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

2022 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 1021

Item No.1:- Court No.1 BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI (Through Video Conference)

Original Application No. 147 of 2020 (SZ)

IN THE MATTER OF Smt. R. Prabha W/o. Ramesh Door No.57/A, Pandhal Veetu Thottam Ariya Goundampatty, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District – 637 406.

...Applicant(s)

Versus Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board Represented by its Member Secretary No.76, Mount Salai, Guindy, Chennai and Ors.

...Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s): Mr. A. Yogeshwaran.

For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R1.

Dr. D. Shanmuganathan for R2, R3 & R5.

M/s. Sarvabhauman Associates for R4.

Mr. D. Ramesh Kumar for R6. Mrs. P. Jayalakshmi for CPCB.

Judgment Pronounced on: 24th August 2022.

CORAM HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER

Advocates:
For the Petitioner: A YOGESHWARAN, YOGESHWARAN
For the Respondent:

ORDER

Judgment pronounced through Video Conference. The original application is disposed of with directions vide separate Judgment. Pending interlocutory application, if any, shall stand disposed of.

Sd/-

Justice K. Ramakrishnan, JM Sd/-

Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM O.A. No.147/2020 (SZ), 24th August 2022. Mn.

Item No.1:- Court No.1 BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI (Through Video Conference)

Original Application No. 147 of 2020 (SZ)

IN THE MATTER OF Smt. R. Prabha W/o. Ramesh Door No.57/A Pandhal Veetu Thottam Ariya Goundampatty Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District – 637 406.

...Applicant(s)

Versus

1) Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board Represented by its Member Secretary No.76, Mount Salai, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.

2) The District Collector

1st Floor, Main Building District Collectorate Thiruchengode Road Namakkal – 637 003.

3) Block Development Officer Namagiripettai Panchayat Union Namagiripettai Namakkal District – 637 406.

4) Saraswathy Vellappan W/o. Vellappan Vellappan Poultry Farm Nanjappan Thottam Ariya Goundampatty Rasipuram Taluk Namakkal District – 637 406.

5) The Public Works Department Represented by its Engineer in Chief Water Resources Organization Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

6) Central Ground Water Board (CGWB)

Represented by its Chairman Bhujal Bhawan, NH – IV, Faridabad – 121 001.

...Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s): Mr. A. Yogeshwaran.

For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R1.

Dr. D. Shanmuganathan for R2, R3 & R5.

M/s. Sarvabhauman Associates for R4.

Mr. D. Ramesh Kumar for R6. Mrs. P. Jayalakshmi for CPCB.

Judgment Reserved on: 26th July 2022.

Judgment Pronounced on: 24th August 2022.

CORAM HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER Whether the Judgment is allowed to be published on the Internet – Yes.

Whether the Judgment is to be published in the All India NGT Reporter – Yes.

J U D G M E N T

Delivered by Justice K. Ramakrishnan, Judicial Member

1. This case pertains to the operation of the poultry farm by the 4th respondent by name „Vellappan Poulty Farm‟ in Nanjappan Thottam, Ariya Goundapatty, Rasipuram Taluk, Namakkal District in violation of the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and also against the guideliness issued by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) dated 20.10.2015 vide S.O. 6140 (E) Notifiction dated 12.12.2018 of the Central Ground Water Authority and Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

2. The applicant was having 4 Acres of land in Ariya Goundampatti Village and she is an agriculturist by profession. She is carrying on their agricultural activity in the property for more than 50 years and the applicant’s house is also situated in the farm where she lives with the family. The 4th respondent had established the subject poultry in the year 1990 on a small scale. Thereafter, she had purchased 2 Acres of land from the applicant in 1992 and expanded its activity. Presently, she runs a large poultry farm in two huge sheds and two small sheds containing around one lakh birds. The exact number of birds at any given point of time was not known, as it was not disclosed or dispalyed by the 4th respondent and according to the applicant, it could be more than one lakh. The 4th Respondent is also in the process of further expanding the poultry farm and in the process of setting up a feed mill. The 4th respondent poultry farm is located adjacent to the house of the applicant and located at a distance of 150 meters from the house of the applicant. There is an open well at 50 meters from the poultry farm boundary and the well is common source of water for both the applicant and the 4th respondent who has given the right to draw water from the well. On account of the activity of the 4th respondent, large scale pollution has been caused in the following ways:-

a) There is a severe odour nuisance. The stench from the poultry farm has made living in the appli

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top