2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 1220

Item Nos.10&11 Court No.1 BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL EASTERN ZONE BENCH, KOLKATA (THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING WITH HYBRID MODE)
Original Application No.82/2023/EZ With Execution Application No.03/2024/EZ In Original Application No.82/2023/EZ IN THE MATTER OF:
Santoshpur Mitali Sangha, Through its authorized Signatory, Shri Avi Bag, Secretary, Banerjee Para, Village – Santoshpur, P.O. – Adi Kashimpur, P.S. Duttapukur, North 24 Parganas, Pin – 743248, …. Applicant(s)
Versus
1. State of West Bengal, Through the Chief Secretary, Department of Environment, 5^th Floor, Pranisampad Bhawan, Block LB-II, Salt Lake, Sector-III, Bidhannagar, Kolkata, Pin – 700106, 2. West Bengal State Pollution Control Board, Through its Member Secretary, Paribesh Bhawan, 10A, Block-LA, Sector-III, Bidhannagar, Kolkata – 700106, 3. Central Pollution Control Board, Through the Member Secretary, Parivesh Bhawan, CBD-cum-Office Complex, East Arjun Nagar, Delhi – 110032, 4. District Magistrate, North 24 Parganas, New Administrative Building, Barasat, Kolkata, Pin – 700124, 5. Pradhan, Kashimpur Gram Panchayat, Bamunpara, Digha, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal – 743248, 6. Block Development Officer Barasat-I Development Block, Chhota Jagulia, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, Pin – 700124, 7. Suravi Sadan Gaushala, Through the President of Rajasthan Gokalyan Trust, Santoshpur, Barasat, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal – 743248, 8. Rajasthan Gokalyan Trust, Through its President, Santoshpur, Barasat, North 24 Parganas, West Bengal Pin – 743248, …. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing and reserving of order: 12.08.2024 Date of uploading of order in NGT Website: 11.09.2024 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ritwick Dutta, Advocate (in Virtual Mode) a/w Mr. Kaustav Dhar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajib Ray, Adv. for R-1, 4 & 6, (in Virtual Mode)
Mr. Ayush Kumar Dadhich, Advocate for R-2, Mr. Dipanjan Ghosh, Advocate for R-3, Mr. Amritam Mandal, Advocate a/w Ms. Shipra Naskar & Mr. Sanjay Sadhu, Advs. for R-7 & 8,
ORDER
1. The allegation of the Applicant in the present Original Application is that the Respondent No.7 is illegally operating a ‘Gaushala’ in the name and style of ‘Suravi Sadan Gaushala’ under the Rajasthan Gokalyan Trust, Respondent No.8.
2. It is alleged that the said Gaushala Unit of Respondent No.7 operated by Respondent No.8, both hereinafter referred to as the Project Proponent, is operating for several years without a valid Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate from the West Bengal Pollution Control Board.

3. It is also alleged that the Respondent No.7 Unit is operating in violation of the provisions of ‘Guidelines for Environmental Management of Dairy Farms and Gaushalas’ published by the Central Pollution Control Board in July, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as the Guidelines, 2021).
4. It is further alleged that the Respondent No.7 Gaushala is located within 60 meters and 80 meters from residential dwellings and schools instead of being located beyond 100 meters from the residential areas and, therefore, its siting is in violation of the Guidelines, 2021.
5. The allegation of the Applicant further is that dung and fodder residue are washed into the drains leading to clogging of the drains. It is stated that as per the Central Pollution Control Board Notification dated 07.03.2016, ‘Dairy Farm’ is listed under ‘Orange’ category and the requirement of obtaining Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, and the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, are mandatory for Red, Orange and Green category industries.
6. It is further stated that the Applicant had moved a RTI application before the West Bengal Pollution Control Board vide his letter dated 12.05.2023, seeking information regarding Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate granted to the Respondent No.7, Suravi Sadan Goshala, but the reply in response thereto dated 23.06.2023 merely states that ‘no information is available regarding the matter’.

7. At the time of admission, this Tribunal constituted a fact finding Committee comprising of the following Members:-
(i) Senior Scientist, West Bengal Pollution Control Board,
(ii) Senior Scientist, Central Pollution Control Board, and
(iii) District Magistrate, North 24 Parganas, or his nominee not below the rank of Additional District Magistrate, 8. The Committee was required to visit the site in question and submit its report with regard to the allegations made in the Original Application and in case violations were found, the Committee was also required to suggest remedial measures as well as determine Environmental Compensation.
9. Along with the Original Application, the Applicant has filed photographs (Annexure-A/2), showing extremely filthy and unhygienic condition existing in the Suravi Sadan Gaushala, Respondent No.7, and the waste discharged therefrom.
10. Along with the Original Application, copy of the Central Pollution Control Board directions dated 07.03.2016 (Annexure-A/3) in the nature of ‘Final Document on Revised Classification of Industrial Sectors under Red, Orange, Green and White Categories (February 29, 2016)’ has been filed. Table G-3 thereof which is the Final List of Orange Category of Industrial Sectors has been issued and dairy and dairy products (small scale) have been included in the ‘Orange’ category at Item No.24 thereof and under the heading ‘Remarks’ it is characterized as ‘water and air polluting both’.
11. Further guidelines have been issued by the Central Pollution Control Board known as ‘Guidelines for Environmental Management of Dairy Farms and Gaushalas’, (July, 2021), copy of which has been filed from page 66 onwards of the paper book, already referred to hereinabove as ‘Guidelines, 2021’.

