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) 3909

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CHENNAI (SOUTHERN ZONE BENCH)
SMT. PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J, DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, ACJ
M. Manickaraj – Appellant
Versus
The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board – Respondent
Original Application No. 62 of 2023 (SZ)



Advocates:
For the Applicant(s): Mr. Yogeshwaran
For the Respondent(s): Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R1, Mr. G.M. Syed Nurullah Sheriff for R2

Existing brick kilns must have valid environmental clearances; illegal units cannot be classified as existing.

Headnote:(A) Environmental (Protection) Rules, 1986 - Notification GSR 143 (E) dated 22.02.2022 - Siting criteria for brick kilns - Applicability of the siting criteria only to new brick kilns and not to existing units is under challenge - The court held that existing brick kilns must comply with legal requirements; illegal units cannot be deemed existing - The clarification allowing illegal operations is set aside as impermissible. (Paras 25, 26)

(B) Pollution Control Board - The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board's interpretation of the notification that existing kilns are exempt from siting norms is incorrect - Such clarification would facilitate illegal operations ignoring necessary approvals. (Paras 20, 21)

Facts of the case:
The applicant challenges a memo from the Pollution Control Board which stated that the siting criteria for brick kilns applies only to new kilns established after 22.02.2022. The applicant argues that only units with proper consents should be considered existing.

Findings of Court:
The memorandum allowing illegal brick kilns to operate under the guise of being existing units is found incorrect and is set aside.

Issues: The crucial issue was whether existing brick kilns operating without the necessary consents can be classified as 'existing' for the purpose of public health and environmental safety.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that for a brick kiln to qualify as 'existing,' it must have the requisite environmental clearances, and illegal units cannot be recognized as such.

Result: The clarification issued by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board is set aside.

Table of Content
1. clearly defines the applicant's challenge against the applicability of siting criteria. (Para 1 , 2)
2. outlines the applicant's arguments regarding legal existing brick kilns and illegal operations. (Para 5 , 6 , 10)
3. court's observation on the interpretation of the notification concerning existing and proposed brick kilns. (Para 15 , 20 , 21)
4. final ruling that the clarification permitting illegal operations is unjustifiable. (Para 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT

Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member

1. The applicant, who is resident of Nanjundapuram in Thadagam of Coimbatore District, is challenging the Memo No. T1/TNPCB/F.029331/Brick kilns/2018 dated 14.02.2023 issued by the 1st respondent stating that the siting criteria prescribed by the 2nd respondent, MoEF&CC, vide Notificaiton GSR 143 (E) dated 22.02.2022 applies only to brick kilns established on or after 22.02.2022 and not to the existing brick kilns.

2. According to the applicant only those legally existing and operating bick kilns i.e., those in existence and operation with valid consent from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 , Hill Area Conservation Authority Regulations, 1990 (HACA) approval etc can be considered as existing units. Those brick kilns which are being operated illegal without any kind of such approval cannot be termed as „existing‟.

3. The genesis of the impugned memo is based on the notification issued by MoEF&CC in GSR 143 (E) dated 22.02.2022. The said general statutory rules bring in an amendment to the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 by which the emission norms and technology were prescribed and the note under the same prescribes the siting criteria. The relevant notes are 6 7 and 8 which are extracted below:

“6. Brick kilns should be established at a minimum distance of 0.8 kilometre from habitation and fruit orchards. State Pollution Control Boards/Pollution Control Committees may make siting criteria stringent considering proximity to habitation, population density, water bodies, sensitive receptors, etc.

7. Brick kilns should be established at a minimum distance of one kilometer from an existing brick kiln to avoid clustering of kilns in an area.

8. Brick kilns shall follow process emission/fugitive dust emission control guidelines as prescribed by concerned State Pollution Control Boards/Pollution Control Committees.”

4. The above said notes specify the distance between two kilns as 01 km and distance between habitations, orchards should be 0.8 kms. The above notes specifically mandates the State Pollution Control Boards or the Pollution Control Committees to make the siting criteria more stringent depending upon sensitive receptors, water bodies etc. The above said siting criteria is based on the fact that there should not be a cluster of brick kilns and the habitations should be separated by at least a distance of 01 km.

5. While so, the impugned memo issued by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board dated 14.02.2023 interpreting the notification of MoEF&CC stating that the said amendments would apply only to new brick kilns and not to brick kilns that were in existence earlier. The applicant has challenged the above impugned memo on the following grounds:

(i) As it would be advantageous to the existing illegal operators the same is challenged by the applicant as ex facie illegal and in violation of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 .

(ii) It is not in consonance with the MoEF&CC notification in GSR 143(E) dated 14.02.2022.

(iii) The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board cannot read beyond the powers prescribed under the said notification of the MoEF&CC.

(iv) The existing brick kilns referred to in the MoEF&CC notification would only mean those are existing legally and operating with the necessary approva

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