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) 5458

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL KOLKATA (EASTERN ZONE BENCH)
B. Amit Sthalekar, Judicial Member, Satyagopal Korlapati, Expert Member
Karunath Pazing – Appellant
Versus
Arunachal Pradesh State Pollution Control Board – Respondent
Original Application No.10/2024/EZ



Advocates:
For the Applicant(s)/Petitioners: None
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Surendra Kumar|Mr. Ashok Prasad|Ms. Amrita Pandey|Mr. Vikas Baisya

Stone crushing units prohibited within 5 km of reserve forest per guidelines; illegal operation despite flawed NOCs mandates closure, official accountability via proceedings, and environmental compensation recovery.

Headnote:(A) Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 - Schedule-I - Stone crushing units - ‘Orange’ category (Pollution Index Score 41-59) - Arunachal Pradesh Stone Crusher Guidelines, 2012 - Para 6.1(d) - Minimum distance from reserve forest/wildlife sanctuary: 5 km or buffer zone - Location within 500 m of reserve forest boundary violates guidelines despite prior NOCs - Illegal operation despite consents; pollution control measures absent - Distance criteria: 1 km from national highway, 500 m from human habitation mandatory. (Paras 3, 7, 20, 21, 23-25)

(B) Administrative Law - Issuance of NOCs - Deliberate omissions in distance tables (omitting reserve forest/wildlife sanctuary) and contradictory certifications by forest authorities - Departmental proceedings directed against erring officials for granting permissions in violation of notified guidelines. (Paras 19, 27-30)

(C) Environmental Compensation - Determination and recovery from delinquent public officials for facilitating illegal unit operation - Utilization for site restoration and afforestation with native species. (Paras 31-32)

Facts of the case:
Applicant alleged illegal stone crushing unit operation near river bridge without permissions, violating environmental distances (300 m from highway, 400 m from resort), lacking forest clearance and pollution controls. Representations ignored. Unit had CTO (2021), initial NOC (2023, cancelled later), but located <500 m from reserve forest per geo-coordinates. Affidavits revealed contradictory official stands; prior NOCs omitted key distance info.

Findings of Court:
Unit operation prohibited; immediate removal ordered. Departmental proceedings against then Additional Deputy Commissioner and Divisional Forest Officer for concealment/erroneous NOCs. Environmental Compensation to be calculated by Pollution Control Board, recovered from officials, used for restoration/afforestation. Compliance within 3 months.

Issues: Whether stone crushing unit location <5 km from reserve forest violates guidelines; validity of NOCs with omissions/contradictions; liability of officials for illegal permissions; environmental remediation.

Ratio Decidendi: Operation within prohibited distance from reserve forest (despite >5 km from wildlife sanctuary) contravenes guidelines; prior NOCs invalid due to violations/deliberate omissions by officials who cannot claim ignorance of 2012-notified rules. Environmental protection mandates strict distance compliance, closure of illegal units, official accountability.

Result: Original Application disposed of with directions for unit removal, departmental actions, compensation recovery and utilization.

Table of Content
1. procedural non-appearance noted. (Para 1 , 2)
2. alleged illegal stone crushing operations. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. conflicting nocs and forest clearances. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. omission of reserve forest distance. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)
5. 5km distance from reserve forest required. (Para 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 25)
6. bonafide reliance but official lapses. (Para 22 , 26 , 27)
7. unit closure and departmental actions. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)

ORDER

1. The allegation of the Applicant in the present Original Application is that the Respondent No.13, M/s Balaji Minerals, is carrying on illegal operation of Stone Crushing Unit near Siku River Bridge under Mebo Circle, District-East Siang, without necessary permissions from the Government authorities and in violation of the environmental guidelines.

2. It is stated that No Objection Certificate (‘NOC’ for short) was granted on 14.02.2023 by the Divisional Forest Officer, Pasighat Forest Division, Pasighat, but the same was subsequently cancelled on 06.11.2023 by the same officer. It is also stated that the Consent to Establish/Consent to Operate order has been granted by the Arunachal Pradesh State Pollution Control Board vide certificate dated 25.06.2021.

3. The allegation further is that the said Stone Crusher Unit of Respondent No.13 is located 300 meters from the National Highway and 400 meters from the Siku Notko Resort whereas as per environmental guidelines it should be installed at a distance of at least one kilometer from the National Highway and half a kilometer from human habitation.

4. It is also alleged that as of today, there is no Forest Clearance from the Forest Division. The pollution control measures i.e. dust containment-cum-suppression system for the equipment, construction of wind breaking walls, regular cleaning and wetting of the ground within the premises and greenbelt along the periphery, have not been installed by the Respondent No.13.

5. It is also stated that the Applicant has submitted representation before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Mebo, East Siang District, as well as the District Forest Officer (T), Pasighat Forest Division, and the Assistant Mineral Development Officer, Pasighat, on 31.10.20223 (page 28 of the paper book), but no order has been passed till date.

6. The Arunachal Pradesh State Pollution Control Board, Respondent No.1, has filed affidavit dated 18.03.2024 and it is stated that the NOC has been issued by the Assistant Mineral Development Officer (ADMO), Department of Geology & Mining, East Siang District, vide letter dated 23.06.2021 (page 101 of paper book) as the Respondent No.13 Stone Crushing Unit is at a distance of about 300 meters from the National Highway/State road. Along with the affidavit, photographs have also been filed showing the premises of the Respondent No.13, Project Proponent, which confirms stone crushing activity of the Respondent No.13.

7. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Respondent No.4, in its affidavit of 09.04.2024 has stated that stone crushing units should operate only after obtaining Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO) from the concerned State Pollution Control Boards/Pollution Control Committees. It is also stated that the stone crushing units fall under Schedule-I of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, and are categorized under ‘Orange’ category vide Central Pollution Control Board order dated 07.03.2016 with a Pollution Index Score of 41 to 59 in a Pollution Index Range from 0 to 100.

8. The Deputy Conservator of Forests (Conservation), Department of Environment, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, has filed affidavit dated 15.07.2024 on behalf of the Respondent No.2, stating therein that the NOC dated 14.02.2023 of the Stone Crusher Unit of Respondent No.13 was issued by the Divisional Forest Officer, Pasighat, as per the application of the Respondent No.13 on the strength of physical verifica

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