Allowed

Kedar Dattatray Gurav v. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods

NGT9 Apr 2026Original Application No. 85/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The NGT held that the Environment Compensation Fund of Rs.64.80 lakhs levied on M/s. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods for environmental violations is valid and not arbitrary. The Tribunal directed the respondent to deposit the amount within one month for environmental improvement.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.1 to deposit Rs.64,80,000 EDC within one month for environmental improvement; MPCB to submit usage report within one month thereafter.

Kedar Dattatray Gurav vs Ichalkaranji Agro Foods — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL WESTERN ZONE BENCH, PUNE

¶2

THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING (WITH HYBRID OPTION) **************

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.85/2024(WZ)

¶4

IN THE MATTER OF:

¶5

Kedar Dattatray Gurav R/at Near Ambabai Temple, Bhramanpuri, Miraj, District Sangli-41640 Maharashtra

¶6

…..Applicant Versus

¶7

1. M/s. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods (Slaughter House) R.S.No.613, Site No.115, Shanti Nagar Near Shanti Hotel, Thorat Chowk, Ichalkaranji, Tal. Hatkanangle, District Kolhapur 2. Ichalkaranji Municipal Corporation Through its Commissioner Ring Road, Station Road, Beside Guru Talkies, Ichalkaranji- 416115 3. The Collector of District Kolhapur Collector Office, Kolhapur -416002, Maharashtra, India 4. Maharashtra Pollution Control Board Through its Regional Officer, Udyog Bhavan, Kolhapur District Kolhapur-416002 .....Respondents Counsel for the Applicant: Mr. Omkar Wangikar, Advocate Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Satyajit Chavan, Advocate for R-1/PP Mr. Aditya S. Raktade, Advocate for R-2/IMC Ms. Manasi Joshi, Advocate for R-4/MPCB PRESENT: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh (Judicial Member) Hon’ble Dr. Sujit Kumar Bajpayee (Expert Member)

¶8

Reserved on : 13.03.2026 Pronounced on : 09.04.2026

¶9

Page 1 of 11

¶10

JUDGMENT

¶11

This application has been filed with the prayers that respondent no.1- M/s Ichalkaranji Agro Foods (Slaughter House) be directed to comply with the Proposed Directions dated 15.05.2023 and 31.08.2023 and Interim Directions dated 29.02.2024 issued by the respondent no.4MPCB for restoration and restitution of the nearby nalla/odha and river Panchganga to its original position; a direction be issued to the respondent No.4- MPCB to close down the slaughter house of respondent No.1; and an Expert Committee be constituted to quantify the environmental losses to be realized from the respondent no.1.

¶12

It is submitted in this application that the respondent no.1 is operating its Slaughter House illegally at R.S. No.613, Site No.115, Shanti Nagar, Near Shanti Hotel, Thorat Chowk, Ichalkaranji, Tal. Hatkanangle, District-Kolhapur and discharging untreated waste water into the nearby nalla/odha, which meets with river Panchaganga. The respondent no.1 has created illegal bypass arrangements to discharge untreated waste water directly into the nalla/odha, in violation of the terms and conditions of the Consent to Operate issued by the respondent No.4- MPCB.

¶13

It is further submitted in this application that a complaint dated 25.08.2023 was made by the applicant to the respondent No.4- MPCB, pursuant to which a visit of the premises of respondent No.1 was made by the Officials of respondent No.4- MPCB, who had collected treated effluent, which was discharged into the irrigation land on 11.04.2023, wherein various parameters of the treated effluent are found to be on much higher side. It is further mentioned in this application that no appropriate action has been taken by the respondent No.4- MPCB against the respondent No.1 in this regard, hence the applicant has approached this Tribunal.

¶14

Page 2 of 11

¶15

This matter was first heard on 26.04.2024 by this Tribunal when the same was admitted and notices were issued to the Respondents.

