NGT Holds Developer Liable for Environmental Violations, Rejects Locus Standi Objection

NGT Fines Developer Crores for Environmental Violations in Meerut Township Project

New Delhi, March 19, 2025 - The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has levied a significant environmental compensation of ₹10.9 Crores on M/s. Ansal Landmark Township Pvt. Ltd., a prominent developer, for failing to comply with environmental regulations in their Sushant City Sector-7A project in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Agarwal (Judicial Member) and Hon’ble Dr. Afroz Ahmad (Expert Member), addresses a complaint regarding improper solid waste disposal and operational violations at the township.

Background of the Case

The case originated from a letter petition filed by Amardeep , President of the Residential Welfare Society of Ansal Sushant City Sector-7A, raising concerns about the developer's failure to manage solid waste, leading to environmental damage. The NGT, exercising its suo-moto jurisdiction as per the Supreme Court's guidelines in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha , registered the petition as an Original Application.

A Joint Committee, comprising representatives from the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (UPPCB), Municipal Corporation of Meerut, and District Magistrate, Meerut, was constituted to investigate the allegations. Their report confirmed deficiencies in waste management and highlighted that the project lacked a Completion Certificate from the Meerut Development Authority (MDA) and had not been handed over to the Municipal Corporation.

Developer's Defense and NGT's Rejection of Locus Standi

M/s. Ansal Landmark Township Pvt. Ltd. contested the complaint, raising a preliminary objection regarding the locus standi of the applicant, Amardeep , arguing that the Resident Welfare Association was not a statutory body and lacked the authority to enforce individual contractual disputes. The developer claimed to have engaged a service provider for waste management and attributed any service deficiencies to residents' non-payment of maintenance charges.

The NGT firmly rejected the locus standi objection, emphasizing the broader scope of environmental protection. The Tribunal cited Supreme Court precedents including Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha, Subhash Kumar vs. State of Bihar , and others, asserting that environmental protection is a collective responsibility, and anyone can bring environmental violations to the Tribunal's attention.

> "Environment belongs to everyone and its protection is everybody’s responsibility. If a person has come to Tribunal with a complaint that project proponent or anybody else has violated environmental laws and norms and thereby, caused damage to environment, the correctness of the complaint can be examined by Tribunal… This Statutory power of Tribunal is not dependent even on any complaint but can be exercised suo- motu..."

Key Findings and Violations

The NGT's judgment highlighted several critical violations by the developer:

• Non-Compliance with Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016: The Joint Committee report substantiated the applicant's claims of improper solid waste disposal within the township.
• Operation Without Consent to Operate (CTO): The developer was found to be operating the project without obtaining the mandatory CTO under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, a "patent illegality" as noted by the Tribunal.
• Violation of Environmental Clearance (EC) Conditions: Despite the EC mandating the installation of a Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) certified by an expert, the developer failed to do so, relying instead on an arrangement with MDA for sewage treatment at a common STP. The NGT clarified that the EC condition prevailed over any mutual arrangement and that no independent expert certification or report was submitted.
• Expiry of Environmental Clearance: The project, initiated in 2007 and granted EC in 2008, was still incomplete by the time of inspection in 2024. The Tribunal noted that the EC's validity was only five years as per the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, rendering ongoing construction activities after its expiry a violation.

Environmental Compensation and Directives

Applying the 'Polluter Pays' principle, the NGT directed M/s. Ansal Landmark Township Pvt. Ltd. to pay an environmental compensation of ₹10.9 Crores, calculated as 5% of the project cost mentioned in the EC. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court’s observation in Goel Ganga Developers vs. Union of India and Others regarding environmental compensation in construction projects.

Furthermore, the NGT issued the following directives:

• Complete Statutory Compliance: The developer must obtain all necessary statutory consents, permissions, and clearances within two months, failing which all project activities must cease until compliance is achieved.
• No Further Third-Party Rights: The developer is barred from creating any further third-party rights in the project until CTOs under the Water and Air Acts are obtained.
• Compliance with Solid Waste Management Rules: The developer must ensure strict adherence to Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 until the project is completed and handed over to the Municipal Corporation of Meerut.
• STP Installation: The developer is mandated to construct an STP of requisite capacity within three months and connect all project sewage lines to it, ensuring compliance with EC conditions.

The UPPCB and District Magistrate, Meerut, are tasked with ensuring compliance and submitting a report by July 15, 2025. The recovered environmental compensation will be used for environmental remediation based on a plan prepared by a joint committee including CPCB, UPPCB, and the District Magistrate, Meerut.

This judgment underscores the NGT's proactive role in enforcing environmental compliance and holding developers accountable for environmental violations, irrespective of locus standi challenges and contractual disputes, reinforcing the 'Polluter Pays' principle in environmental jurisprudence.