Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 631
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
HON’BLE MR. ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, J, HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, ACJ
Amaravati Fly Ash Bricks Manufacturers Association – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondent
Original Application No. 327/2022 | Original Application No. 878/2022 | Original Application No. 661/2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Gaurav Kumar Bansal, Ms. Nandita Bansal, Ms. Chandrika Upadhyaya
For the Respondents: Mr. Kumar Rajesh Singh, Mr. K M Natraj, Mr. Gigi C George, Mr. Watsal, Mr. Raj Kumar, Mr. Chetan Sharma, Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Mr. Sudhanshu Prakash, Ms. Anisha Agarwal, Ms. Purnima Krishna, Mr. Karamveer Singh, Ms. Anusha Nagarajan, Mr. Rushil Anand, Mr. N. Nithianandam, Mr. Munawar Naseem, Mr. Jaskaran Singh Bhatia, Mr. Adarsh Tripathi, Mr. Vikram Singh Baid, Mr. Ajitesh Garg
The tribunal emphasized the need for rigorous auditing and compliance with environmental regulations governing fly ash utilization, stressing the accountability of authorities.
Headnote:(A) Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986 - Issues related to the utilization of fly ash and compliance with relevant notifications - The original applications aimed at quashing orders related to fly ash disposal and enforcement of guidelines for thermal power plants. Relevant notifications require 100% utilization of generated fly ash by plants. The tribunal identified the need for auditing compliance and resolving conflicts in interpretations of regulations regarding fly ash utilization. (Paras 1-41)
(B) Mandates for compliance auditing and environmental compensation were discussed, emphasizing responsibilities of the Ministry of Power and the Central Pollution Control Board in ensuring adherence to the guidelines. (Paras 22, 25, 27)
(C) The tribunal emphasized the urgent need for further submissions from parties regarding the adverse impacts of fly ash on the environment and potential violations of the environmental laws. (Paras 39, 41)
Findings of Court:
The tribunal acknowledged the pressing environmental questions relating to fly ash utilization and the necessity for a comprehensive assessment of the compliance by the authorities involved.
Issues: The core issues include the effectiveness of current guidelines on fly ash disposal, the quality of response from authorities, and the necessity for further audits of usage.
Ratio Decidendi: The tribunal found that substantial environmental questions necessitate a detailed examination of compliance with notifications regarding fly ash utilization.
Result: The tribunal directed additional audits and responses from the Ministry of Power and the Central Pollution Control Board.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applications filed for quashing orders concerning fly ash. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. revised notifications and guidelines for fly ash disposal issued. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. discussion on respondents' compliance and responses regarding notifications. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. emphasis on responsibilities of authorities in ash utilization. (Para 22 , 24 , 27) |
| 5. focus on environmental impact and need for thorough investigation. (Para 39 , 41) |
ORDER
1. The applicant-Amaravati Fly Ash Bricks Manufacturers Association filed O.A. No. 327/2022 for quashing of office order dated 22.02.2022 issued by respondent no. 4, office order dated 16.03.2022 issued by respondent no. 5 and issue direction to respondent no. 4 to direct all thermal power plant to maximize fly ash consumption.
2. The applicant-Tamil Nadu Fly Ash Brick and Block Manufacturer Association filed O.A. No. 878/2022 to direct respondents no. 6 to 18 not to sell fly ash in violation of order dated 25.08.2022 passed in O.A. No. 327/2022 and to direct Ministry of Power not to implement its advisory dated 22.02.2022.
3. MoEF&CC amended notification dated 31.12.2021 vide notifications dated 30.12.2022 and 01.01.2024. Para D (4) of the notification dated 01.01.2024 which is relevant to the environmental questions involved reads as under:-
“The coal or lignite based thermal power plants, while utilising ash under this notification shall reserve certain percentage of ash for supply to all micro and small enterprises engaged in ash based product manufacturing namely, bricks, blocks, tiles, sintered or cold bonded ash aggregates, fiber cement sheets, pipes, boards, panels for sale at concessional price or through limited auction in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Central Government in the Ministry of Power. ”
4. In compliance/consonance with notification dated 01.01.2024, the Ministry of Power has also issued the revised advisory/guidelines dated 15.03.2024 to all coal or lignite-based thermal power plants and concerned State Governments superseding guidelines dated 22.02.2022 during pendency of O.A. No. 327/2022 and O.A. No. 878/2022.
5. I.A. No. 666/2024 was filed on 13.12.2024 with the prayer to take on record additional facts and documents.
6. Learned Additional Solicitor General had submitted that in view of amendment of notification dated 31.12.2021 by notifications dated 30.12.2022 and 01.01.2024, issuance of revised advisory/guidelines dated 15.03.2024 by the Ministry of Power and orders dated 24.02.2023 and 02.09.2024 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court, these Original Applications have become infructuous. Learned Additional Solicitor General also relied on order dated 16.04.2024 passed in O.A. No.436/2023 whereby the above said Original Application was disposed of as infructuous.
7. This Tribunal observed in its order dated 16.12.2024 that the question as to whether all the reliefs sought in these applications have become infructuous or not has to be adjudicated upon after filing of reply by applicants and hearing of submissions in respect thereof. This Tribunal also observed that the parties before the Court/Tribunal can amend the pleadings in view of subsequent developments and the Court/Tribunal can also mould the relief in view of subsequent developments and that O.A. No. 661 of 2024 has been filed for quashing order dated 01.01.2024 issued by respondent no.1-MOEF&CC and order dated 15.03.2024 issued by respondent no.4-MOP.
8. Vide order dated 16.12.2024, the applicants were directed to file replies I.A. No.666/2024 specifically mentioning as to whether the reliefs sought by them have become infructuous or not, as to whether any relief survives despite subsequent developments and as to whether any amendments are desired to be made to reiterate the grievances and assail validity of subsequent notification and guidelines.
9. Despite oppourtunity, the applicants have not filed any replies to I.A. No. 666/2024 and have not responded to the other aspects mentioned above.
10. In the facts
