1

Item No. 02

(Pune Bench)

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

(By Video Conferencing)

Original Application No. 30/2021 (WZ)

(I.A. No. 41/2021)

Dr. Adinath Bhujaballi Kuchanur

Applicant

Versus

Union of India & Ors.

Respondent(s)

Date of hearing:

17.06.2021

CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

HONBLE DR. NAGIN NANDA, EXPERT MEMBER

Applicant:

Mr. Adinath Bhujballi Kuchanur (in person)

ORDER

1.

Grievance in this application is against violation of environmental

norms in the construction project

Vardhaman Palm Rose

at S.No.

15/7, Village Punawale, Taluk Mulshi, District Pune, Maharashtra by

Chhajed Associates (project proponent). According to the applicant, the

Environmental Clearance (EC) for the project was granted on

27.11.2018. Consent to Establish was granted on 25.03.2019. The

project proponent did not comply with the EC conditions and Consent

to Establish conditions. The applicant filed O.A. No. 10/2020(WZ),

Mr.

Adinath Bhujaballi Kuchanur v. Chhajed Associates Belonging to

Vardhaman Spaces & Ors.,

which was disposed of on 24.08.2020 by

this Tribunal after considering the report of the joint Committee to the

effect that the project had been completed and was compliant. The

2

report was factually incorrect as confirmed by subsequent stand of the

project proponent itself.

2.

We confronted the applicant in person as to how a second

application was maintainable on which, the applicant made a prayer that

the present application may be treated as an application for review of order

dated 24.08.2020. We have accepted the prayer and direct that the present

application be treated as a review application against order dated

24.08.2020 in O.A. No. 10/2020.

3.

The applicant, accordingly, addressed the Tribunal within the scope

of the review jurisdiction by pointing out that there are patent factual

errors which have been discovered subsequent to the order. We find that

the Expert Member who was party to order dated 24.08.2020 has since

retired and the Judicial Member now stands posted at Bhopal, we are

proceeding to consider the matter.

4.

We find from the order dated 24.08.2020 that the Tribunal earlier

proceeded on the footing that the application was barred by limitation and

that the work had already been completed. The applicant points out that

limitation is five years from the date of accrual of cause of action and that

there is adequate documentary material to establish that the project had

not been completed. Even after order of this Tribunal, in the

advertisements issued by the project proponent itself on 10.10.2020, it is

stated that the work is completed to the extent of 85% and 90% as on

06.03.2021.

5.

Thus, it does appear that the project was not complete as made out

in the report of the joint Committee.

3

Accordingly, we direct the Chairman, SEIAA, Maharashtra and

Chairman, State PCB to look into the allegation that the report given

earlier, that the project was complete, was not factually correct and take

such remedial action as may be found appropriate.

The application is disposed of.

In view of order in the main matter, I.A. No. 41/2021 also stands

dismissed.

A copy of this order be forwarded to the Chairman, SEIAA,

Maharashtra and Chairman, State PCB by email for compliance.

Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP

Sudhir Agarwal, JM

M. Sathyanarayanan, JM

Brijesh Sethi, JM

Dr. Nagin Nanda, EM

June 17, 2021

Original Application No. 30/2021 (WZ)

AVT