Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 52

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
B. Amit Sthalekar, JM, Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM
Sh. Manoj Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Bihar Foundry and Castings Limited – Respondent
Original Application No.148/2024/EZ|Original Application No.183/2023/EZ|Original Application No.44/2023/EZ

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Puran Sharma, Adv., Mr. Narender Pal Singh, Adv., Mr. Bharat Sharma, Adv., Mr. Harshit Shekhar, Adv., Mr. Ankit Burman, Adv., Mr. Anubhav Khastagir, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sanjay Upadhyay, Sr. Adv., Mr. Shubham Upadhyay, Adv., Ms. Mansi Bachani, Adv., Mr. Surya Gupta, Adv., Ms. Rashhmi Singhee, Adv., Mr. Surendra Kumar, Adv., Mr. Sibojyoti Chakrabarti, Adv., Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree, Adv., Mr. Ashok Prasad, Adv.

Environmental Compliance requires prior clearance for expansions, with violations subject to penalties and operational restrictions.

Headnote:(A) Environmental Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 15 and 19 - Issues relating to Environmental Clearance and Consent to Operate - Allegations against Bihar Foundry and Castings Limited regarding discrepancies in land area and operations without necessary approvals - Alleged violations of environmental laws and norms highlighted by various applicants. (Paras 1-8, 16-24, 41-60)

(B) Environmental Compliance - Necessity for obtaining prior Environmental Clearance before operational expansions and meeting established conditions. Violation of these norms can lead to penalties and operational restrictions. (Paras 35-66)

Facts of the case:
Applicants allege that Bihar Foundry and Castings Limited commenced operations without requisite Environmental Clearances for expansion, including installing additional furnaces and operating existing units without necessary approvals. Discrepancies in land area and operation against environmental norms were also claimed. Allegations of illegal groundwater abstraction were made, alongside environmental damage caused by the company's operations. (Paras 1-8, 41-44)

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal directed the relevant Pollution Control Board to rectify discrepancies in clearances and enforce compliance with environmental regulations. The operations without clear environmental authorizations were declared improper, and directions for remediation were noted. (Paras 50-60)

Issues: Key issues included the legitimacy of operational setups without Environmental Clearances, the appropriate area for operations, compliance with environmental standards, and a review of how violations were regulated amidst ongoing case deliberations. (Para 72)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of strict compliance with environmental regulations. It ruled that operations not meeting these standards, especially concerning the environmental assessments, have to cease until all violations are rectified. Any extensions or modifications to operations must also comply strictly with environmental protocols as per the governing law prior to changes. (Paras 15-32, 50-66)

Result: Original Applications disposed of, directing the respondent to address the grievances in line with statutory requirements and pending approvals. No costs awarded.

Table of Content
1. procedural details of the hearing and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. description of the environmental permits and discrepancies in land area. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. affidavit findings from the jharkhand state pollution control board. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. allegations and arguments regarding environmental violations. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)
5. court observations on the allegations and evidence. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. rejoinders and further allegations by the applicants. (Para 26 , 27)
7. response by the ministry and implications for the respondent. (Para 28 , 29)
8. final court directions on compliance with environmental regulations. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
9. judgment on environmental compliance and penalties. (Para 34 , 35)
10. court's order and implications moving forward. (Para 36)

ORDER

1. Mr. Puran Sharma, learned Counsel assisted by Mr. Narender Pal Singh and Mr. Bharat Sharma, learned Counsel is present (in Virtual Mode) for the Applicant in O.A. No.148/2024/EZ.

2. Mr. Harshit Shekhar, learned Counsel assisted by Mr. Ankit Burman is present for the Applicant in O.A. No.183/2023/EZ.

3. Mr. Anubhav Khastagir, learned Counsel is present for the Applicant in O.A. No.44/2023/EZ.

4. Affidavit dated 27.01.2025 has been filed by the Respondent No.4, Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board in O.A. No.44/2023/EZ;

the same is taken on record.

5. Mr. Surendra Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board in both the Original Applications states that the same affidavit shall be treated as read in Original Application No.183/2023/EZ also.

6. Learned Counsel for the parties state that the issue involved in O.A.

No.148/2024/EZ is identical to that of O.A. No.183/2023/EZ and O.A. No.44/2023/EZ.

7. In view of this matter, all the three Original Applications namely O.A. No.148/2024/EZ, O.A. No.183/2023/EZ and O.A.

No.44/2023/EZ are being taken up together for disposal.

(Final order of this case will be uploaded in NGT website by separate sheets of paper).

..................................... B. Amit Sthalekar, JM ............................................. Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM January 28, 2025, Original Application No.148/2024/EZ With Original Application No.183/2023/EZ With Original Application No.44/2023/EZ (I.A. No.67/2024/EZ)

OM Item Nos.07-09 Court No.1 BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)

Original Application No.148/2024/EZ IN THE MATTER OF Sh. Manoj Yadav S/o Late Sh. V.S. Yadav R/o Kundu Mohalla Presently known as Medni Nagar City Daltanganj, District-Palamu, Jharkhand;

Presently At:-

H. No. K-82 Gali No. 26, West Gonda, Delhi-110053 ..........Applicant(s)

Versus

1. Bihar Foundry and Castings Limited, Through its Chairman/Director Main Road, Ranchi, P.O.-G.P.O, PS- Sadar, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand-834001;

Also At:- Ramgarh Industrial Area, Marar Village, Ramgarh (Tehsil & District), Jharkhand-829117;

2. M/S GAUTAM FERRO ALLOYS LTD., Through its Managing Director At:- Ramgarh Industrial Area Marar Village, Ramgarh (Tehsil & District), Jharkhand-829117;

3. Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, Through Secretary, Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi – 110003;

4. Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, Through its Member Secretary, H.E.C., Dhurwa, Ranchi-834004, Jharkhand;

5. Central Pollution Control Board, Through Chairman, Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun Nagar, Delhi-110032;

6. Department of Forest, Environment & Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand, Through Principal Secretary, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi, Jharkhand-834002;

7. Central Ground water Authority of India, Through Member

18/11 Jamnagar House, Mansingh Road, New Delhi – 110011;

8. Central Ground water Board Mid Eastern Region, Through Regional Director, 6th & 7th Floor, Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Bhawan, Frazer Road, Dak Banglow, Patna, Bihar PIN-800011 ...........Respondent(s)

With Original Applicat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 52

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)B. Amit Sthalekar, JM, Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EMSh. Manoj Yadav – AppellantVersusBihar Foundry and Castings Limited – RespondentOriginal Application No.148/2024/EZ|Original Application No.183/2023/EZ|Original Application No.44/2023/EZ

Environmental Compliance requires prior clearance for expansions, with violations subject to penalties and operational restrictions.

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
B. Amit Sthalekar, JM, Dr. Arun Kumar Verma, EM
Sh. Manoj Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Bihar Foundry and Castings Limited – Respondent
Original Application No.148/2024/EZ|Original Application No.183/2023/EZ|Original Application No.44/2023/EZ