¶16

Respondent no.1- M/s. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods has submitted its reply affidavit dated 11.07.2024, wherein it is submitted that the respondent no.2- Ichalkaranji Municipal Corporation is controlling and managing the said slaughter house since the year 2004, by following due procedure of law and taking all the necessary permissions by carrying all the requisite permissions. The Answering Respondent has complied with all the directions issued by the Respondent no.4- Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) and is regularly operating pollution control systems and maintaining good housekeeping. The Answering Respondent also segregated all the slaughter-house waste properly and disposed of the same scientifically. They have provided 4 to 5 numbers of bypass arrangements for discharging effluent into nearby odha. The holes observed by the respondent no.4 in the boundary, which were presumed to be not a bypass arrangement, were actually the holes to drain rainwater. For the skin-cleaning activities, very negligible water is required, after cleaning, the effluent is collected and stored in a tank and transferred to ETP, which is hardly 500 ltrs/day in quantity. The respondent no.1 utilized the said water in their own farms.

¶17

It is further mentioned in this affidavit by respondent no.1 that the business of slaughterhouse is carried out as per the consent conditions. The slaughterhouse in question is managed as per the procedures laid down in the Slaughter House Rules, 2011.

¶18

It is further mentioned in this affidavit by respondent no.1 that the Answering Respondent has been operating the slaughter house since the year 2004 and till date, none of the residents of this area took objection on the operation of the slaughter house. The applicant is approaching

¶19

Page 3 of 11

¶20

the Tribunal after a span of all around 20 years of business. Hence, this application may be treated to be barred by limitation.

¶21

Respondent No.4- Maharashtra Pollution Control Board has submitted their reply affidavit dated 22.07.2024, wherein it is submitted that the Answering Respondent has granted Consent to Operate to respondent No.1- M/s Ichalkaranji Agro Foods for slaughter house activity under Red Category, subject to certain terms & conditions vide letter dated 08.02.2022 which is valid upto 31.10.2024.

¶22

It is further mentioned in this affidavit by respondent no.4 that the Answering Respondent has received various complaints from Shri Santosh Hatitikar regarding water and air pollution due to slaughtering activities in the surrounding area. The said complaints were investigated by the official of the Board on 11.04.2023 and it was observed that the industry was partly discharging generated effluent from bypass arrangement, provided by M/s Ichalkaranji Agro Foods, into odha backside of the premises. The Respondent’s Industry has also failed to comply with the Slaughter House Rules, 2011.

¶23

In view of above non-compliances, the Respondent Board has issued Proposed Direction to the Respondent’s Industry under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control Pollution) Act, 1974, Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Hazardous Wastes (M, H & T) Rules, 2008 vide letter dated 12.05.2023. The Board has extended the hearing to respondent no.1 and thereafter, interim directions were issued to it under Section 33A of Water (Prevention and Pollution Control) Act, 1974 directing therein to comply with the various directions and thereafter, a bank guarantee of Rs.2,50,000/- (Two Lakh fifty Thousand only) was forfeited.

¶24

It is further mentioned in this affidavit by respondent no.4 that in compliance of this Tribunal’s order dated 26.04.2024, the Board official

¶25

Page 4 of 11

¶26

along-with the Medical Health Officer of M/s. Ichalkaranji Municipal Corporation-respondent no.2 have conducted a joint visit at the site in question on 29.02.2024. During inspection, the unit was found in operation and engaged in slaughtering activity. The respondent no.1 was given Consent for 53.3m3/D of the effluent generated from the industry, for which ETP has been provided. It was further observed that the industry was discharging treated effluent on 3-acre of land for irrigation purposes. For the discharge of 3 MLD effluent, the industry has provided septic tank with soak pit. The generated non-hazardous waste i.e. type-1 (Vegetable matter such as Rumen, Stomach, intestine contents dungs & agriculture residue) & type-2 (Animal matter such as inedible offal’s, tissues etc.) are disposed to M/s. Maharashtra Food Processing Phaltan, District Satara.