12. Para 2 of the Guidelines, 2021, categorizes Dairy Farms and Gaushalas on the basis of number of bovine animals in a Dairy/Gaushala located in urban, peri-urban and rural area. Para 2.2 of the Guidelines, 2021, deals with Gaushalas having upto 100 animals, 1,000 animals and more than 1,000 animals which can be categorized as small, medium and large Gaushalas respectively.
Para 2.2 of the Guidelines, 2021, reads as under:- “2. Categorization of Dairy Farms and Gaushalas …………..……..x…………….x………………………….x………….
2.2 Gaushalas Similarly, inventory received from SPCBs/PCCs for Gaushalas and it is analysed that 15-20 % Gaushalas having upto 100 animals and 80-85% Gaushalas having more than 100 animals. Therefore, Gaushala having upto 100 animals, 1000 animals & more than 1000 animals can be categorized as small, medium & large Gaushala, respectively. It has been analysed that 5055%, 5-10% and 35-45% Gaushalas located in urban, peri-urban & rural area, respectively.”
13. Para 3 of the Guidelines, 2021, deals with ‘Environmental Issues in Dairy Farms and Gaushalas’ and notes that major environmental issues of Dairy Farms and Gaushalas are related to disposal of dung and urinal waste water. It is stated that a bovine animal, on an average, weighs 400 kilograms and discharges 15-20 kilograms/day of dung and 12-14 litres/day of urine. It is also stated that solid wastes produced from Dairy Farms and Gaushalas are bovine dung, feed residue etc. which are organic and non- hazardous in nature but requires proper handling and disposal.

Para 3 of the Guidelines, 2021, reads as under:-
“3. Environmental Issues in Dairy Farms and Gaushalas Major environmental issues of Dairy farms and Gaushalas are related to disposal of dung and urinal wastewater. Poor handling & disposal of dung and wastewater causes water pollution & odour problem. A Bovine animal, on an average, weigh 400 kg and discharges 15-20 kg/day of dung and 12-14 litres/day of urine. Solid wastes produced from Dairy farms and Gaushalas are bovine dung, feed residue, etc. which are organic and non-hazardous in nature but requires proper handling and disposal.”
14. Para 3.1.1 of the Guidelines, 2021, deals with Urban & Peri-Urban Area and notes that the issue of disposal of dung and waste water from Dairy farms is predominant in urban and peri-urban area where it is discharged in drains, leading to clogging, which ultimately reach to and pollute rivers; these clogged drains become breeding ground for mosquitoes thereby creating health hazards and odour nuisance; waste water is generated from floor cleaning, bathing of animals, urine etc. and disposed of without treatment into drains; dung produces many gases/compounds such as – Carbon Dioxide, Ammonia, Hydrogen Sulphide, Methane etc. which are emitted into the atmosphere and are responsible for odour. Para 3.1.1 of the Guidelines, 2021, reads as under:-
“3.1.1 Urban & Peri-urban Area Majority of Dairy Farms are in clusters. Issue of disposal of dung & wastewater from Dairy farms is predominant in urban & peri-urban area where it is discharged in drains, leading to clogging, which ultimately reach to and pollute rivers. These clogged drains become breeding ground for mosquitoes creating health hazards and odour nuisance. Wastewater is generated from floor cleaning, bathing of animals, urine, etc. and disposed of without treatment into drains. Dung produces many gases/compounds such as carbon dioxide, ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, methane, etc. which emitted into atmosphere and responsible for odour.”

15. Para 3.2 of the Guidelines, 2021, deals with Gaushalas in Urban & Peri-urban Area and Rural Area.
16. Para 4 of the Guidelines deals with Methods for Disposal/Utilisation of Dung which reads as under:-
“4. Methods for Disposal/Utilisation of Dung Majority Disposal of bovine dung is biggest challenge in dairy farms and gaushalas. However, bovine dung, if effectively utilised, can be a resource of manure & energy. Bovine dung may be used for many purposes i.e. for combustion (dung wood) or for producing biogas or as soil conditioner or as fertilizers or as material for wall plastering, etc. Following methods for disposal/utilisation of solid wastes (dung) may be adopted:
a. Composting/Vermicomposting: Composting is a manure management practice to reduce impact on the environment. Composting is biological decomposition and stabilization of organic material. The process produces a final product that is stable, free of pathogens, reduced odours and can be applied on land as manure. Vermicomposting is method of preparing compost with use of earthworms that enriches soil quality by improving its physicochemical and biological properties. It is becoming popular as a major component of organic farming system.
b. Biogas/Compressed biogas (CBG) production: Biogas plants are best way to handle dung waste. Biogas is generated in process of biodegradation of organic materials under anaerobic conditions which may be utilised for cooking and power generation. Biogas plant generated digested organic manure for crops. Biogas can be processed and filled in cylinders. Bio- gas may be further purified to remove hydrogen sulphide (H2S), carbon dioxide (CO2) & water vapour and compressed (known as Compressed Bio Gas, CBG) which has methane (CH4) content of more than 90% as per BIS standard IS 16087:2016. CBG has calorific value and other properties similar to CNG and hence can be utilized as green renewable fuel as replacement of CNG in automotive, industrial and commercial areas.

c. Manufacture of dung wood or dung cake to be used as fuel:
Bovine dung can be used as fuel as a replacement of firewood. Bovine dung can be dewatered and converted to value added products such as logs, powder etc. by mechanized/semi-mechanized machines.
Following options for disposal/utilization of dung may be adopted by Dairy Farms and Gaushalas:
17. Para 5 of the Guidelines, 2021, lays down the guidelines for Waste Management in Dairy Farms. Para 5.1 lays down guidelines for Waste Management in Dairy Farms located in Urban & Peri-urban Area. Para 5.1 and its sub-paras 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.1.3 & 5.1.4, deal with Solid Waste Management, Wastewater Management, Air Quality Management and Siting Policy respectively, which read as under:-

