SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 1561

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL BHOPAL (CENTRAL ZONE BENCH)
Sheo Kumar Singh, Judicial Member, Afroz Ahmad, Expert Member
Nitin Singhvi – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
Original Application No.81/2024(CZ)|I.A.No.102/2024



Advocates:
For the Applicant(s): Mr. Sajal K. Gupta, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rajat Jariwal, Adv., Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv.

State permissions for river embankment development upheld on expert reports showing no environmental harm; monitoring committee directed for precautionary compliance with zoning guidelines under public trust doctrine.

Headnote:(A) Environmental Law - Public Trust Doctrine - River Centric Urban Planning Guidelines - Prohibited Activities Zones - Dumping of solid waste and construction in prohibited zones along river embankments - Guidelines issued by Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs classify river stretches into prohibited, restricted and regulated zones; dumping of solid waste and new embankment construction prohibited in prohibited zones extending to outermost embankment plus 100m buffer - Public Trust Doctrine mandates government protection of natural resources like rivers from private or commercial exploitation (Para 8, quoting M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath).

(B) Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle - Absolute liability for environmental harm; sustainable development requires balancing development with ecology preservation under Articles 21, 48-A, 51-A(g); anticipatory action to prevent harm even on reasonable suspicion (Paras 9, 10).

(C) Expert Reports and Administrative Permissions - Permissions granted by pollution control board and collector for tailing dumping and retaining wall construction upheld based on site inspections and expert opinions finding no biodiversity damage or river flow impact; prior High Court disposal without adverse findings (Paras 4, 5, 11, 12).

Facts of the case:
Applicant alleged non-compliance with river zoning guidelines due to dumping of iron ore tailings near river embankment, construction of retaining wall on river bed, biodiversity destruction and flood washing of waste; permissions issued by authorities in 2021 and 2023; site inspection confirmed tailings covered, no flow into river, work halted post-objections but partially compliant.

Findings of Court:
Work undertaken per administrative consents and expert reports; no evidence of environmental harm or guideline violation warranting interference; monitoring committee to oversee completion ensuring no adverse effects.

Issues: Whether dumping tailings and constructing retaining wall near river embankment violated prohibited zone guidelines and caused biodiversity loss; validity of administrative permissions and expert reports.

Ratio Decidendi: Tribunal deferred to state authorities' permissions supported by expert assessments and site reports showing compliance and no harm; directed monitoring committee for rule-compliant execution rather than prohibiting activity, applying precautionary measures.

Result: Original Application and I.A. disposed of with directions to monitoring committee comprising state environment, biodiversity, forest and pollution board representatives to oversee work per collector's order ensuring no biodiversity or river flow impact. (Paras 12, 13)

Table of Content
1. factual background of tailings dumping and permissions (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 11)
2. no biodiversity damage per expert reports (Para 2 , 6)
3. monitor works under committee oversight (Para 5 , 12 , 13)
4. public trust and polluter pays doctrines apply (Para 8 , 9)
5. river regulation zones prohibit waste dumping (Para 10)

ORDER

1. The grievance of the applicant is noncompliance of the draft notification and guidelines issued from the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs providing the prohibited activities zones and restricted activities zones from the embankment of the river and dumping of solid waste at the bank of the river. The contention of the applicant is that in the District of Dantewada, Bailadila Iron Ore Mines are situated and Respondent No.8 which is a company involved is extracting iron ore from Bailadila mines and has received a “No Objection” on 19.05.2021 subject to certain conditions from the Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board for dumping the dry tailings (waste) of iron ore in a pit at the embankment of the river, adjoining to the river bank of river Dankani. That, Respondent No.8, in 2021 dumped the iron ore waste near the river bed (near the cremation ground) in District headquarters in Dantewada. Construction of a retaining wall on the river bed to 2 prevent wet leakage and washing away of the tailing in the river was started and completed up to plinth level in 2021 and after the objections the construction of this retaining wall was stopped and has not been dismantled till date. A large quantity of tailing dumped in 2021 washed away in the floods of 2022. Again the Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board on 25.04.2023 and the Collector Dantewada on 14.06.2023 issued a new “No objection certificates” to dump more tailings at the same site and the private party by destroying the biodiversity has dumped the tailings and filled the pit at the embarkment of the river Dankani. After the intervention of the Chhattisgarh State Biodiversity Board the Collector Dandewada issued orders to remove the dumped tailing but it has still not been removed.

2. It is further contended that the forest authorities called a report from two experts and on the basis of expert report it was reported that the proposed construction has no environmental effect on the eco system or bio diversity of the area. Further contention of the applicant is that the report is not based on any scientific criteria.

3. The matter was taken up by this Tribunal and Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board (CECB) Raipur was directed to submit the report on the point in issue. Learned Counsel for the CECB has filed the reply and argued that in the District of Dantewada, Bailadila Iron Ore Mines are situated and Respondent No.8 which is a company involved is extracting iron ore from Bailadila mines and has received a “No Objection” on 19.05.2021 subject to certain conditions from the Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board for dumping the dry tailings (waste) of iron ore in a pit at the embankment of the river, adjoining to the river bank of river Dankani and construction of a retaining wall on the river bed to prevent wet leakage and washing away of the tailing in the river was started and completed up to plinth level in 2021 and after the objections the construction of this retaining wall was stopped and has not been dismantled till date and that again the Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board on 25.04.2023 and the Collector Dantewada on 14.06.2023 issued a new “No objection certificates” to dump more tailings at the same site and the private party by destroying the biodiversity has dumped the tailings and filled the pit at the embarkment of the river Dankani.

4. The Members of the State Pollution Control Board with the Asst.Engineer and Regional Officer visited the site and submitted the observation as recorded as follows :

a. That at the time of inspection land filling and levelling was haulted.

b. It was observed that ta

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top