¶27

The current status is also recorded in this affidavit by Respondent No.4 that the slaughtering activity was found not in operation. However, during the inspection, industry representatives have informed that the slaughtering was done only of one large animal i.e. buffalo for local market. ETP outlet sample was collected for analysis purposes. The status of the rest part is the same, which we have already recorded above.

¶28

Respondent no.1 has filed another reply affidavit dated 20^th January, 2025, wherein it is recorded that after thorough inspection, respondent no.4- State Pollution Control Board had issued direction dated 05.02.2023 which were duly complied with vide communication dated 26.12.2024. Thereafter, the Consent to Operate was extended to respondent no.1, which is valid till 31.10.2027, which grants the answering respondent to continue to operate its facility, subject to compliance with all the terms, conditions and regulatory requirements outlined in the Consent to Operate. The Type-1 waste (vegetable matter such as rumen, stomach contents, intestine contents, dung and

¶29

Page 5 of 11

¶30

agricultural residue) and Type-2 waste (animal matter such as inedible offal’s, tissues, etc.), is properly disposed of at M/s. Maharashtra Food Processing, Phaltan, District Satara, in accordance with the waste disposal protocols outlined in the consent.

¶31

A rejoinder affidavit dated 08.07.2025 against the reply affidavit of respondent no.4 has been filed by respondent no.1, wherein it is specifically mentioned that the period of 324 days’ violation, as alleged by respondent no.4, is not correct. Respondent no.1 has been making continuous efforts to comply with the consent condition and direction issued by respondent no.4 therein. They are regularly operating pollution control systems, maintaining good housekeeping, segregating all the slaughterhouse waste properly and disposing of the same scientifically. But some political vegetarian people have opposed the slaughter-houses and kept filing complaints, in order to blackmail the respondent no.1.

¶32

Respondent no.1 has not made bypass arrangements and never discharged effluent to the odha because their treated effluent is a good organic content fertilizer. The 4 to 5 holes in the boundary walls, which were found, were assumed to be the bypass arrangements because earlier here, when it rained heavily, rainwater came to their workshop and office, which got flooded so these holes were made. For skin cleaning activities, very negligible water is required. After cleaning activities, the answering respondent collects the effluent from the storage tank and transfers the same to the ETP hardly 500 ltrs./day in quantity and thereafter treated water is being utilized on their own farm.

¶33

Regarding M/s. Gayama Enterprises, it is submitted by respondent no.1 that it has closed its activities because all the material was sent to its concerned sister unit i.e. M/s Maharashtra Food Processing Unit, Phaltan, having rendering plant, for skin collection, cleaning, and applying the salt for maintaining the life and for sending to the vendors.

¶34

Page 6 of 11

¶35

Very negligible wastewater i.e. approximately 500 litters, is generated, which is being treated in their existing full-fledged ETP. Firstly, answering respondent is following the Slaughtering House Rules, 2011. There are 2 to 3 cemeteries near their establishments and all the city hotels’ chicken wastages and chicken shops’ wastage are being collected in drums and thrown into the odha near respondent no.1’s Unit, regarding which they complained so many times to the Nagar Parishad, but no action has been taken.

¶36

The amount of EDC Rs. 64,80,000/- (Sixty-Four Lakhs Eighty Thousand Rupees Only) is excessive, as the same does not reflect the actual environmental impact, especially considering the remedial action already undertaken. The said amount has been calculated without affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondent no.1, hence the same is treated to be in violation of the principles of natural justice. The forfeiture of Bank Guarantee of Rs.2,50,000/- (Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand Rupees Only) has already caused significant financial strain to the respondent no.1.

¶37

A Joint Committee was also constituted by this Tribunal vide order dated 29.04.2025, which has submitted its report dated 10.07.2025, in which following observations have been made:-

¶38

“ 1. At the time of visit, the unit was not in operation as informed by industry representatives the unit is not in operation due to non-availability of the livestock. Also they informed that they are receiving averagely 50 to 60 animals and operations of the slaughter house are not regular due to non-availability of raw material. (They have submitted the records of daily Ante mortem Examination Report for last five months).

