Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
  • Applicant: Mr. Rahul Choudhary, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 1: Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. And Mr. Manu Aggarwal, Adv. For Hindustan Coca-cola, Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
  • Respondents No. 1&2: Mr. Vikash Malhotra and Mr. M.P Sahay, Advocates for MoEF and Mr. Ishwer Singh, Adv. Respondent No. 3: Mr. Rajkumar, Adv. For CPCB
  • Respondent No. 4: Dr. Abhishek Atrey and Mr. Sumit Rajora, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 5: Ms. Savitri Pandey, Adv for State of UP
  • Respondent No. 6: Mr. Pradeep Misra and Mr. Daleep Kr. Dhayani, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 33, 34, 61 to 106, 133, 136 to 202: Mr. M.Z Chowdhary and Mr. S.A Zaidi
  • Respondent No. 135: Mr. S.A Zaidi, Adv. Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. And
  • Mr. Vineet Malik, Adv. For State of Haryana
  • Mr. B.V Niren, CGSC for Ministry of Water Resources
  • Mr. Bikas Kar Gupta, Adv. For State of West Bengal
  • Ms. Yogmaya Agnihotri, Adv. For CECB
  • Ms. Angeli Dayal, Adv. For IOCL Mr. Aayush Juneja, Adv.,
  • Mr. Sanjeev Palli, Adv. And Mr. Dinesh Jindal, LO for DPCC
  • Mr. A.A Aron, Adv. With Mr. Somesh Rattan, Adv. For DSM Sugar Distillery Division Asmoli, Marodabad, For Yash Paper Ltd., for Wave Distellery and Brewaries Ltd and for DSM (Unit Distillery) Dhampur
  • Ms. Antima Bazaz for Saraya Distellery and for Deoxia papers Mr. Rudreshwar Singh and
  • Mr. Gopal Jha, Advs. For State of Bihar and State Pollution Board
  • Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Ms. Vanita Bhargava and
  • Mr. Amur Chandelwal, Advs. For United Spirits.
Judges
  • Swatanter Kumar
  • Chairperson
  • U.D Salvi, Judicial Member
  • Dr. D.K Agrawal, Expert Member
  • Prof. A.R Yousuf, Expert Member
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
  • Applicant: Mr. Rahul Choudhary, Adv.
  • Respondent No. 1: Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. And Mr. Manu Aggarwal, Adv. For Hindustan Coca-cola, Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
  • Respondents No. 1&2: Mr. Vikash Malhotra and Mr. M.P Sahay, Advocates for MoEF and Mr. Ishwer Singh, Adv. Respondent No. 3: Mr. Rajkumar, Adv. For CPCB
  • Respondent No. 4: Dr. Abhishek Atrey and Mr. Sumit Rajora, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 5: Ms. Savitri Pandey, Adv for State of UP
  • Respondent No. 6: Mr. Pradeep Misra and Mr. Daleep Kr. Dhayani, Advs.
  • Respondent No. 33, 34, 61 to 106, 133, 136 to 202: Mr. M.Z Chowdhary and Mr. S.A Zaidi
  • Respondent No. 135: Mr. S.A Zaidi, Adv. Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. And
  • Mr. Vineet Malik, Adv. For State of Haryana
  • Mr. B.V Niren, CGSC for Ministry of Water Resources
  • Mr. Bikas Kar Gupta, Adv. For State of West Bengal
  • Ms. Yogmaya Agnihotri, Adv. For CECB
  • Ms. Angeli Dayal, Adv. For IOCL Mr. Aayush Juneja, Adv.,
  • Mr. Sanjeev Palli, Adv. And Mr. Dinesh Jindal, LO for DPCC
  • Mr. A.A Aron, Adv. With Mr. Somesh Rattan, Adv. For DSM Sugar Distillery Division Asmoli, Marodabad, For Yash Paper Ltd., for Wave Distellery and Brewaries Ltd and for DSM (Unit Distillery) Dhampur
  • Ms. Antima Bazaz for Saraya Distellery and for Deoxia papers Mr. Rudreshwar Singh and
  • Mr. Gopal Jha, Advs. For State of Bihar and State Pollution Board
  • Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Ms. Vanita Bhargava and
  • Mr. Amur Chandelwal, Advs. For United Spirits.
Judges
  • Swatanter Kumar
  • Chairperson
  • U.D Salvi, Judicial Member
  • Dr. D.K Agrawal, Expert Member
  • Prof. A.R Yousuf, Expert Member
See more information ...
Smart Summary

Structured Summary of the Tribunal's Order — 17 November 2014 (Items 14 to 274)

Factual and Procedural Background

This opinion arises from the National Green Tribunal's consideration of matters referred by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India by its order dated 29 October 2014 in W.P. (C) No. 3727 of 1985. The Supreme Court referred issues of industrial pollution of the River Ganga to the Tribunal and requested the Tribunal to expeditiously address the questions and provide six monthly reports to the Supreme Court.

