussain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nizamuddin Asmad Jalal v. Jalal Zubair Zahid Hussain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suo Moto Titled Bypass Ban Gaya Kachra Dumping Point Mrat Maveshi Bhi Yahin Fek Rahe Sankraman Ka Khatra Dated 14TH August 2026 vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Suo Moto Titled Ab Rat Me Bhi Avaidh Khanan 9 Ghante Me Nikle Rahe 12 Truck Kopra Dated 28TH October 2025 in Db Star Bhopal Newspaper vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Surender Singh Parihar vs

Pratap Chandra Mohanty Aged About 46 Years S/O-Sunakar Mohanty vs 1. State of Odisha Represented by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Vaibhav Baban Satam vs Environment Department Government of Maharashtra

Abhijit Bhowmick vs State of West Bengal

Nitin Saxena vs Union of India Ministry of Environment Forest & Climate Change (Government of India)

Mainak Bhattacharyya vs Mp State Wetland Authority Epco

Prashant Vasant Mahadik vs Thane Municipal Corporation

Sarang Yadwadkar vs Union of India

Sarang Yadwadkar vs Union of India

News Item Titled Four Workers Killed in Storage Tank Explosion at Gujarat Industrial Unit Appearing in the Hindu Dated 03.12.2024 vs -Gujarat Pollution Control Board(Gpcb) through Its Member Secretary

News Item Titled Four Workers Killed in Storage Tank Explosion at Gujarat Industrial Unit Appearing in the Hindu Dated 03.12.2024 vs -Gujarat Pollution Control Board(Gpcb) through Its Member Secretary

Hakimuddin Kasamali Hathyari (Vohra) vs State of Gujarat through Secretary Industries and Mines Dept