“5. Guidelines for Waste Management in Dairy Farms ………………..x……………………….x…………….…x………………
5.1 Guidelines for Waste Management in Dairy Farms located in Urban & Peri-urban Area
5.1.1 Solid Waste Management Guidelines to be followed for management of solid wastes are as under:-
i. Dung from floor of shed should be collected at regular interval, so as to keep floor clean. Surrounding areas should also be cleaned regularly to prevent obnoxious smell in area.
ii. Premises and its surrounding areas should be properly sanitized and disinfected, e.g. by sprinkling crushed lime.
iii. Dung & fodder residue etc. should not be washed into drains in order to avoid clogging of drains. Local bodies/corporations/SPCBs should ensure that untreated wastes are not discharged outside premises.
iv. Collected solid wastes should be stored properly for its utilization.
v. Small Dairy Farms may adopt dung for manufacture of dung wood/dung cake or composting/vermicomposting or combination of both methods for disposal/utilization of solid wastes. In case of cluster, biogas/compressed biogas production may be adopted for disposal/utilization of solid wastes in association with entrepreneurs or local dairy farmers association. Local bodies/corporations/SPCBs should facilitate Dairy farmers/entrepreneurs/NGOs in setting up of individual or common utilization facilities.
vi. Medium & Large Dairy Farms may adopt a combination of disposal/utilization methods like manufacturing of dung wood or biogas generation or vermicomposting. However, Large Dairy Farms may setup biogas/compressed biogas production facility either by themselves or in association with entrepreneurs.
vii. Domestic hazardous wastes (vaccines, vails, medicines, syringes, etc.) should be disposed as per provisions of “Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016”. If they have their own medical facilities then wastes should be disposed as per provisions of “Bio-medical Waste Management Rules, 2016.

5.1.2 Wastewater Management Guidelines for management of wastewater are as follows:-
i. Water should be judiciously used for bathing of bovines and other services including floor cleaning to contain wastewater quantity to 100 litres/day/bovine.
ii. Adequate infrastructure should be provided to ensure proper handling, treatment and disposal of wastewater. They may set-up individual or common treatment facilities where in cluster. Local bodies/corporations/SPCBs should facilitate Dairy farmers/ entrepreneurs/NGOs in setting up of individual or common treatment facilities.
iii. Wastewater should be adequately treated so as to meet standards as prescribed by SPCBs/PCCs.
iv. Flooring of shed should be properly paved (impervious) with a wastewater collection system. However, floor should not be slippery in order to ensure safety of animals.
5.1.3 Air Quality Management Guidelines for management of air quality/emissions are as follows:-
i. Animal housing should be ventilated allowing sufficient supply of fresh air to remove humidity, dissipate heat and prevent build-up of gases such as methane, carbon dioxide, ammonia, etc.
ii. Good housekeeping practices like maintaining proper sanitary conditions, protecting dung from unwanted pests/insects should be followed in order to minimize odour nuisance.
iii. Floor, feeding, water and air spaces available for each animal should be adequate for standing, resting, loafing, movement, feeding, watering and ventilation. Space requirements should be provided as per Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (refer BIS: 12237-1987 given at Annexure-I).
iv. It is suggested to obtain ration advisory for improving/modifying quality and dosage of feed/forage/supplements from any of agricultural institutes/departments like Krishi Vigyan Kendra, State Dairy Department, Animal Husbandry Department, NDRI, NDDB, etc. in order to reduce enteric methane generations from livestock. It is beneficial to animal health/nutrition and reduced impact on environment.

v. Plantation of trees or green belts, wherever feasible, to provide a barrier against the spread of foul smell or noise originating from them. 5.1.4 Siting Policy Siting criteria will be applicable for new establishment. Existing establishments should take appropriate environmental friendly practices as per Guidelines. Dairy farm shall be setup as per siting policy/guidelines of local administration and may follow criteria as below:
i. It should be located in area wherever permissible and atleast 100 meters away from residential dwellings, health centres/hospitals & schools in order to avoid odour problem, ii. At least 200 meters away from water spread area of major watercourses like Lake, canal and major drinking water sources, iii. Away from flood plain area of River and areas having shallow groundwater.
iv. At least 5 meters of inter-se distance between two establishments (each establishment should provide 2.5 meters from each side) for ventilation should be provided and developed green belt.
18. Para 5.2 of the Guidelines, 2021, lays down guidelines for Waste Management in Dairy Farms located in Rural Area. Para 5.2 and its sub-paras 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3 & 5.2.4, deal with Solid Waste Management, Wastewater Management, Air Quality Management and Siting Policy respectively, which read as under:-
5.2 Guidelines for Waste Management in Dairy Farms located in Rural Area
5.2.1 Solid Waste Management i. Dung should be collected & stored properly for its utilization. It should be used as compost in field or in making dung wood or vermi-compost. Biogas production may be practiced wherein cluster as a source of energy for rural area.

ii. Dung & fodder residue should not be washed into drains in order to avoid clogging of drains and surrounding areas should also be cleaned regularly to prevent obnoxious smell in area.
iii. Provisions of “Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016” should be followed for disposal of domestic hazardous wastes (vaccines, vails, medicines, syringes, etc.).
5.2.2 Wastewater Management
i. Water should be judiciously used to contain wastewater quantity to 100 litres/day/ bovine.
ii. Floor should be paved and wastewater should be collected and utilized for agriculture purpose. Floor should not be slippery in order to ensure safety of animals.
iii. Wastewater should be adequately treated so as to meet standards as prescribed by SPCBs/PCCs.
5.2.3 Air Quality Management
i. Animal housing should be ventilated allowing sufficient supply of fresh air to remove humidity, dissipate heat and prevent build-up of gases.
ii. Good housekeeping practices should be followed in order to minimize odour nuisance.
iii. Floor, feeding, water and air spaces available for each animal should be adequate for standing, resting, loafing, movement, feeding, watering and ventilation. Space requirements should be provided as per Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (refer BIS: 11799-2005 given at Annexure-II).
iv. It is suggested to obtain Ration advisory for improving/modifying quality and dosage of feed/forage/supplements from any of agricultural institutes/departments like Krishi Vigyan Kendra, State Dairy Department, Animal Husbandry Department, NDRI, NDDB, etc. to reduce enteric methane generations from livestock.
v. Plantation of trees or green belts, wherever feasible, to provide a barrier against spread of foul smell or noise originating from them.
5.2.4 Siting Policy Siting criteria will be applicable for new establishment. Existing establishments should take appropriate environmental friendly practices as per Guidelines. Dairy farm shall be setup as per siting policy/guidelines of local administration.

