Disposed

Shri Raj Saubhag Satsang Mandal v. Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

NGT3 Feb 2026Original Application No. 59/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal directed the GPCB to calculate and levy environmental compensation for stone crusher units that operated without a valid CCA subsequent to a lapsed compliance certificate, mandating a pre-imposition hearing thereafter to permit operations only upon compliance.

What did the court decide?

Directed GPCB to calculate and levy Environmental Compensation for operating without CCA after lapse, ensuring an opportunity of hearing prior to leviation.

Shri Raj Saubhag Satsang Mandal vs Ministry of… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No. 04

¶2

Pune Bench

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE [THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION]

¶4

Original Application No. 59/2025(WZ)

¶5

Shri. Raj Saubhag Satsang Mandal

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

MoEF& CC & Ors. Respondent(s)

¶9

Date of hearing: 03.02.2026

¶10

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

¶11

Applicant: Mr. Shiom K Pandit, Adv. for Applicant. Respondent: Mr. Aniruddha Kulkarni a/w Mr. Savyasachi Bharadwaj, Adv. for R-3/CPCB Mr. Maulik Nanavati, Ms. Manvi Damle, Advs. for R-8/GPCB

¶12

ORDER

¶13

By our previous order dated 03.12.2025, we had directed the respondent no.8-GPCB to submit a report giving the current status of the stone crusher plants i.e respondent nos. 11 to 18 which are the private respondents in the present case.

¶14

In pursuance to that, GPCB has submitted an undated report which is said to have been submitted on 02.02.2026.

¶15

In this report which begin from page 263 to 264, it is made clear that all the eight units were inspected earlier on 30.07.2025 to 31.07.2025 and it was observed that seven units were not in operation, while one unit had totally removed its plant & machinery. The board had issued notices to the seven units on 18.09.2025 for non-compliance. The GPCB has also conducted Environmental Clinic on 09.10.2025 to educate stone crusher industries for implementation of CPCB's 2023 Guidelines which focus on dust emission control. It is also made clear that these units are engaged in stone crushing activity only and not in mining activity, therefore, no EC was required. Another inspection was made on 29.01.2026 and its status is given in annexure-C in tabular form which is at page 287 to 290 of the

¶16

¶17

paper book. In this status report, it is made clear that only non-compliance was found to have been made by all these units related to that they did not provide chute from top of discharge point to the ground level and one side wind breaking wall was observed not constructed. All the units were not found operational. The Jaybhav Stone Industries-respondent no.18 had CCA which lapsed on 20.01.2026 thereafter they did not apply for its renewal. Respondent no.11- Shree Nilkanth Stone had CCA valid upto only 13.10.2025 and had not applied for its renewal.

¶18

As regards respondent no.16- Gayatri Stone Ind. It was found that their CCA had lapsed way back on 24.04.2023 and they had carried the operation without CCA, therefore, an amount of EC is required to be levied from that date when the CCA has lapsed till date of closure.

¶19

We direct the Learned Counsel for GPCB to calculate the amount of EC for this period and levy the same within one month from date of uploading of this order.

¶20

It need not be made clear that before imposition of environmental compensation an opportunity of hearing shall be given to the said respondents. We also make it clear that GPCB shall permit these units i.e private respondent nos. 11 to 18 to run and operate their activities only after they have complied with all the directions issued to them and have valid CCA.

¶21

We dispose of this original application with the above directions with liberty to the applicant to approach the Tribunal in case he has any grievance left.

¶22

Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM

¶23

Dr. S.K. Bajpayee, EM

¶24

February 03, 2026 Original Application No. 59/2025(WZ) JG.

¶25

Shri Raj Saubhag Satsang Mandal v. Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Raj Saubhag Satsang Mandal v. Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

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

Anantha Seetharam Reddy vs State of Telangana Rep. by Its Principal Secretary. Irrigation and Cad Department

Prasad Haribhau Jadhav vs Godavari Biorefineries Ltd.

Mr Suryakant J Shelake vs Ms Skb Builder India Pvt. Ltd.

Naveen Pandit vs Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam

Ramesh Chandra Kumawat vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Singh vs

Sakhubai Patil vs Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (Kspcb)

Sou Moto Newspeaper Article Published on People Samachar Dated 16TH April 2025 vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Taloja Industries Association vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Prasad Haribhau Jadhav vs Godavari Biorefineries Ltd.

Mr Suryakant J Shelake vs Ms Skb Builder India Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Sairam Realtors vs State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (Maharashtra)

M/S Sairam Realtors vs State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (Maharashtra)

M/S Sairam Realtors vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change