Introduction

The case of Aditya Jakhar v. State of Haryana was adjudicated by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) on February 14, 2020. This landmark judgment addresses severe violations of environmental norms by real estate developers in Haryana, highlighting systemic issues in regulatory enforcement and accountability. The petitioner, Aditya Jakhar, raised concerns regarding the disposal of untreated sewage by Sare Homes Society in Gurgaon, which posed significant health hazards to the local population. The State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) and various government departments were scrutinized for their inadequate responses to these environmental infractions.

Summary of the Judgment

The NGT examined the allegations that Sare Homes Society had been illegally discharging untreated sewage, leading to environmental degradation and health risks in Gurgaon, Haryana. Reports from the District Magistrate and SPCB revealed that the sewage treatment plant (STP) of 850 KLD was malfunctioning, resulting in the release of polluted effluents. Multiple non-compliances were identified, including failure to separate grey and black water, absence of disinfection facilities, and lack of rainwater harvesting mechanisms.

The Tribunal found the compensation assessed by SPCB inadequate and criticized the slow and ineffective actions taken by the authorities. It observed possible collusion among state officials to overlook violations, thereby exacerbating the environmental and public health issues. Drawing parallels with previous cases, the NGT emphasized the recurring pattern of non-compliance among real estate projects and the inefficacy of existing monitoring mechanisms.

Consequently, the Tribunal directed the Chief Secretary of Haryana to initiate stringent remedial actions, including blacklisting violators, seizing properties, and ensuring the speedy enforcement of environmental norms. The judgment underscored the necessity for enhanced oversight, accountability, and robust enforcement mechanisms to prevent future violations.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references several previous orders and cases to establish a pattern of environmental non-compliance by real estate developers in Haryana:

• Mukund Dhote v. Union Of India (O.A No. 506/2019): Highlighted significant breaches of environmental norms by Vista Heights in Faridabad, including improper sewage discharge and unauthorized groundwater extraction.
• KISSAN UDEY SAMITI v. STATE OF HARYANA (O.A. No. 764/2018): Documented Violations such as lack of Environmental Clearance (EC) and inadequate sewage treatment in multiple construction projects.
• Praveen Kakar v. Ministry Of Environment & Forests (O.A No. 661/2018): Addressed severe non-compliance by Ansal Properties, including non-payment of compensation and illegal extraction of groundwater.
• Sandeep Mittal v. MoEF&CC (O.A. No. 837/2018): Criticized delays in compensation assessment and the ineffective penal mechanisms in place.

These precedents collectively influenced the Tribunal’s decision by demonstrating persistent regulatory failures and the need for a more aggressive enforcement approach.

Legal Reasoning

The Tribunal analyzed the adequacy of existing environmental regulations and their enforcement mechanisms. It identified critical shortcomings in the SPCB’s ability to monitor and enforce compliance, noting that procedural delays and possible collusion among state officials undermined the effectiveness of environmental laws. The Tribunal emphasized the principle of "zero exit discharge," which mandates that no untreated effluents should be released into the environment.

The legal reasoning centered on the failure of both the project proponent and the regulatory authorities to adhere to environmental standards. By assessing the failures in sewage treatment, water segregation, and waste management, the Tribunal underscored the direct impact of these violations on public health and the environment. The Tribunal invoked the precautionary principle and the duty of care owed by developers and the state to ensure sustainable development.

Furthermore, the Tribunal stressed the importance of accountability of both the project developers and the state authorities. By recommending actions such as blacklisting and property seizure, the judgment sought to establish a deterrent against future violations.

Impact

The Aditya Jakhar v. State of Haryana judgment sets a significant precedent for environmental law enforcement in India, particularly concerning real estate projects. Its potential impacts include:

• Strengthened Regulatory Framework: Encourages the revamping of monitoring mechanisms to ensure real-time compliance with environmental norms.
• Enhanced Accountability: Mandates stricter accountability for both developers and regulatory authorities, reducing instances of collusion and negligence.
• Deterrent Effect: Implementation of punitive measures such as blacklisting and property seizure serves as a deterrent against future environmental violations.
• Increased Public Awareness: Empowers citizens by reinforcing their right to a clean environment and providing avenues for redressal.
• Policy Reform: Influences policymakers to formulate more robust environmental protection laws and ensure their effective enforcement.

Additionally, the judgment may inspire similar actions across other states, fostering a nationwide improvement in environmental governance within the real estate sector.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Zero Exit Discharge

The principle of zero exit discharge mandates that no untreated or inadequately treated waste effluents should be released into the environment. This ensures that all waste is properly treated to meet environmental standards before disposal, thereby preventing pollution.

Environmental Clearance (EC)

Environmental Clearance is an approval granted by the government before the commencement of any project that may have significant environmental impacts. It involves an assessment of the proposed project’s potential effects on the environment and ensures compliance with environmental regulations.

Senior Town Planner

A Senior Town Planner is an official responsible for overseeing urban planning and ensuring that development projects comply with zoning laws, environmental regulations, and sustainable development practices.

Consent to Operate (CTO)

Consent to Operate is a regulatory approval required for industries and projects to commence operations. It is granted after verifying that the project complies with environmental norms and conditions specified in the Environmental Clearance.

Conclusion

The Aditya Jakhar v. State of Haryana judgment is a pivotal development in the realm of environmental law enforcement in India. By highlighting the systemic failures in regulatory oversight and the persistent environmental violations by real estate developers, the National Green Tribunal has reinforced the imperative for stringent compliance and accountability. The directives issued by the Tribunal aim to fortify the enforcement mechanisms, ensuring that environmental norms are not merely theoretical but are actively upheld to safeguard public health and the ecosystem. This judgment serves as a clarion call for all stakeholders to prioritize sustainable development and uphold the rule of law in environmental governance.