These should be located away from residential dwellings/hospitals/schools in order to avoid odour issue as per siting norms of local administration. It should be atleast 100 meters away from water spread area of major drinking water sources in order to avoid contamination of water bodies. These should be away from flood plain areas of River and areas having shallow groundwater.
Atleast 5 meters of inter-se distance between two establishments for ventilation, this space of 5 meters (2.5 meters from each side from each unit) shall be developed for green belt.”
19. Para 6 of the Guidelines, 2021, lays down guidelines for Waste Management in Gaushalas. Para 6.1 deals with Solid Waste Management, para 6.2 deals with Water Management, para 6.3 deals with Air Quality Management, and para 6.4 deals with Siting Policy. Para 6 and its sub-paras read as under:-
“6. Guidelines for Waste Management in Gaushalas Following guidelines are framed for management of wastes from Gaushalas located in urban, peri-urban & rural area. These guidelines are applicable to establishment which are discharging their wastes into environment. These establishments shall also follow existing laws, rules, guidelines, directions and standard operating procedures issued by different organizations.
6.1 Solid Waste Management Guidelines to be followed for management of solid wastes are as under:-
i. Dung from floor of shed should be collected at regular interval, so as to keep floor clean. Surrounding areas should also be cleaned regularly to prevent obnoxious smell in area.
ii. Premises and its surrounding areas should be properly sanitized and disinfected, e.g. by sprinkling crushed lime.
iii. Dung & fodder residue etc. should not be washed into drains in order to avoid clogging of drains. Local bodies/corporations/SPCBs should ensure that untreated wastes are not discharged outside premises.

iv. Solid wastes should be stored properly for its utilization in dung wood manufacturing or biogas generation or vermicomposting. In case of small & medium scale Gaushalas, a combination any of methods may be adopted for utilization of dung wherein large scale Gaushalas may setup biogas generation facility at its own or in partnership with entrepreneurs.
v. Domestic hazardous wastes (vaccines, vails, medicines, syringes, etc.) should be disposed as per provisions of “Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016”. If they have their own medical facilities then the wastes should be disposed as per provisions of “Bio-medical Waste Management Rules, 2016”.
6.2 Wastewater Management Guidelines for management of wastewater are as follows:-
i. Dung Water should be judiciously used for bathing of bovines and other services to contain wastewater quantity to 50 litres/day/bovine. (As water utilized by Gaushala is less in comparison to Dairy Farm due to occasional bathing & mechanized floor cleaning).
ii. Adequate infrastructure should be set-up to ensure proper handling, treatment and disposal of wastewater. Local bodies/corporations/SPCBs should facilitate Gaushala owners/ entrepreneurs/NGOs in setting up of treatment facilities.
iii. Wastewater should be adequately treated so as to meet standards as prescribed by SPCBs/PCCs or utilized for various medicinal purpose.
iv. Flooring of shed should be properly paved (impervious) with a wastewater collection system. However, floor should not be slippery in order to ensure safety of animals.
6.3 Air Quality Management Guidelines for management of air quality/emissions are as follows:-
i. Animal housing should be ventilated allowing sufficient supply of fresh air to remove humidity, dissipate heat and prevent build-up of gases.
ii. Good housekeeping practices like maintaining proper sanitary conditions, protecting dung from unwanted pests/insects should be followed in order to minimize odour nuisance.

iii. Floor, feeding, water and air spaces available for each animal should be adequate for standing, resting, loafing, movement, feeding, watering and ventilation. Space requirements should be provided as per Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (refer BIS: 11942-1986 given at Annexure- III).
iv. It is suggested to obtain Ration advisory for improving/modifying quality and dosage of feed/forage/supplements from any of agricultural institutes/departments like Krishi Vigyan Kendra, State Dairy Department, Animal Husbandry Department, NDRI, NDDB, etc. to reduce enteric methane generations from livestock.
v. Plantation of trees or green belts, wherever feasible, to provide a barrier against spread of foul smell or noise originating from them.
6.4 Siting Policy Siting criteria will be applicable for new establishment. Existing establishments should take appropriate environmental friendly practices as per Guidelines. Gaushala shall be setup as per siting policy/guidelines of local administration.
These should be located atleast 100 meters away from residential dwellings/schools/hospitals in order to avoid odour issue and away from the water spread area of major drinking water sources. These should be away from flood plain areas of River and areas having shallow groundwater. Atleast 5 meters of inter-se distance between two establishments for ventilation, this space of 5 meters (atleast 2.5 meters from each side from each unit) shall be developed for green belt.”
20. Para 7 of the Guidelines, 2021, lays down the Regulatory/Monitoring Mechanism for Dairy Farms & Gaushalas, which reads as under:-
“7. Regulatory/Monitoring Mechanism for Dairy Farms &Gaushalas
i. Local authorities/corporations should carry out inventory of Dairy farms and Gaushalas located in their jurisdiction in inventory performa given at Annexure-IV and same should be updated & shared with concerned SPCB/PCC on annual basis (calendar year wise).