¶39

2. Committee visited all the facilities provided for the Slaughtering activity such as Antemortem Inspection area, Holding Area, Halal, Processing including separation of Skin and Horn and offal’s (Rumen, Tribes, Intestine, Omasum, etc).

¶40

Page 7 of 11

¶41

3. Committee visited to the ETP which is of capacity 60 CMD consisting of Primary, secondary and Filtration treatment as Duel media filter, Treated Water Storage Tank, Sludge Drying Beds.

¶42

4. At the time of visit ETP found in operation i.e. aeration system and recirculation of effluent is found in operation. No effluent generation and disposal found due to non-operation of Slaughtering activity.

¶43

5. Industry has provided 8 acres of agricultural land opposite side of the Nalla for disposal of treated effluent. During the visit Sugar Cane crop is observed at said agriculture land. As informed by representative they are disposing the treated effluent through close pipeline in the said agriculture land. Committee has verified the closed pipeline for treated effluent disposal.

¶44

6. Representative informed the Solid waste generated Type-I (Vegetable matter such as Rumen, Stomach, intestine contents dungs & agriculture residue) is disposing through closed Tractor Trolleys to own Agricultural land at Kondigre, Tal. Shirol for composting purpose. Type-2 (Animal matter such as inedible offal’s, tissues etc.) is disposed to M/s. Maharashtra Food Processing Phaltan, District-Satara and they have submitted the letter regarding the same.

¶45

7. As per earlier MPCB visit to M/s. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods dated 11.04.2023 the non-compliances were noticed such as poor operation of the ETP and arrangement for discharge of effluent into nalla located backside of unit. During the visit of Committee ETP found operational, and observed that they have closed the discharge arrangement to nalla permanently. During the visit no any discharge of effluent observed in to nalla.

¶46

8. Also in the earlier visit of the MPCB dated 11.04.2023 and Ichalkaranji Municipal Corporation letter dated 28.08.2023 discharge of the effluent from the skin cleaning, washing activity from the premises of the M/s. Gamma Enterprises was observed. During the visit of Joint Committee industry representative informed that they have only skin storage activity at the same place and Now they have provided collection tank with arrangement of pumping the leachate to

¶47

Page 8 of 11

¶48

their existing ETP at M/s. Ichalkarani agro Foods through closed pipeline, which is verified by Joint Committee.

¶49

9. Also they have separated the storm water by the provision of open Drain channel at the entrance of the storage premises at M/s. Gamma Enterprises and same is diverted to the Nalla.

¶50

10. Earlier Gamma Enterprises the sister company of the Ichalkaranji Agro Foods was engaged in the oil Extraction from the Animal Bones. During the visit Committee observed that, said activity was not in operation and as informed by industry representatives the said activity was not in operation since 2018-2019.

¶51

11. It was observed that they have blocked the pipe holes in the wall with cement concrete in the premises of M/s. Gamma Enterprises.

¶52

Conclusion:-

¶53

Joint Committee gone through the documents produced by the Industry M/s. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board and Ichalkaranji Municipal Corporation and observed that MPCB mentioned First evidence of the noncompliance regarding the poor operation and maintenance of the ETP and disposal of the effluent into nalla on 11.04.2023. In connection to the observed non-compliance MPCB has issued proposed direction on 12.05.2023 and on the basis of compliance report submitted MPCB has visited dated 29.02.2024 and observed that industry has complied with the directions, i.e. duration of the non-compliance 324 days. MPCB has also forfeited Bank Guarantee of Rs. 2.5 Lakhs against the non-compliance observed. At the time of Joint Committee visit it was observed that Industry has upgraded the ETP and stopped discharge of effluent into nalla by taking corrective measures as per directions and at present there is no any discharge of effluent outside the plant premises.”

