Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 653
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL BHOPAL (CENTRAL ZONE BENCH)
Mr. Justice Sheo Kumar Singh, Dr. A Senthil Vel, JJ
Bhopal Care Hospital – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Original Application No. 255/2024(CZ)
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Ravi Kant Patidar, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Prashant M. Harne, Adv., Ms. Parul Bhadoria, Adv., Ms. Disha Chouksey, Adv. (for Ms. Gunjan Chowksey)
The Tribunal cannot entertain applications not arising from the specified enactments in Schedule-I of the NGT Act, and jurisdiction is limited to substantial environmental questions.
Headnote:(A) National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Sections 14 and 15 - Environmental law - The Tribunal held that the application to quash a demand order from the Municipal Corporation was not maintainable as it did not arise from the enactments specified in Schedule-I of the NGT Act. The impugned orders were issued under the Madhya Pradesh Municipality Act, which is not included in the Schedule. The application was also deemed time-barred. (Paras 1, 9, 12)
(B) Jurisdiction - The Tribunal emphasized that it can only entertain applications involving substantial questions relating to environment as specified in the NGT Act. (Paras 8, 9)
Facts of the case:
The applicant sought to challenge demand notices from the Municipal Corporation for dues related to environmental compliance. The Tribunal found the application inadmissible based on jurisdictional grounds.
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal concluded that the application was not maintainable and disposed of the matter accordingly.
Issues: The primary issues included the maintainability of the application under the NGT Act and the applicability of the Madhya Pradesh Municipality Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the NGT can only entertain matters under the specific environmental statutes listed in its Schedule, and the applicant had alternate remedies available.
Result: Application dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. quashing of municipal demand order. (Para 1) |
| 2. tribunal's observations on environmental violations. (Para 2 , 3) |
ORDER
1. The present application has been filed to quash and set aside the impugned demand order and notice dated 04.10.2021, 21.09.2023 and 17.01.2024 passed by Respondent No. 2, i.e. Municipal Corporation Bhopal, whereby and whereunder notice was issued to the applicant to deposit a certain amount of dues calculated by the Nigam.
2. While considering the matter on the point of admission on 04.12.2024, this Tribunal observed that prima facie the order under challenge has not been passed by any authority mentioned in Schedule-I of the National Green Tribunal, Act 2010, therefore, question is whether the present original application itself would be maintainable before the Tribunal or not.
3. Notices were issued to the Respondent and the reply by the State PCB has been filed. Matter involved in this application has its origine in Original Application No. 07/2018(CZ) and O.A No. 77/2020(CZ), whereby and whereunder this Tribunal vide order dated 28.02.2022, considering the issue of damage to the Nawab Siddique Hassan Khan Talab, Motia Talab and Munshi Hassan Talab, observed as follows :-
“6. Averments in the application are that Bhoj wetland is an ancient large man-made lake in central India. It was created in 11th Century by the King Bhoj with open area of 3,201 Sq. ha. at latitude 23(cid:176)14’ N Longitude 077(cid:176) 20E. It was recognized as wetland of international importance and one of the Ramsar Sites. It is home to more than 700 species of diverse flora like zooplankton, phytoplankton, etc. The wetland is also an important site of avian fauna with more than 150 species of both migratory and resident birds. This rich biodiversity of this wetland has, however, been affected adversely in the last few years due to various anthropogenic pressures. As per Rules and orders of this Tribunal, no construction activity permissible within 50 meters of the FTL of the lake. The Bhopal Master Plan 2005 that, 50 meters open space shall be kept from the edge of the upper lake. The Wetland Rules prohibit construction in its catchment area. In violation thereof, large number encroachments have been permitted. No action has been taken inspite of orders of this Tribunal dated 17.12.2015 in O.A. No. 21/2013, Dr. Alankrita Mehra v. UOI and dated 19.07.2021 in O.A. No. 135/2014, Subhash C. Pandey v. State of M.P.
7. Vide order dated 10.06.2021, on further consideration of the matter in the light of the earlier proceedings and the pleadings, the Tribunal constituted a joint Committee comprising of the Collector, Bhopal, (M.P.), Municipal Commissioner, Bhopal, (M.P.) and MP State PCB to visit the site and file an action taken report on the following points:-
i. The total number of drains where untreated/sewage water is being discharged in the lake or river bodies in Bhopal.
ii. Total number of STPs installed there.
iii. Quantity of water being used by the residents in the city of Bhopal. iv. Total capacity to treat the water.
iv. The gap between the use and capacity to treat.
v. Future planning of the municipality to meet out the gap and make proper arrangements for treatment of the water.
vi. Action taken against the polluters who are discharging the water, sewage and untreated water into the river bodies and causing water pollution and contaminating the underground water.
vii. It is directed that Municipal Authorities to ensure that no solid waste be thrown into the open space and there should be no discharge of untreated/sewage water into the water bodies or in the open space and anyone violating the norms."
11. Finally, on 16.02.2022, the matter was further considered. It was noted that 41 drains were discharging in untreated sewage/ effluents in the lake. 227 encroachments still existed, which were needed to be removed. Operative part of the order is as follows:-
"1. City of Bhopal is proud of being a city of lakes, but the fa
