2022 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 2118
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONE BENCH, BHOPAL (Through Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 71/2022 (CZ)
Alankar Jain & Anr. Applicant(s)
Versus Central Pollution Control Board & Ors. Respondent(s) Date of completion of hearing and reserving of order: 03.04.2023 Date of uploading of order on website: 12.04.2023 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEO KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, EXPERT MEMBER For Applic ant(s) : M r. Ala nkar Jain, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yadvendra Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Sharma, Adv.
For the Petitioner: ALANKAR JAIN, ALANKAR JAIN, ALANKAR JAIN
For the Respondent:
ORDER
1. The issue raised in this application is non compliance of the Bio Medical Waste Management Rules 2016 as amended by Second Amendment Rules 2019 on the following grounds: i. That the unit is situated in the residential area.
ii. There is a violation of coverage area.
iii. Approach road is not proper and according to the standard parameters.
iv. There is a huge gap between generation and disposal of the waste.
v. The guidelines for maintenance of greenery have been violated.
2. The matter was taken up by this Tribunal on 22.09.2022 and notices were issued to the respondents to submit the reply. Reply by the respondent has been filed.
3. We have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the applicant is that respondent no. 7 collects and incinerating the Bio Medical Waste from Gwalior, Datia & Shivpur Districts and is under obligation to treat the Bio Medical Waste in sustainable manner as per Bio Medical Waste Management and Handling Rules, 2016. On the points of working capacity, distance from the residential area, distance from Shivpur and approach road there are violation of environmental rules. The necessary guidelines with regard to 33% of green belt, has been violated. The area of Project Proponent is not properly selected and it is being operated around the residential area. It is further argued that on the basis of violation of environmental rules the Bio Medical Waste facility should be closed and environment compensation should be realized.
5. Learned Counsel for the respondent no.1 /Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has argued that that as per the relevant provisions vis - a - vis Location Criteria as per the Revised Guidelines for C.B.W.T.F., a C.B.W.T.F. can be located at a place reasonably far away from notified residential and sensitive areas and should have a buffer distance of preferably 500 meters so that it shall have minimal impact on these areas. In case of non - availability of such land, the buffer zone distance from the notified residential area may be reduced to less than 500 meters by S.P.C.B./P.C.C. without referring the matter to the C.P.C.B. by prescribing additional control measures such as (i)
adoption of best available technologies by the proponent of CBWTF; (ii) prescribing stringent standards for operation of the CBIVTF by the SPCB/PCC; (iii) adoption of zero liquid discharge by the CBWTF and (iv) in case of any complaint from the public then CBIYTF should prove that the facility is not causing any adverse impact on environment and habitation of the vicinity. As per the Revised Guidelines for C.B.W.T.F., a C.B.WT.F. located within the respective State/U.T. shall be allowed to cater to healthcare units situated at a redial distance of 75 KMs. However, in a coverage area where 10,000 beds are not available within a radial distance of 75 KMs, existing C.B.W.T.F. in the locality located within the respective Sate/U.T.) may be allowed to cater to the healthcare units situated up to 150 KM radius with respect to its location provided that the Bio - Medical waste generated is treated and disposed of within 48 hours of collection as stipulated under the Biomedical Waste Management Rules, 2016. And that as per the Revised Guidelines for C.B.W.T.F., a C.B.W.T.F Operator is required to obtain authorization under the B.M.W.M. Rules, 2016, from the Prescribed Authority that is respective S.P.C.B./P.C.C. Further, the C.B.W.T.F. operator is also required to obtain Environmental Clearance from the respective S.E.I.A.A. or MoEF & CC. This is a matter of verification and may be appropriately responded to by the Prescribed Authority.
6. It is further contended that in case of any violation of Rules State Pollution Control Board has been authorized to do in accordance with rules.
7. The Respondent/ State Pollution Control Board has summarized grievances as follows :
S. No.
Grievance raised & explained by the Shri Jain
As per record