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) 4099

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL BHOPAL (CENTRAL ZONE BENCH)
Sheo Kumar Singh, Judicial Member, Afroz Ahmad, Expert Member
Tahir Hussain – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Appeal No.02/2024 (CZ)|I.A.No.13/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Prakash Pandey, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Prashant Sthapak, Adv., Ms. Vanshika Dubey, Adv., Mr. Shoeb Hasan Khan, Adv.

Retrospective regularization of operations without prior environmental consents via fees, exempting compensation, violates statutes and Polluter Pays Principle; requires prior consents, penalties, and damage-based compensation.

Headnote:(A) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Sections 3, 7; Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 - Sections 25, 26, 44, 45A, 45E; Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 - Sections 21, 39, 39D - National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Section 20 - Pollution Control - Consent to Establish/Operate - State Pollution Control Board order regularizing 'back period' operations without prior consents by charging fees and exempting Environmental Compensation held violative of statutory mandates requiring prior consents and punitive actions for violations - Polluter Pays Principle and Precautionary Principle, part of environmental law, mandate accountability for environmental harm during unauthorized operations, not retrospective regularization - CPCB methodology for Environmental Compensation and prior judicial precedents prohibit ex post facto consents without damage assessment and compensation - Order quashed with directions to modify per CPCB guidelines and law. (Paras 5, 6, 13, 26)

(B) Environmental Law Principles - Polluter Pays Principle requires polluters to bear costs of environmental restoration and compensation for harm, extending to cleanup and reversal of damage - No retrospective consents or regularization without assessing and recovering compensation for unauthorized operations - Both penalty (fees) and Environmental Compensation required on case-to-case basis for deterrence and restoration. (Paras 13, 26)

Facts of the case:
Appeal challenging State Pollution Control Board order dated 02.01.2024 streamlining 'back period' fees for operations without valid consents, regularizing such periods via consents, and exempting Environmental Compensation for regularized back periods - Appellant contended violation of environmental statutes, Polluter Pays Principle, and prior judicial orders - Respondents defended as rationalizing dual penalties; CPCB expert committee report opposed regularization.

Findings of Court:
State Board order beyond jurisdiction, against statutory provisions, Polluter Pays Principle, and CPCB guidelines - Directed State Board to amend notification per CPCB report and law within 60 days - Costs of Rs.5,000/- awarded to appellant.

Issues: Whether State Board order regularizing back period operations without prior consents via fees, exempting Environmental Compensation, violates environmental statutes, Polluter Pays Principle, and CPCB methodology requiring prior consents, penalties, and compensation for violations.

Ratio Decidendi: Prior consents mandatory under environmental laws; retrospective regularization undermines regulatory framework, Polluter Pays Principle, and public trust doctrine - Units operating without consents liable for both penalties and Environmental Compensation based on damage assessment; no ex post facto approval without accountability.

Result: Appeal allowed; impugned order dated 02.01.2024 quashed and directed to be modified per CPCB guidelines within 60 days.

Table of Content
1. state pcb notification regularizes back period consents without ec. (Para 1)
2. notification violates polluter pays and precautionary principles. (Para 2 , 3 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
3. back period fees rationalize dual penalties, regularize consents. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. cte/cto mandatory; retrospective regularization violates law. (Para 13)
5. strict compliance with consent laws and cpcb ec methodology required. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. pcb order exceeds jurisdiction, contravenes environmental principles. (Para 26)
7. quash pcb order; direct compliance with cpcb guidelines. (Para 27 , 28)

ORDER

1. The State Pollution Control Board Respondent No. 3 vide order dated

02.01.2024, issued a notification as follows:-

“ d. No Environmental Compensation would be levied for the Back Period for which Consent to operate has been regularised.

e. …..

f…. g….

it is further clarified that this dispensation would also be applicable in case where demand of Environmental Compensation raised on account of “Back Period” is yet to be deposited”

2. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the appellant are that the above notification is in violation of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and order passed by this Tribunal in Original Application No. 606/2018.

3. It is further argued that it is in violation of order of Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India reported in 1996 A.I.R. S.C.W., page 3399, Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum Appellant Vs. Union of India & Ors. Respondent.

4. Notices were issued to the Respondents and in compliance thereof, Respondents have filed their reply. A report/expert report and opinion was called from the Regional Director, CPCB, Bhopal, Integral Office and he has submitted the report. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. The submission of the learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 - CPCB are that the consent to establish and consent to operate to industrial unit is given by concerned State Pollution Control Board in accordance with the Section 21 of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, which states that, "(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, no person shall, without the previous consent of the State Board, establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area.... (2) An application for consent of the State Board under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied by such fees as may be prescribed and shall be made in the prescribed form and shall contain the particulars of the industrial plant and such other particulars as may be prescribed." Also, Section 25 of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, states that, "(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, no person shall, without the previous consent of the State Board, (a) establish or take any steps to establish any industry, operation or process, or any treatment and disposal system or any extension or addition thereto, which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into a stream or well or sewer or on land (such discharge being hereafter in this section referred to as discharge of sewage); or (b) bring into use any new or altered outlet for the discharge of sewage; or (c) begin to make any new discharge of sewage... (2) An application for consent of the State Board under sub-section (1) shall be made in such form, contain such particulars and shall be accompanied by such fees as may be prescribed.

6. That in reference to the Hon’ble Tribunal’s order dated 31.08.2018 in the matter of O.A. 593/2017 titled Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. a methodology for assessing EC was prepared by CPCB. The said methodology was accepted as an interim measure by the Hon’ble Tribunal vide order dated 28.08.2019. It is submitted that, the above referred methodology considers following cases for levying

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