ii. Local bodies/municipal corporations shall publish a public notice in newspapers and on their website for registration of Dairy farms and Gaushalas as per municipal laws. Registration may be done preferably through online mode and same may be displayed at their websites.
iii. SPCBs/PCCs shall publish a public notice for Dairy farms &Gaushalas to obtain consent to establish and consent to operate under Water Act, 1974 as well as Air Act, 1981 as per the categorization of industries in Orange and Green Category, respectively.
iv. SPCBs/PCCs/local bodies/municipal corporations shall upload Environmental Guidelines on their website and also circulate to all Dairy farms and Gaushalas.
v. Concerned SPCBs/PCCs/local bodies/corporations should monitor dairy farms and gaushalas on regular basis to ensure proper disposal of bovine dung and wastewater to check compliance of environmental norms. SPCBs/PCCs will consider carrying capacity of surroundings while allowing a new establishment and laying down environmental norms.
vi. SPCBs/PCCs shall carry out environmental audit of atleast 2 Dairy farms and 2 Gaushalas, randomly selected from each district of State/UT and submit compliance and action taken report to CPCB on half yearly basis.
vii. SPCBs/PCCs shall submit status of compliance of guidelines by Dairy farms and Gaushalas located in their jurisdiction in form of report once in six months to CPCB for Audit purpose.
viii. CPCB shall carry out environmental auditing of 4 Dairy farms and 4 Gaushalas in each State/UT, randomly selected based on information received from SPCBs/PCCs on annual basis.
ix. In case of any violation of environmental norms under Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Environmental (Protect) Act, 1986 by Dairy farms and Gaushalas, concerned SPCBs/PCCs should impose environmental compensation as per CPCB methodology for “Environmental Compensation to be levied on Industrial Units”, for damaging the environment and in order to stop polluting activity and initiate prosecution for repeatedly polluting units.

x. SPCBs/PCCs should provide training and consultation to Gram Panchayat for implementation of guidelines in their jurisdiction. Gram Panchayat should ensure implementation of guidelines by Dairy farms and Gaushalas falling under their jurisdiction for handling and management of wastes.
xi. Hands on practical trainings on environment/waste management & treatment technologies, scientific feeding for enteric methane reduction, waste to wealth management programme, etc. should be provided to Dairy & Gaushala workers/entrepreneurs by local bodies/ SPCBs/PCCs on regular interval.”
21. As per the contents of the Original Application, the Respondent No.7, Suravi Sadan Gaushala, Rajasthan Gokalyan, is located at Village-Santosphpur, Barasat, North 24 Parganas. It is alleged that the Respondent No.7 Gaushala is located just about 80 meters away from the residential dwellings, 33 meters away from a Primary School (Kindergarten School) and 80 meters away from a Government School thereby grossly violating the Siting Policy as mandated in the 2021 Central Pollution Control Board’s Guidelines.
22. It is also alleged that solid wastes generated from the Gaushala in question are discharged in complete violation of the Guidelines; the surrounding areas are not periodically cleaned as a result leading to tremendous obnoxious smell in the adjacent residential area; all urinal and bathing wastewaters are washed into the adjacent agricultural fields leading to clogging of drains; there is absolutely no adequate infrastructure for handling/treating and disposal of wastewater; no treatment facilities have been installed despite it being a large category Gaushala.
23. It is also alleged that an RTI application was filed by the Applicant before the West Bengal Pollution Control Board, vide his letter dated 12.05.2023, seeking information with regard to grant of Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate to the Respondent No.7 Gaushala but the information provided by the West Bengal Pollution Control Board vide its reply letter dated 23.06.2023 is that:-

“As per records kept with the State Board, there is no information available regarding this matter”
It is, therefore, alleged that the Gaushala Unit of Respondent No.7 has not obtained any valid Consent to Establish or Consent to Operate from the West Bengal Pollution Control Board and is illegally operating the said Gaushala.
24. In para 17 of the Original Application, the Applicant has filed the Laboratory Test Report of the wastewater effluents discharged from the Respondent No.7 Gaushala which shows that the level of Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) are beyond the permissible limits as prescribed and permitted under the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986. The Test Report as quoted in para 17 of the Original Application reads as under:-
25. The West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Respondent No.2, has filed affidavit dated 22.09.2023 bringing on record the Enquiry Report of the Committee constituted by the Tribunal of an enquiry conducted on 29.08.2023 of M/s Survi Sadan Gaushala, Respondent No.7, located at Village-Santoshpur, P.S.-Duttapukur, District-North 24 Parganas, under Kashimpur Gram Panchayat.

The Enquiry Report reads as under:-
“Enquiry report conducted in compliance of the directions contained in the solemn order of the Hon’ble NGT dated 04.08.2023 in connection with Original Application No.
82/2023/EZ In compliance of the subject solemn order of the Hon’ble National Green Tribunal and in furtherance of your reference communication an enquiry has been conducted on 29.08.2023 M/s. Survi Sadan Gaushala, is located at Vill.-Santoshpur, P.S.- Duttapukur, Dist.-North 24 Parganas, under Kashimpur Gram Panchayat (Lat 22.77ºN, Long 88.51ºE), Inspecting Officials:
1. Smt. Shama Parveen, A.D.M. North 24 Parganas nominated by District Magistrate North 24 Parganas.
2. Shri Abhijit Pathak, Scientist – D, CPCB.
3. Shri Bimalendu Mal, Environmental Engineer, WBPCB.
Person met during inspection:
On behalf of the Unit
1. Shri B.K. Newatia, Trustee of Rajasthan Gokalyan
2. Shri Prakash Kedia, Doner of the trustee and others On behalf of the complainant
1. Shri Avi Bag, Secretary of Santoshpur Mitali Sangha
2. Swami Santirupa Nanda and others That the following facts have surfaced during the enquiry: 1. Land records, possession and related matters:
a) It has been found during the enquiry that the concerned Gauushala is situated within a well demarcated boundary comprising mostly of concrete brick walls leaving a very few portions of tin-sheet boundary towards the northern, north- western and north-eastern periphery of the Gaushala project compound. The entire land area may be stated to be comprised within the Gaushala.

b) The Gaushala project compound appears to be comprised of the following schedule of land, elucidated in tabular form:
c) The above schedules of plot are not recorded either in the name of the instant respondent no.7 or in the name of the instant respondent no.8 of the subject Original Application filed before, NGT.
They have not applied till date for recording their name and hence they are not raiyats in terms of section of W.B.L.R Act, 1955. Since as per the provisions of W.B.L.R. Act, 1955 and rules made there under, except a recorded raiyat none can apply for change of recorded classification (Conversion) of land, which also implies to the present case. The Respondents have neither applied for mutation nor conversion.

