ORDER

1. Both these applications have been filed in light of observations in the order of the Hon(cid:146)ble Supreme Court dated 28.02.2022 in Civil Appeal Diary No(s).1304/2022, the Poultry Farmers and Breeders Association vs.

Gauri Maulekhi & Ors. which is as follows:-

(cid:147)1. Permission to file the Civil Appeals granted.

2 The principal grievance which has been urged on behalf of the appellants by Mr Mukul Rohatgi, senior counsel with Mr Arijit Prasad, is that neither when it passed the first order dated 16 September 2020 nor when it passed the second order of 10 December 2021 did the National Green Tribunal have before it the representatives of the poultry farms who are affected by the directions.

3. Since admittedly the appellants were not before the NGT and having regard to the above grievance, we grant liberty to the appellants to move the NGT with an appropriate application for modification of the directions which have been issued. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of such an application and the above liberty has been granted in order to obviate the grievance of the appellants that they were not furnished an opportunity of being heard. The rights and contentions of all the parties before the NGT in that regard are kept open.

4. In the event that the appellants are aggrieved by the order of the NGT, they would be at liberty to pursue their remedies in accordance with law, including on the grounds which have been set out in the Civil Appeals.(cid:148)

2. We may note that contrary to representation made before Hon(cid:146)ble Supreme Court that representatives of poultry farms were not before the Tribunal when the matter was dealt with by it, association of poultry farms was very much represented before the Tribunal and its view point was duly addressed as noted in paras 9 and 10 of order of the Tribunal dated 16.9.2020, which is quoted in later part of this order.

3. Further, instead of availing of liberty to move an application for modification of orders of the Tribunal in the proceedings earlier dealt with, the applicants have filed independent OAs under sections 14 and 15 of the NGT Act, more than nine months after the order of the Hon(cid:146)ble Supreme Court, which are strictly speaking not maintainable, the said remedy being available to victims of violation of environmental norms. Inspite of this, we have considered the matter on merits and heard learned Counsel for the applicants at length and proceed to deal with the same.

4. As the record would show, the Appeal before the Hon(cid:146)ble Supreme Court was against orders of this Tribunal dated 16.09.2020 in OA No. 681/2017, Gauri Maulekhi vs. Union of India & Ors. and 10.12.2021 in OA No. 320/2021, Gauri Maulekhi vs. Union of India & Ors. Order dated 16.09.2020 considered a grievance against inadequacy of consent regime as per CPCB Guidelines dated 20.10.2015 by which consent under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 was required only for poultry farm handling more than 1 lakh birds at a single location. Poultry farms with more than 5,000 birds were required to be registered with local bodies without any consent under the Water Act, 1974 or the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. Commercial poultry farms were categorized as (cid:145)Green(cid:146) industries by CPCB as per its order dated 29.02.2016. Grievance was that to give effect to (cid:145)Sustainable Development(cid:146) and (cid:145)Precautionary(cid:146) principles of Environmental Law laid down inter alia under section 20 of the NGT Act, there has to be effective regulatory regime having regard to potential for huge damage to the environment and public health by unregulated activities of such farms. The applicants relied upon literature in support of their case. The Tribunal sought response of the CPCB and on consideration found that guidelines issued for categorizing poultry farms as green and exempting their regulation from consent reg