Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(NGT) 5156
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
Sudhir Agarwal, Judicial Member, Afroz Ahmad, Expert Member
Vikrant Tongad – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.363/2022 (I.A. No.555/2024)
For the Respondents:Mr. Gi. Gi. C. George and Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocates for respondents no. 1, 2 and 6, Mr. Pinaki Misra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Nishikant Singh and Mr. Swatej Jetta Advocates for respondent no.3 NOIDA with Mr. Lokesh M, CEO, NOIDA (through VC), Mr. Ravindra Gupta, CLO, Mr. S. P. Singh, Law Officer, NOIDA, Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shivam Saksena, Advocate for GNIDA, Mr. Pradeep Misra and Mr. Daleep Dhyani, Advocates for UPPCB, Mr. Atif Suhrawardy, Advocate for CPCB (through VC), Mr. Shlok Chandra and Mr. Sankalp Sharma, Advocates for MoEF&CC (through VC)
Excessive urban concretization violates sustainability by blocking groundwater recharge; mandates permeable paving limited to specified widths, 1m tree buffers, green restoration balancing dust control and ecology.
Headnote:(A) Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Sections 3 and 5 - National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Section 20 - Guidelines for rainwater harvesting, groundwater recharge, urban greening, and flood prevention - Excessive concretization of roadsides and roadberms violates government orders and NGT directions by preventing groundwater recharge, causing urban flooding, eliminating biodiversity, creating heat islands, and increasing surface run-off by 75-95% - Impervious surfaces must be minimized; permeable/semi-permeable perforated blocks, fly ash bricks limited to specified widths (max 0.50m on road edges, 1.50m footpaths); no cement concrete interlocking tiles or blacktop around water bodies; parks limited to 5% permanent construction; 1m deconcretized space around trees mandatory - Substantial compliance required balancing dust control, pedestrian safety, and environmental protection. (Paras 67, 69, 72, 85)
(B) Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle - Urban development must prioritize groundwater recharge, green infrastructure over indiscriminate paving; soil as carbon sink and biodiversity habitat protected; vegetation on roadberms essential for pollutant absorption, microclimate regulation, and flood mitigation - Authorities to deconcretize violations, restore with grass/shrubs; PAN India directions for permeable surfaces, tree protection. (Paras 72, 85)
Facts of the case:
Residents challenged reckless concretization of roadsides/roadberms in specified sectors by development authorities, alleging violation of state government order (dated 23.03.2018), NGT prior judgments, and urban development guidelines, causing environmental damage including blocked recharge, flooding, heat islands, biodiversity loss.
Findings of Court:
Development authorities substantially complying by using interlocking tiles on granular sub-base as permitted; removed violations where pointed out; no further directions needed but reiterated guidelines observance; liberty to applicants for future complaints.
Issues: Whether excessive concretization violates environmental guidelines; scope of permissible paving for dust control vs. recharge; balancing urban needs with ecological imperatives.
Ratio Decidendi: Substantial compliance with anti-concretization guidelines suffices in vast urban areas; minor deviations justified by traffic/pedestrian safety, dust suppression under GRAP; deconcretize trees (1m radius), limit paving widths, prioritize permeable materials, restore greenberms for recharge/sustainability - PAN India applicability.
Result: OA disposed of with directions to all states/UTs for guideline compliance; no further orders against authorities.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicants allege excessive concretization violating environmental orders. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. up govt order mandates rainwater harvesting and limited concretization. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. ngt orders and up g.o. limit permeable paving around water bodies. (Para 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. air pollution control requires road greening and dust suppression. (Para 7 , 8 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. concretization reduces groundwater recharge and harms biodiversity. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. noida/gnida violate guidelines with impermeable roadside tiling. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 7. authorities claim compliance using permeable tiles for dust control. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33 , 47 , 59) |
| 8. guidelines prioritize groundwater recharge over excessive paving. (Para 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72) |
| 9. ngt precedents mandate tree protection and green belts. (Para 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85) |
| 10. pan-india compliance with anti-concretization guidelines ordered. (Para 86 , 87 , 88 , 89) |
-
JUDGMENT
BY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. This Original Application (hereinafter referred to as ‘OA’) has been preferred by Vikrant Tongad and Dr. Supriya Mahajan. Both are residents of District Gautam Budh Nagar, State of Uttar Pradesh. It is alleged that there is huge damage to environment due to reckless, excessive and indiscriminate concretisation of road sides and roadberms, carried out by New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as ‘NOIDA’) in Sectors 28, 37, 47, 50, 55 and 62 and by Greater Noida Authority (hereinafter referred to as ‘G NOIDA’) in Sectors Omega 1, Alpha and P3. The said authorities are also violating orders of Tribunal passed in OA 165/2013, Ashish Vashishtha vs. Union of India & Ors. and also, Government Order dated 23.03.2018 issued by State of UP and concurred by Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (hereinafter referred to as ‘MoEF&CC’) in Execution Application No. 34/2017 in OA 165/2013, Akash Vashishtha vs. Union of India & Ors. Act of these authorities is also in gross violation of judgment dated 10.11.2016 passed in OA 21/2014, Vardhaman Kaushik vs. Union of India & Ors. and dated 03.12.2020 passed in OA 283/2020, R. S. Virk vs. Central Pollution Control Board. The activities are also in complete transgression of Guidelines dated 21.07.2000, 03.09.2013 and 23.09.2013 of Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, besides, in contravention of Government Order dated April 2001 issued by State of UP.
-
2. Applicants have impleaded, besides State of UP; District Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar and two authorities i.e., NOIDA and G NOIDA, also MoEF&CC, District Ground Water Management Council, Gautam Budh Nagar (hereinafter referred to as ‘DGWMC GB Nagar’) and certain Residents Welfare Associations namely, Arun Vihar Residents Welfare Association; Residents Welfare Association, Sector-50, Noida; Residents Welfare Association, Sector-47, Noida; Residents Welfare Association, Sector-55, Noida; and, Residents Welfare Association, Sector-62, Noida. 3. The facts stated in OA, in brief, are that applicant-1 is a resident of G NOIDA and a water and environmental conservationist, engaged in the work of environmental protection for last several years. He was also honoured by various authorities for his work on environmental protection. Applicant-2 is senior Consultant Dermatologist, practicing in National Capital Region (hereinafter referred to as ‘NCR’) for the last 20 years, and has written several articles on preservation of environment and ecology and co-founded a community citizens initiative called “Sustainable Alternatives and Awareness against Plastic and Household Waste (SAAPH)”.
-
4. Applicants have stated that for conservation of ground water recharge, State Government of UP earlier took a conscious decision while issuing Government Order dated April 2001 (annexure A-7 at page 121) and communicated the following decision to be