Remedial measures-The Respondents have been asked to apply for mutation forthwith and which may be done online. After mutation if allowed they have been asked to apply for conversion as per provisions of WBLR Act, 1955.
d) The above schedule of lands has been recorded in the name of different raiyats. Copies of the plot information are enclosed herewith.
e) During the physical enquiry it has been observed that the nature of the plot nos. 277, 242, 238 and 282 bearing ‘Doba’, ‘Pukur’, ‘Pukur’ and ‘Doba’ as recorded classifications, have been physically altered by filling up of the same, which is in violation of Section 4 (C) of the W.B.L.R Act, 1955.
f) Notice/s as envisaged U/s 4 (C)(5) of the W.B.L.R Act, 1955 have been issued on directing the concerned raiyat/s to restore the recorded classification of the said water-body within a period of 7 days from issuance/receipt of said notice/s.
Remedial measures- The Respondents will have to restore the waterbody. For waterbody the Act does not allow post facto conversion. Since as submitted by the respondents that the Goushala was constructed prior to 07.11.2017 and so as per the Act there is scope of allowing post facto conversion for the rest of the plots. So after mutation of all the plots and restoration of waterbody the respondents may apply for conversion through Form 1D as prescribed.
g) It has been observed during the physical enquiry that boundary walls of concerned gaushala compound are bounded by locality, virtually leaving no gap between the gaushala and locality on the Western and Eastern side and leaves only a gap of 20 feet of a concrete/pucca road on the southern side. On the Northern, North- Western and North-Eastern side the compound boundary is adjacent to agricultural lands. It has also been observed that there are holes in the boundary walls which allows the overflowing waste water to pass over to the adjacent plots and which is the cause of public resentment.
Remedial measures-The Respondents have been asked to close down all the holes in the boundary wall and take steps such that the waste does not flow over to adjacent agricultural tract.

The gradient of the compound is such that water flow will not be smooth if pumps are placed therein.
The respondents were asked to submit a concrete plan to the authorities of pollution control board and get it vetted. The team as has been formed will visit again after such plan is implemented in the field by the Respondents.
2. Trade license issued: Description of trade “cow-farm”, as documented in the trade licenses issued from Kashimpur G.P., which contradicts their verbal declaration that the gaushala is for charitable purpose and for looking after the deserted/disabled cows.
3. Violation of the provisions of Guidelines for Environmental Management of Dairy Farms and Gaushalas published by the Central Pollution Control Board in July, 2021 including CTE/CTO, Sewage disposal and locational hazard:
The alleged site is a Gaushala namely M/s. Survi Gaushala, owned by Rajasthan Gokalyan, a charitable trust. The unit is engaged in taking care of old / sick / abandoned including miking and fertile cows. The unit is rearing the cows under shed. But many cows are being kept under the open sky in the fenced area. The unit has no valid Consent to Operate on the day of visit. As informed, the unit has submitted on line Consent to Operate application on 28/08/2023 just before the day of inspection. The unit uses submersible pump to extract ground water without permission from SWID or CGWA. Over all requirement of water is more than150 KLD, as per CPCB guide line.
The unit is operating since the year 2012 (as stated) located beside the Nilgunj Dutta Pukur Road. The land area of the unit is about 3.56 acre. Sri Ramkrishna Sarada Aashram is situated adjacent to eastern side of the unit which was established in 1999. A school having student capacity 70 is run by the Aashram. Distance between the Ashram Canteen and cow shade is merely about 10ft. Mitali Sangha and Santoshpur Primary school is situated at a distance of about 70m form the unit at the South-West side. Northern side and western side of the unit is agricultural / vacant land. Some portion of the unit is butted and bounded by brick wall but some major portion of the land is fenced with corrugated tin. At present, there are about 1500nos. of livestock (cows) [Bufflow-01, Calf- 220, Ox-280, Cow-1059] out of which milking cows are 120 in number.

The main source of generation of waste water is floor washing, bathing of livestock and urine output of livestock. As per CPCB guide line estimated solid waste and waste water generation for this unit rearing 1500 bovines are as under:
Cow dung: 22500 Kg/day: Maximum 30000 Kg/day.
The unit has installed an ETP (Effluent Treatment Plant) (which is under commissioning) for treatment of this waste water claimed to have a capacity of 40KLD, but the representative of the unit could not explain / show the drainage network by which the waste water leads to ETP. Gradient of most of the drainage system is opposite to the ETP. No such collection pit or transfer pit for transfer of waste water to ETP was found. No garland drain was observed to arrest surface generated waste water. However, the direct discharge of effluent into the outside farming land / pond was observed along the East to West boundary wall of cow shed. Majority of existing drains inside the premises was found clogged with slurry of cow dung and fodder waste. The unit has made unlawful provision to discharge of untreated waste water outside the boundary wall (North-East side and western side) through openings in the boundary wall.
At the part of fencing made by corrugated tin sheet there is ample scope to spill surface run off to adjacent farm land owned by villagers.
The industry claimed to produce Bio-gas from cow dung which is consumed in house. First hand observation in and around Bio-gas plant it appears that the plant is not designed properly and the operation of the same was discontinuous. The operator and management could not explain the mode of disposal of sludge from dung storage pit and mixer. The Bio-gas is stored in storage balloons which has safety issues too.
Very less quantity of dung is used for making cow dung cakes, which is solely manual. The residue of bio-gas plant and some cow dung is claimed to be utilized used for production of organic manure. However, no scientific composting or Vermi composting facility was observed. The cow dung is kept in heaves within the industry premises.

