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) 5623

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
B. Amit Sthalekar, Judicial Member, Arun Kumar Verma, Expert Member
Manoj Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Bihar Foundry and Castings Limited – Respondent
Original Application No.148/2024/EZ|Original Application No.183/2023/EZ|Original Application No.44/2023/EZ (I.A. No.67/2024/EZ)



Advocates:
For the Applicant(s): Mr. Puran Sharma, Mr. Narender Pal Singh, Mr. Bharat Sharma, Mr. Harshit Shekhar, Mr. Ankit Burman, Mr. Anubhav Khastagir
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Sanjay Upadhyay, Mr. Shubham Upadhyay, Ms. Mansi Bachani, Mr. Surya Gupta, Ms. Rashhmi Singhee, Mr. Surendra Kumar, Mr. Sibojyoti Chakrabarti, Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree, Mr. Ashok Prasad, Ms. Anamika Pandey, Mr. Gigi C George

Supreme Court stay on violation SOP permits processing EC expansions under pre-2021 law; operations continue pending final adjudication, with directions for compliance rectification and no immediate closure.

Headnote:(A) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Sections 15, 19 - EIA Notification, 2006 - Category A Metallurgical Industry - Operation of industrial units without prior environmental clearance, discrepancies in land area reporting, unauthorized expansion including additional furnace and converter - Validity of consents issued despite violations - Supreme Court stay on OM dated 07.07.2021 (SOP for violation cases) - Processing of expansion proposals under pre-07.07.2021 law permitted but final EC grant pending - Directions issued for rectification of name discrepancies in consents, installation of fugitive emission controls, and representation to competent authority for EC; environmental compensation and closure subject to final Supreme Court orders. (Paras 52, 58, 71, 72)

(B) Green Belt Requirements - 33% within premises plus additional off-site plantation to achieve 40% total land cover - Compliance verified through inspections and undertakings for further development. (Paras 54, 60)

(C) Groundwater Abstraction - NOCs issued and renewed for specified quantities with surface water permissions; allegations of overdrawing not substantiated. (Paras 55)

Facts of the case:
Three consolidated applications alleged environmental violations by industrial units operating ferro alloy and sponge iron plants including discrepancies in land area between lease deeds and clearances, lack of prior environmental clearance for expansions (5th submerged arc furnace and CLU converter), unauthorized product mix changes, inadequate green belt, illegal groundwater abstraction, and fraudulent use of clearances between related units. State Pollution Control Board inspections confirmed operations with valid consents till specified dates, minor discrepancies, and functional emission monitoring; violations prosecuted with compensation imposed; expansion proposals under consideration as violation cases per SOP 07.07.2021 but stayed by Supreme Court.

Findings of Court:
Discrepancies in unit naming in consents to be rectified; fugitive emission controls at raw material unloading to be installed within two months; green belt compliance adequate with additional off-site development; units directed to approach competent authority for environmental clearance; no closure ordered pending Supreme Court final adjudication on violation SOP.

Issues: (1) Whether operations and expansions without prior environmental clearance violate law despite consents and pending proposals; (2) Validity of land area discrepancies and green belt compliance; (3) Effect of Supreme Court stay on violation SOP for processing EC applications.

Ratio Decidendi: Supreme Court interim orders permit processing modification/expansion proposals under pre-07.07.2021 law if prior valid EC existed, without stalling operations pending final decision; regulatory authorities must rectify discrepancies and ensure compliance measures; liability for compensation/closure deferred to higher court adjudication.

Result: Original Applications disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. discrepancies in land area and clearances alleged (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. jspcb inspection confirms operations and compliances (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
3. groundwater noc valid with renewals (Para 14 , 15 , 22 , 27 , 55)
4. operations without ec violate sop 07.07.2021 (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
5. ec proposals under violation category processed (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 44 , 45)
6. supreme court stays violation sop operations (Para 37 , 46 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 69 , 70)
7. jspcb enforces compliance directions (Para 40 , 42 , 43 , 54 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60)
8. court directs name rectification in consents (Para 51 , 52 , 53)
9. applications disposed; ec to moef&cc (Para 71 , 72 , 73 , 74)

ORDER

1. Mr. Puran Sharma, learned Counsel assisted by Mr. Narender Pal Singh and Mr. Bharat Sharma, learned Counsel is present (in Virtual Mode) for the Applicant in O.A. No.148/2024/EZ.

2. Mr. Harshit Shekhar, learned Counsel assisted by Mr. Ankit Burman is present for the Applicant in O.A. No.183/2023/EZ.

3. Mr. Anubhav Khastagir, learned Counsel is present for the Applicant in O.A. No.44/2023/EZ.

4. Affidavit dated 27.01.2025 has been filed by the Respondent No.4, Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board in O.A. No.44/2023/EZ; the same is taken on record.

5. Mr. Surendra Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board in both the Original Applications states that the same affidavit shall be treated as read in Original Application No.183/2023/EZ also.

6. Learned Counsel for the parties state that the issue involved in O.A. No.148/2024/EZ is identical to that of O.A. No.183/2023/EZ and O.A. No.44/2023/EZ.

7. In view of this matter, all the three Original Applications namely O.A. No.148/2024/EZ, O.A. No.183/2023/EZ and O.A. No.44/2023/EZ are being taken up together for disposal.

(Final order of this case will be uploaded in NGT website by separate sheets of paper).

ORDER

(Original Application No.148/2024/EZ)

1. This Original Application has been filed by the Applicant alleging that the Respondent No.1, Bihar Foundry and Castings Limited (‘BFCL’ in short), was granted lease of Ferro Alloy Unit for 3.51 acres of land by the State Government in 1985 for a period of 99 years but Environmental Clearance was granted to the Respondent No.1 for 14 acres of land which shows a discrepancy.

2. It is stated that first Environmental Clearance was issued to Respondent No.1 on 31.10.2011. It is also stated that in 2020, the Respondent No.1 executed a lease deed for 3.67 acres of land but the Consent to Operate (CTO) issued by the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board specifies the total land area as 7.26 acres. At the same time, the Pre-feasibility Report, six monthly Environmental Clearance Compliance Report and Environmental Statement (Form-V) indicates the land area as 7.76 acres which again shows a discrepancy in land area.

3. It is also stated that the Respondent No.1 has failed to obtain the mandatory No Objection Certificate (NOC) and Consent to Establish (CTE) from the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board for its initial 1 x 5 MVA furnace established in 1996 and its subsequent 1 x 5 MVA furnace established in 1999 which would be seen in the Factory Inspector’s letter dated 18.12.1999. It is further stated that NOC was granted by Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board only on 24.02.2000.

4. It is stated that first Consent to Operate (CTO) was obtained by the Respondent No.1 on 12.03.2015. It is also stated that the Respondent No.1 obtained Consent to Establish (CTE) on 20.05.2009 for 1 x 7.5 MVA furnace for production of 30 TPD of SiMn ferro alloy without securing the mandatory Environmental Clearance. It is further stated that Consent to Establish (CTE) a Ferro Alloy Industry falls under Category-A of the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006.

5. It is stated that there is no Environmental Clearance in the name of the proprieto

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