¶54

Additional reply affidavit dated 15.07.2025 has been filed by respondent no.4- State Pollution Control Board, wherein it is recorded that a reply dated 17.05.2023 has been received from the industry as well as a letter from the Medical Health Officer, Ichalkaranji Municipal

¶55

Page 9 of 11

¶56

Corporation dated 28.08.2023, along-with the site inspection report of Sanitary Inspector, in which they have stated the discharge of effluent outside the factory premises into nalla through pipeline by the Respondent industry. Based on that, the Board has issued Proposed Direction on 31.08.2023 to the respondent no.1- Industry. Even after the said proposed direction and reply submitted by the industry on 17.05.2023, the respondent-industry continued non-compliances as per the Medical Health Officer, Ichalkaranji Municipal Corporation letter dated 28.08.2023. Also, as per the report of MPC Board Officials dated 29.02.2024, the Respondent industry has complied with the said directions. So, duration of non-compliance is considered for the period from 11.04.2023 to 29.02.2024 (total 324 days), for which EDC calculation has been done.

¶57

We have heard the argument of learned counsel for the applicant as well as that of learned counsel for respondent no.1 and respondent no.4 and perused the entire record in depth.

¶58

From the affidavit filed by the respondent no.4-State Pollution Control Board, it is evident that the non-violations were found on the part of the respondent no.1 for a period from 11.04.2023 to 29.02.2024 (total 324 days), for which an amount of EDC to the tune of Rs.64,80,000/- (Sixty-Four Lakhs Eighty Thousand Rupees Only) has been calculated to be levied from respondent no.1. Against this calculation, there is no objection filed by the respondent no.1- Project Proponent. The said violation also stands substantiated by the Joint Committee in its Report, against which too, there was no objection filed by the respondent no.1. Therefore, since the said estimated EDC amount of Rs.64,80,000/- (Sixty-Four Lakhs Eighty Thousand Rupees Only) was never contested, it should be allowed to be realized from the respondent no.1 by the MPCB.

¶59

Page 10 of 11

¶60

From the side of the respondent no.1, a written submission dated 15.03.2026 is submitted, wherein the above amount of EDC has been said to be calculated arbitrarily. But we are not satisfied from the submissions made therein that the said amount has been calculated arbitrarily and we confirm the said amount of EDC to be levied from Respondent No.1.

¶61

In view of above analysis, we dispose of this application with a direction that an amount of EDC to the tune of Rs.64,80,000/- (SixtyFour Lakhs Eighty Thousand Rupees Only) be deposited by respondent no.1 with the MPCB within one month from the date of uploading of this Judgment. After depositing the said amount of EDC, the same shall be utilized by the MPCB for improvement of environment in the area in question within six months thereafter. A report in this regard shall be submitted by the MPCB to the Registry of this Tribunal within one month after utilizing the said amount of EDC.

¶62

Dinesh Kumar Singh, JM

¶63

Dr. Sujit Kumar Bajpayee, EM

¶64

April 09, 2026 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.85/2024(WZ) J.G.

¶65

Page 11 of 11

Kedar Dattatray Gurav v. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kedar Dattatray Gurav v. Ichalkaranji Agro Foods

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

News Item Titled Bhojpur Bangrasia Fourlane Sadak Nirmaan Shuru Pedo Ki Shifting Ke Naam Par Ho Rahi Katai Appearing in Nav Duniya News Paper Dated 31ST October 2025 vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Deepak Awasthi vs

Sanu Das vs State of Odisha

Rameez Hassin Warsi vs State of West Bengal

Durai Varathan vs District Collector Tiruvannamalai District

Gaurav Prakash vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Prabhat Pandey vs State of Madhya Pradesh through the Principal Secretary Urban Development & Housing Department

Satyendra Kumar Sharma vs Union of India

Joe Fernandez vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

News Item Titled Maharashtra: 22 Workers Injured in Boiler Explosion at Steel Factory in Jalna Appearing in India Tv Dated 24.08.2024 vs Member Secretary Maharashtra State Pollution Control Board

Shamshir Abdul Wahab Khan vs Seiaa

Dharti Quarry Works vs State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

Ashapura Quarry Works vs State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

Tanaji Balasaheb Gambhiretanaji Balasaheb Gambhire vs Union of India through Secretary Moef & Cc