The unit generates Bio-Medical Waste during treatment of the livestock. The Bio-Medical Waste is not segregated and disposed in compliance with the Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules, 2016. During inspection, unsegregated Bio-Medical Waste was found stored in plastic bags. It was also informed that these collected unsegregated waste are simply handed over to unauthorized collector without even crushing or cutting the injection niddle.
The unit has one DG set of capacity 63 KVA.
The unit has two chillers of capacity 500L each to store milk. As reported nearly 400L of milk is produced per day. Milk is distributed to the trustee members by single use plastic bottles. During inspection, it was observed that the unit has developed the low land inside the premises by depositing cow dung and other waste. No records or diary for dead animals is maintained as informed.
Dumping / accumulation of cow dung slurry and waste water of the unit were found outside the boundary wall of the unit as well as in the open field of the complainant’s agricultural / low lying land.
An odour quite characteristic to such firm was smelt from the adjacent localities also.
It was observed that, the gaushala is not having adequate tree coverage.
Environmental Compensation (EC) is not calculated in this report considering that a) Gaushala and Dairy farms was brought into the ambit of environmental legislation since July, 2020, however this particular unit is operating since, 2012. The field visit revealed that the unit has violated land uses and even damaged agricultural land by discharging untreated effluent.
b) One day site visit is not sufficient to assess the extent of damage of agricultural land and subsequent loss in crop production already done by the unit.
Therefore, opinion of experts from Agricultural Department for detail damage assessment may be proposed before imposing the EC.
Remedial Measures:

Industry has to comply with all applicable Environmental legislation requirements, including permission for ground water extraction.
Drainage inside the premises shall be redesigned ensuring collection and diversion of the waste water to ETP.
Entire boundary wall shall be ensured as leak proof. All the intentional discharge holes in wall shall be sealed immediately.
The capacity of ETP as stated by unit is seemed to under-capacity considering the quantity of waste water generation.
Cow dung is to be removed frequently to minimize the chances of mixing of cow dung with waste water.
Capacity of bio-gas plant is to be increased and the unit may explore to provide the CBG (Compressed Bio Gas) filling system.
Scientific cow dung composting plant is to be adopted and the product is to be disposed of in regular interval.
Bio-Medical Waste is to be disposed in compliance with Bio Medical Waste Management Rules, 2016.
Good housekeeping and cleanliness are to be maintained.”
26. Along with this affidavit, the West Bengal Pollution Control Board has filed copy of the Consent to Operate dated 21.09.2023 (Annexure-R2), granted to the Respondent No.7, M/s Survi Sadan Gaushala, Village-Santoshpur, North 24 Parganas.
27. The Respondent No.8, Rajasthan Gokalyan Trust, has filed affidavit dated 08.12.2023 stating that it is a charitable trust registered under the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is stated that the Rajasthan Gokalyan Trust does not exist by that name and that the name of the entity is ‘Rajasthan Gokalyan’. It is also stated that one of the objectives of the Trust is to serve and look after cows to arrange for their hay and grass and spread awareness of cow protection. It is also stated that to open a Gaushala, the Trust purchased land measuring about 1.0745 acres situated at Mouza-Santoshpur, P.S. Barasat, District-North 24 Parganas, within Kashimpur Gram Panchayat, by a registered Deed of Conveyance dated 20.11.2010. It is stated that the said Gaushala was initially started with 16 cows and currently the total area of the Gaushala is about 3.06 acres and the number of cows rehabilitated thereafter is about 1600 including calves and ox. It is stated that solid waste of the Gaushala is converted into cow dung cakes and distributed among the patrons for their use in havans etc. It is also stated that a Bio- gas Plant was installed within the premises of the Gaushala and is running for the last six years and the solid waste of the cows as raw material is used to generate bio-gas and electricity in the Bio-gas Plant. It is stated that the excess solid waste is converted into manure through vermi-compost process, and for manufacturing of cow dung cakes and cow dung logs. It is also stated that for handling wastewater generated in the Gaushala, an Effluent Treatment Plant has been set-up and with the increase in the number of cows, the capacity of the Effluent Treatment Plant has also been increased from time to time and the present Plant has the capacity to treat 40,000 litres of wastewater. It is also stated that after receipt of the Original Application, the Trust for the first time came to know that Consent to Operate is required for a Gaushala in accordance with the 2021 Guidelines and accordingly the Trust applied for Consent to Operate with the West Bengal Pollution Control Board on August 28, 2023, and has also deposited Rs.2,98,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand only) towards fee and on 21.09.2023 Consent to Operate was granted in the name of the Gaushala of the Trust.


28. We may at the outset observe that ignorance of law is no defence.
29. It is a well settled principle of jurisprudence that ignorance of law cannot be set up as a defence. In (1975) 4 SCC 378, (The Swdeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. The Government of U.P. & Ors.), the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 3 thereof held as under:-
“3. We do not think that in this case it is necessary for us to consider whether Article 226 can be used for challenging the validity of the orders passed prior to January 26, 1950. But we are in agreement with the High Court on the other two grounds. As mentioned earlier, the impugned assessments were made in 1949. The writ petition was filed in 1956. The explanation given by the petitioner for this long delay is that he did not know the correct legal position and he came to know about the same after the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Modi Food Products Ltd. Every individual is deemed to know the law of the land. The courts merely interpret the law and do not make law. Ignorance of law is not an excuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation. Therefore the argument that the appellant did not know the true legal position is not one that can be accepted in law. That part, even after the High Court rendered its decision in Modi Food Products’ case the petitioner did not move the High Court for over several months. There is no satisfactory explanation for that delay. That being so, the High Court was fully justified in refusing to exercise its discretion under Article 2226 of the Constitution in favour of the appellant.”
30. In (2005) 4 SCC 295, (Bharat Electronics Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Assets) & Anr.), the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 8 held as under:-
“8. We see no substance in these submissions. Ignorance of law is no excuse. Once the notifications stood quashed, the dealers were found to collect tax @ 6%. Even otherwise, it is difficult to believe that parties in the trade do not know the prevailing rate of tax.”

