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) 2657

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
B. Amit Sthalekar, Judicial Member, Arun Kumar Verma, Expert Member
Binay Basfore – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal – Respondent
Original Application No.88/2024/EZ



Advocates:
For Applicant(s): Ankur Sharma
For Respondent(s): Sudip Kumar Dutta|Dipanjan Ghosh|Rashhmi Singhee|Sibojyoti Chakrabarti

Boundary walls around private ponds in residential areas need not be demolished if integrated with surrounding houses; restoration of water bodies upheld with directions for maintenance and prevention of illegal filling/dumping.

Headnote:(A) West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 - Section 4C - West Bengal Inland Fisheries Act, 1984 - Section 17A - Town and Country (Planning and Development) Act, 1973 - Section 52A - Environment protection - Circular of Department of Environment dated 08.10.2007 - Filling up of private pond - Allegation of illegal filling and construction of boundary wall around pond in residential area - Prior criminal case filed and chargesheet submitted - Pond restored to original position in August 2024 under supervision of authorities - No evidence of ongoing filling - Boundary wall not ordered for demolition considering congested residential surroundings - Owner directed to maintain pond free from filling and vegetation; authorities to prevent dumping by neighbours. (Paras 6, 8, 10, 16, 24, 25)

(B) National Green Tribunal - Directions for protection of water bodies - Private pond owner to clear vegetation and initiate pisciculture under supervision; local authorities to monitor, demarcate plots, prevent illegal filling/encroachment, and ensure compliance with restoration. (Paras 16, 24-26)

Facts of the case:
Applicant alleged that owner of recorded pond was illegally filling it with soil/debris and had constructed boundary wall around it, violating water body protection laws. Prior writ petition and police FIR led to investigation, chargesheet, restoration orders, and eventual cleaning. Owner denied filling, attributed issues to neighbours' dumping. Latest inspection confirmed restoration but noted re-growth of vegetation.

Findings of Court:
Pond restored to original boundaries with weeds removed; situated in congested residential area surrounded by houses and roads; boundary wall forms part of abutting structures; no direction for its demolition.

Issues: Whether pond filling and boundary wall construction violated laws; propriety of boundary wall in residential context; directions for maintenance and prevention of dumping.

Ratio Decidendi: In residential areas, boundary walls around ponds not directed for removal if integral to surrounding houses; restoration confirmed by reports/photographs; owner must prevent filling/vegetation overgrowth; authorities to act against external dumping on complaint.

Result: Original Application disposed of with directions to owner and State Respondents; no costs.

Table of Content
1. alleged illegal pond filling and boundary wall construction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. official reports confirm partial filling; fir and chargesheet filed. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. pond restoration confirmed; no recent filling observed. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. applicant disputes restoration; opposes boundary walls. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
5. joint inspection verifies restoration; directs maintenance. (Para 16 , 17)
6. denial of filling; boundary walls allowed in residential area. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
7. directs pond maintenance and action against dumping. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)

ORDER

1. The allegation of the Applicant in the present Original Application is that the Respondent No.12, Mohammad Moinuddin Ansari, is filling up a pond measuring about 20 decimals situated in L.R. Dag No.305/477, L.R. Khatian No.1128, J.L. No.32, Police Station- Sankrail of Mouza-Banipur, District-Howrah. It is stated that the Respondent No.12 is the owner of the „Pukur Par‟ (Pond) in question which is recorded as such in the Record of Rights.

2. It is alleged that the Respondent No.12 had constructed a brick boundary wall on the said „Pukur Par‟ against which a writ petition being W.P.A. (P) No.13 of 2022 was filed by the Applicant. It is stated that in the said Writ Petition, a Report in the form of affidavit dated 16.03.2022 was filed by the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer and Special Revenue Officer-II, Sankrail, District-Howrah, stating therein that there is a bamboo fencing between 9268 square feet/21.27 decimal (approx..) and 1038 square feet (approx.) of „Pukur‟/Pond and on both sides of the fencing the Pukur is filled with water hyacinth. It was stated that on the north-eastern side 3330 square feet (approx.) area is filled with piled up rubbish as noticed during physical verification. It was also stated that adjacent Plot No.305/4777 (L.R.) corresponding R.S. Plot No.308 is recorded as “Pukur Parh” and L.R. Plot No.306 corresponding to R.S. Plot No.309 is recorded as „Bastu‟ in favour of one Moinuddin Ansari. It was also stated that the western and northern side of the plots recorded in the Khatian of Moinuddin Ansari is surrounded by six feet height boundary. It was specifically stated that no pond filling work was going on during physical verification.

3. It is also stated that the said Writ Petition was disposed of by the Hon‟ble High Court vide its order dated 23.08.2022 with a direction to the Block Land and Land Reforms Officer, Howrah, to give an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties and also verify the existing position on the spot with due intimation to the concerned parties and take appropriate decision in accordance with law to ensure that the water body and the embankment are protected and no illegal filling up takes place in violation of any of the provisions of the Act or the Rules.

4. The allegation of the Applicant is that a six feet boundary wall has been constructed all around the Plot Nos.306, 305 through L.R. Plot No.477 which is totally illegal. It is also stated that the Respondent No.12 has prayed for permission to clean up the pond and to repair the Pukur Par.

5. We find that the order of the Block Land & Land Reforms Officer, Sankrail, Howrah, stated to be in compliance of the order of the Hon‟ble High Court has been filed at page no.59 of the paper book, para 4 of which mentions that “dumping of garbage on one side of the water body is in corroboration with the written statement filed by the alleged raiyat Moinuddin Ansari”. Para 6 of the said order also mentions that “since there is no proof of filling of the waterbody by the Raiyat no penal action could be taken for violation of Section 4 C (2) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955”.

6. The Inspector-In-Charge, Sankrail Police Station has filed affidavit dated 05.07.2024 stating that on 07.04.2024 an application was lodged at the Sankrail Police Station and the concerned officer alleged that during enquiry of a mass petiti

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