In furtherance of that referral, the Tribunal took up the matters on 17 November 2014. The Registry was directed to open a separate file under the National Green Tribunal (Practices and Procedure) Rules, 2011. Original Application No. 196 of 2014: Krishan Kant Singh v. Hindustan Cocacola Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Mehdiganj, Rajatalab, Varanasi, and connected matters listed that day were ordered to be listed along with this case.

The Tribunal noted the two main sources of pollution of the River Ganga—industrial effluents and domestic sewage—and recorded that industrial pollution questions had been referred to the Tribunal while domestic sewage issues remained with the Supreme Court. The Tribunal identified nine States primarily concerned with industrial pollution affecting the River Ganga and directed service of notice on unrepresented States (Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar) returnable on 15 December 2014.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether and how the Tribunal should exercise its powers to prevent and control industrial pollution of the River Ganga following the Supreme Court's referral.
  2. What institutional structure (committees at Principal, Implementation and State levels) should be constituted to ensure implementation, monitoring and reporting of measures to control industrial effluents into the Ganga.
  3. What criteria and identification process should be adopted to list "seriously water polluting industries" discharging effluents into the River Ganga or its tributaries.
  4. What immediate enforcement measures (including closure/sealing of non-compliant units) should be ordered against industries operating without consent, without ETPs, or discharging untreated effluents.
  5. What steps (including installation of CETPs/ETPs, online automatic monitoring systems, and mapping/drainage plans) should be mandated to remediate and prevent industrial pollution of the River Ganga.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 29 October 2014 in W.P. (C) No. 3727 of 1985 The Supreme Court referred issues relating to industrial pollution of the River Ganga to the National Green Tribunal, expressed serious concern about lack of monitoring and non-implementation by State Governments and Pollution Control Boards, and requested the Tribunal to expeditiously consider the matters and provide six monthly reports. The Tribunal proceeded to take up the matter, directed Registrar to create a separate file, listed connected applications together, constituted Principal, Implementation and State Level Committees, set out detailed implementation and reporting requirements, and scheduled further listings and reports consistent with the Supreme Court's direction.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Tribunal's reasoning follows from the Supreme Court's referral and its own assessment of the state of pollution of the River Ganga. The Tribunal identified industrial effluents as one of the two main sources of pollution and noted that industrial pollution issues had been referred to it. The Tribunal observed deficiencies in monitoring and implementation by statutory bodies as highlighted by the Supreme Court and concluded that effective and enforceable institutional measures and directions were required.

Key steps in the Tribunal's analysis and consequent directions:

  • Identification of concerned geographic and administrative scope: The Tribunal named nine States primarily implicated in industrial pollution (Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, NCT of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal), directed notice to unrepresented States, and scheduled returnable dates for compliance and reports.
  • Institutional response: The Tribunal concluded that committees at multiple levels were necessary to ensure implementation and monitoring. It therefore constituted:
    • The Principal Committee (comprising specified central and state-level secretaries, CPCB chairperson, financial/advisory representatives and others).
    • The Implementation Committee (headed by Chief Secretaries of UP and West Bengal, principal secretaries, Member Secretaries of CPCB and State Pollution Control Boards, etc.).
    • State Level Committees (including State Environment Secretaries, Member Secretaries of State Pollution Control Boards/DPCC, local bodies, industry and water supply representatives, scientists and academics, and the Director of NEERI).
  • Delegation of functions and reporting: The Implementation and State Level Committees were made responsible for implementing Tribunal orders and reporting to the Principal Committee. The Principal Committee was charged with overall control and required to submit monthly reports to the Tribunal with complete collected data.
  • Identification and prioritization of polluting units: Within one week the Committees were ordered to provide a comprehensive list of all "seriously water polluting industries" that directly or indirectly discharge into the Ganga or tributaries and operate without consent, without ETPs/anti-pollution devices, or discharge untreated effluents. The Tribunal directed that identification should be quality-based rather than solely quantity-based.
  • Technical and remedial measures: The Tribunal directed preparation of drainage maps, separate plans indicating points of direct discharge into the Ganga/tributaries, and consideration of installing CETPs/ETPs at drains/nalas where they join the River. It also ordered the Committees to estimate costs for such installations.
  • Enforcement measures against non-compliant industries: The Tribunal ordered immediate cessation of operations for industries of certain listed sectors (Tannery; Paper and Pulp; Sugar; Sugar-cum-Distillery; Distillery; Dyeing; Printing; Slaughter Houses) that (a) discharge untreated effluents into the Ganga/tributaries, (b) operate without consent of the Boards, and (c) have not installed ETPs or requisite pollution control devices. Such units were to stop forthwith and could be sealed; police were directed to assist as required.
  • Opportunity to seek consent and compliance: Closed units were permitted to apply to the Central/State Pollution Control Boards for consent within two weeks; application to be dealt with expeditiously. Where consent might be granted, conditions (including installation of ETPs/anti-pollution devices) could be imposed. Units with ETPs but failing to meet parameters were given one month to bring discharges within prescribed standards.
  • Monitoring and transparency: The Tribunal required Committees and authorities to publish criteria for identifying seriously polluting industries on relevant websites and to consider requiring online automatic monitoring systems for trade effluents and CETP performance. Committees were directed to specify where CETPs/ETPs were required and to assess required capacities.
  • Administrative follow-up: Committees were to meet (noted meeting on 11 November 2014 and scheduled meeting on 12 December 2014), and the matter was listed for submission of reports and further directions on 15 December 2014. States were directed to publish the Tribunal's order in the news media through advertisements.