31. In (2008) 11 SCC 502, (Board of Directors, Himachal Pradesh Transport Corporation & Anr. Vs. K. C. Rahi), it was held in para 8 as under:-
“8. In the instant case we have been taken through various documents and also from the representation dated 19-10-1993 filed by the respondent himself it would clearly show that he knew that a departmental enquiry was initiated against him yet he chose not to participate in the enquiry proceedings at his own risk. In such event plea of principle of natural justice is deemed to have been waived and he is estopped from raising the question of non-compliance with principles of natural justice. In the representation submitted by him on 19-10-1993 the subject itself reads “DEPARTMENTAL ENQUIRIES”. It is stated at the Bar that the respondent is a law graduate, therefore, he cannot take a plea of ignorance of law. Ignorance of law is no excuse much less by a person who is a law graduate himself.”
32. In (2019) 3 ICC 762, 2019 SCC OnLine Cal 1870, (Debabrata Dutta Vs. Joy Gopal Saha & Ors.), the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta held as under:-
“13. It is further argued that the only ground taken by the petitioner in his application for condonation of delay was ignorance of law, which is not a valid ground in law for condonation of delay. In this context, learned senior counsel cites a judgment reported at (1975) 4 SCC 378 [The Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. The Government of U.P.], wherein it was held that ignorance of law was not an excuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation. The explanation given by the petitioner in the said case for the long delay was that he did not know the correct legal position and came to know about the same after a decision of the Allahabad High Court. The Supreme Court held that every individual is deemed to know the law of the land and courts merely interpret the law and do not make law. Therefore, the argument that the appellant did not know the true legal position, was not one that could be accepted in law.

14. Learned senior counsel next cites a judgment of a single bench of the Allahabad High Court reported at 1983 SCC OnLine All 254 [Ram Prasad v. D.D.C.], wherein a learned Single Judge held that ignorance of law was not excuse and the benefit of Section 5 of the Limitation Act was not available on the ground of ignorance of law. It was further held that if the appellant in that case did not know the law, it was necessary for him to communicate all the facts to his counsel so that he might take all the legal steps.
15. learned senior counsel next cites a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, reported at 2013 SCC OnLine P&H 22717 [Vijay Kumar v. Swarna Rani], for the same proposition, that ignorance of law is not an excuse for condoning delay. The petitioner in the said case was having the services of a lawyer at his disposal and the court held that it did not lie in his mouth that he was ignorant about the period of limitation.
16. Lastly, learned senior counsel cites the judgment of a co- ordinate bench of this court, reported at (2018) 3 CHN 461 [Mithun @ Akhtar Ali v. Sk. Aziz Haque], wherein it was reiterated that ignorance of law cannot be an excuse for the litigant. In the said case, it was further held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act had not applicability to Section 7(1) of the 1997 Act and the court was justified in striking out the defence under Section 7(3) of the said Act.”
33. In the affidavit of the Respondent No.8, the allegations of environmental degradation have been denied. Allegations with regard to Siting Criteria being in violation of the Siting Policy has also been denied. It is also denied that the urine or bovine bathing wastewater is washed into any agricultural field or there is any ecological degradation of agricultural field. It is disputed that the cow dung of 22,500 kilograms/day for 1500 bovines is generated and it is stated that the cow dung being generated in the Gaushala varies from 10,000 kilograms to 12,000 kilograms per day for 1560 cattle (including cows, calves and ox). It is further stated that the estimated wastewater generated, as per the guidelines, is to the tune of 1,68,000 litres per day which is also for the dairy farm whereas water usage in the Gaushala is in the range of 40,000 litres per day. Thus, the figure of wastewater generated being 1,68,000 litres per day is disputed. It is also stated that as per the daily meter reading, the maximum requirement of water is 40 KLD and 10 KLD of wastewater is recycled through the Effluent Treatment Plant and, therefore, the observation that overall requirement of water is more than 150 KLD as per the Inspection Report is disputed.

34. With regard to the remedial measures recommended by the Committee, the steps taken by the Gaushala in question have been outlined in para 28 of the affidavit which read as under:-
“28. ………….……..……. x………………..x…………….…x…………....
a. Steps are being taken for required permissions for extraction of ground water. To the best of the knowledge of the respondent no 8, such permission is not required for domestic use, i.e. for cleaning, washing and consumption (including for cattle). The respondent no 8 shall seek necessary guidance on the matter, from the concerned authorities.
b. The drainage inside the premises has been repaired whenever required and as morefully mentioned in paragraphs hereinabove the entire waste water is being collected and/or diverted to Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP).
c. The entire boundary wall has been repaired and the holes in the boundary wall have been sealed. The said holes were not discharge holes but holes due to damage in the boundary wall.
d. The capacity of ETP is 40 KLD. The total water requirement is 30 KLD from ground water and 10 KLD from recycled water aggregating to 40 KLD. Hence, the capacity of ETP is not under- capacity.
e. Cow dung is being removed every hour. The report does not suggest as a frequency of removal. In case, the frequency needs to be increased, the answering respondent undertakes to increase the same as suggested by the committee in future.

f. The answering respondent is in the process of installing an additional biogas plant. The vendor has already been selected and it is expected that the additional biogas plant will be operational by June 2024.
g. The answering respondent is in the process of installing a dewatering machine so that the slurry from the biogas plant can be dewatered and dried to form compost. The water separated from the dewatering plant will be in turn used again for the biogas plant. Since the entire cow dung will be used in the biogas plant after installation of the additional plant, cow dung composting plant would not be required. As a temporary measure, the answering respondent is installing a temporary vermicompost plant."
35. During the pendency of the proceedings, the Tribunal by its order dated 02.04.2024 had directed the Respondent Nos.7&8 to take immediate steps to clear all the bovine waste which may have poured out into the adjoining area outside the boundary of the Gaushala within one month and file affidavit of compliance. The order dated 02.04.2024 reads as under:-