SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 1966

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
MR. PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CJ, MR. SUDHIR AGARWAL, J, DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, ACJ
SANDEEP KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
M.A. NO. 100/2024 | ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 328/2024



Advocates:
Mr. Prakash Pandey
Mr. Srinivas Vishven
Mr. Amit Shukla, Ms. Neha Shukla, and Mr. Deva Singh Shukla
Mr. Vikrant Rana
Ms. Priyanka Swami

The right to a clean environment is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, and compliance with environmental regulations is mandatory to ensure public health and safety.

Headnote:(A) National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Sections 14, 15, 18 - Environmental compliance - Applicant claimed illegal operation of poultry farm affecting air quality and health rights - Violations of siting criteria and absence of required permits under environmental laws were established but farm argued compliance with previous regulations - Tribunal directed inspections and action by pollution control authorities. (Paras 1, 3, 4, 26, 51)

(B) Environmental Rights - Right to clean environment as an extension of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution upheld - Employer's duty to ensure compliance with environmental guidelines for public health protection emphasized. (Para 1)

Facts of the case:
The applicant contended that the poultry farm operated by the respondent was illegally established too close to residential zones, causing severe air pollution and health issues. Inspections confirmed that the farm did not have the necessary consent under applicable environmental laws and had unsatisfactory waste management practices leading to nuisance and health hazards. (Paras 2, 3, 10)

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal found substantial violations on the part of the poultry farm and directed the pollution control board to take action but also acknowledged a recent revocation of the closure order upon compliance with certain guidelines, including imposing an environmental compensation. (Paras 46, 52)

Issues: The legal questions were primarily whether the poultry farm should be allowed to operate given the alleged violations of environmental norms and the responses of the pollution control authorities to these violations. (Paras 24, 28)

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that non-compliance with environmental regulations is serious and actionable, recognizing the need for the poultry farm to fully comply with updated guidelines regarding its operation and environmental impact, while also considering the interim relief provided by the Supreme Court regarding certain regulatory requirements. (Para 45)

Result: The Miscellaneous Application treated as Execution Application was disposed of with no further orders needed since violations were found to be substantially addressed and the measures implemented were adequate as per the pollution board's recommendations. (Paras 52)

Table of Content
1. complaint about illegal poultry farm operation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. inspection findings and health hazards. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. details of complaints and inspections leading to closure. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. arguments regarding environmental violations. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
5. compliance with tribunal's earlier orders. (Para 43 , 44 , 48 , 50)
6. decision on execution of tribunal's order. (Para 46 , 51)

JUDGMENT

BY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. Applicant Sandeep Kumar has invoked jurisdiction of this Tribunal by filing this Original Application (hereinafter referred to as ‘OA’) under Sections 14 and 15 read with 18 of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as ‘NGT Act, 2010’) particularly against M/s Royal Layer Poultry Farm, impleaded as respondent 5 (hereinafter referred to as ‘project proponent’), complaining that it is operating poultry farm illegally, unauthorizedly and in violation of environmental laws relating to consent and even otherwise causing damage to environment polluting air. It is also said that the siting criteria for establishment of poultry farm has been deviated/violated by the project proponent in establishing its poultry farm.

2. The applicant, in brief, has stated in the OA that he is a resident of village Dakhodi, Jamalpur District Shamli, State of Uttar Pradesh and enjoy right of clean environment i.e., clean water, clean air etc. enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. Respondents 1 to 4 i.e., State of Uttar Pradesh through Chief Secretary; Central Pollution Control Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPCB’); Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘UPPCB’) and Collector, Shamli are authorities holding responsibility of protection and improvement of environment and compliance of the environmental laws. Respondent 5- project proponent is a poultry farm classified as ‘green’ under the classification of industrial sectors by CPCB. The poultry farm of respondent 5 is situated in village Dakhodi, Jamalpur, Thana Bhawan, Janpad Shamli which is at a distance of 200 meters, east from the residential zone of applicant’s village Chandenamal and 800 meters north from the population of applicant’s village Dakhodi, Jamalpur. Poultry farm of respondent 5 causes an intolerable pungent smell and flies spreading in the atmosphere. The presence of foul smell and large amount of flies has been felt by the applicant due to close proximity of poultry farm of respondent 5 with the residential zone of applicant’s village. Continuous presence of all odour, toxic gases and flies in the air causes multiple diseases to human population of applicant’s villages and domesticated animals. Flies made it unbearable for every villager to live and work in their agricultural fields. Foul odour emanates from undisposed dead birds, littering in the poultry farm of respondent 5 and badly affects the villagers. It also affects the growth and development of infants and children. Old people are facing respiratory problems leading to aggression and despair in the entire affected area and all these activities causes infringement of applicant’s fundamental Right of Life and Liberty which includes a clean environment under Article 21 of Constitution of India. The applicant has lodged complaints against the illegal operation of poultry farm by respondent 5. On the complaint of the applicant, UPPCB conducted an inspection on 24.03.2023 on the premise of respondent 5. The inspection Report submitted by Regional Officer, UPPCB, Muzaffarnagar along with its letter dated 09.05.2023 is annexure A1 at page 30. The letter of 09.05.2023 says that the poultry farm is at a distance of 200 meters from abadi and has capacity of 40,000 birds. It was being operated without obtaining any consent under Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Air Act, 1981’) and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (hereinafter ref

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