Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 763
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
SUDHIR AGARWAL, J, DR. ARUN KUMAR VERMA, ACJ
Milan Kunda and Ors. – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal & Ors. – Respondent
Original Application No. 129/2024/EZ | Earlier O.A. No.141/2024/PB
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Abhinaba Dan
For the Respondents: Mr. Krishnendu Bera, Mr. Ayush Kumar Dadhich
The tribunal established that pre-existing poultry operations did not meet criteria for environmental violations under relevant guidelines without specific evidence to support the claims.
Headnote:(A) Environmental Protection Act, 1986 - Poultry Farming Guidelines - Complaint raised regarding the environmental impact of poultry farm operations under CPCB Guidelines and state regulations. Allegations of pollution and noncompliance with siting criteria were made against the poultry farm operator. The inspection revealed that the unit did not qualify as a poultry farm as defined under the guidelines due to not exceeding the bird count threshold, thus no environmental law violations were established. (Paras 5, 6, 11, 12)
(B) Jurisdiction - The Tribunal affirmed its limited scope in assessing compliance for pre-existing establishments and stressed that novel complaints require specific proof of statutory breaches. (Paras 10, 12)
Facts of the case:
Residents alleged environmental violations due to poultry farm operations causing pollution. The Tribunal ordered an inspection by a Joint Committee that found the operations did not violate legal standards.
Findings of Court:
No sufficient evidence of pollution or violation of siting criteria was established to take further action against the respondent.
Issues: The key issue was whether the poultry operations breached CPCB guidelines due to proximity to residential and water sources.
Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal clarified that without evidence of violations specifically outlined in the guidelines, no further legal action was necessary.
Result: The Original Application was disposed of with no further orders required.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. registration of the original application based on a letter petition. (Para 1) |
| 2. allegations against a poultry farm regarding environmental pollution due to odor and health hazards. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 3. findings from inspections reported by joint committee regarding farm characteristics and regulatory requirements. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. legal counsel's arguments regarding siting criteria and license legitimacy. (Para 10) |
| 5. determining compliance based on existing operations vs new establishments. (Para 11) |
| 6. conclusion on the absence of mandated violations warranting further legal measures. (Para 12) |
| 7. final order of the tribunal disposing the application without further legal action. (Para 14) |
ORDER
1. This Original Application (hereinafter referred to as ‘OA’) was registered on a letter petition dated 07.09.2023 sent by Milan Kunda and others, taking cognizance thereof, in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha , (2022) 13 SCC 401 .
2. The complainants have said that they are residents of Village and Post Office-Janta, Police Station-Bishnupur, District-Bankura, State of West Bengal. One Manik Kundu Sio Late Nimai Kundu is running a poultry farm in the village near Durga Mata Temple, Mansa Mata Temple and Aathchala (hollyshed where religious programs conducted). There is also a tube-well near the poultry farm. Poultry farm releases bad smell causing air and also causing soil and water pollution. The poultry farm is running without following siting criteria mentioned in Notification of Central Pollution Control Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPCB’) dated August 2021 and Memorandum dated 10.01.2022, Department of Environment, Govt. of West Bengal’s instruction on ‘Poultry Farm’ dated 18.07.2016 read with West Bengal State Pollution Control Board’s (hereinafter referred to as ‘WBSPCB’) Memorandum dated 27.01.2022.
3. Tribunal while taking cognizance of the matter on 22.04.2024, constituted a Joint Committee to verify factual position and take remedial action. The Committee was comprised of representatives of WBSPCB, District Veterinary Officer, Bankura (hereinafter referred to as ‘DVO, Bankura’) and District Magistrate, Bankura (hereinafter referred to as ‘DM, Bankura’).
4. Pursuant to order dated 22.04.2024, an inspection was conducted by Joint Committee and its Report is on record as annexure R-4 at page 45 along with the affidavit of DVO, Bankura (respondent 3). Report says that the unit under scrutiny is not a ‘poultry farm’ in true sense, but a stock shed with feeding arrangement for adult broiler birds only to be sold in live state, on wholesale basis, to chicken meat selling outlets. Hence, here, no rearing/raising of chicks upto adult stage is done. Stocking/storage capacity of the shed is much less than 5000 broiler birds at a time. Though, characteristic odour of broiler shed was felt within 15 metres of the shed under scrutiny whose size is 40 ft. (cid:215) 20 ft. but no littering outside the shed was seen to have been done by the unit. The entire observations and other relevant information given in the inspection Report read as under:
5. Consistent to the observations and information contained in inspection Report, DVO, Bankura in its affidavit has also stated that as per Tribunal’s Principal Bench’s order dated 16.09.2020 in OA No.681/2017, Gauri Maulekhi vs. Union of India & Ors., a person desiring to carry on business of poultry farm having more than 5,000 birds must require Consent to Operate (hereinafter referred to as ‘CTO’) from State Pollution Control Board. Principal Bench of Tribunal in OA No.320/2021, Gauri Maulekhi vs. Union of India & Ors. vide order dated 10.12.2021 observed that the Guidelines shall be enforced but in respect of poultry farms having more than 5,000 birds will be covered by the said Guidelines w.e.f. 01.01.2023. CPCB has issued Guidelines in January 2022 which govern poultry farms in respect of environmental aspects for ma