Holding and Implications

Holding: The Tribunal issued mandatory directions to prevent and control industrial pollution of the River Ganga by (a) constituting a Principal Committee, Implementation Committee and State Level Committees; (b) requiring identification, mapping and reporting of seriously polluting industries; (c) ordering immediate cessation of operations of specified non-compliant industries pending compliance; and (d) directing measures for installation of CETPs/ETPs, on-site/online monitoring, and periodic reporting.

Implications

  • Direct operational effect on industries in the listed sectors: units discharging untreated effluents, operating without consent, or without ETPs were ordered to stop forthwith and could be sealed until compliance steps are taken and consent is granted.
  • Administrative obligations on States and regulatory bodies: States, State Pollution Control Boards, CPCB and central ministries were tasked with supporting committee operations, preparing drainage maps and plans, estimating costs for CETP/ETP installations, and publishing identification criteria and public notices in the media.
  • Monitoring and compliance timeline: Committees to provide lists within one week, closed units may apply for consent within two weeks, units with ETPs but non-compliant were to get one month to comply, and the Tribunal set further dates for meetings and reporting (notably 12 December 2014 and listing on 15 December 2014).
  • No broader doctrinal precedent was articulated in the order beyond its specific enforcement and administrative directions; the decision primarily effects immediate regulatory and remedial actions for the parties and authorities named in the order.

Note: This summary is compiled strictly from the content of the Tribunal's order dated 17 November 2014 as provided. No information has been inferred beyond what appears in the text.

Show full summary ...

    Krishan Kant Singh v. Hindustan Cocacola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.

    Item Nos. 14 to 274 November 17, 2014

    In furtherance to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dated 29th October, 2014 passed in W.P (C) No. 3727 of 1985, we have taken up this matter for hearing. Registry is directed to make a separate file after numbering and registering the same in accordance with the National Green Tribunal (Practices and Procedure) Rules, 2011. Let the Original Application No. 196 of 2014: Krishan Kant Singh v. Hindustan Cocacola Beverages Pvt. Ltd., Mehdiganj, Rajatalab, Varanasi connected matters in the case of as listed today, be listed along with this case.

    Pollution of the River Ganga has been of a serious concern not only for the different wings of the State but even for the Judiciary. The Supreme Court vide its order dated 29 October, 2014 while referring the issue of industrial pollution of the River Ganga to this Tribunal, in no uncertain terms, expressed its anguish and serious concern in that behalf. It is not necessary for us to refer to that order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in any greater detail. Suffices it to note that the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that a total lack of monitoring by the statutory bodies and non-implementation of the Court's orders by the State Governments and the respective Pollution Control Boards, has contributed to the current state of affairs in respect of the River Ganga. It observed that there is no gainsaying that this River has significance not only in the spiritual and cultural/mythological sight of the countrymen, but has also sustained millions of lives on its banks/basin. While noticing that the National Green Tribunal has been established for effective and speedy disposal of cases relating to natural reserves, including environment, the Apex Court, not only expressed a definite confidence in this Tribunal, but also said that it was confident that the Tribunal, which has advantage and also availability to take assistance from agencies outside, will be able to effectively address all the questions relating to pollution of the Holy River by industrial effluents and thereby referred the matters relating to industrial pollution of River Ganga to this Tribunal. These include not only the grossly polluting industries referred to in the earlier part of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order, but, also those that have been designated as highly polluting industries. Then, the Apex Court requested the Tribunal to expeditiously look into all these aspects and give a six monthly report to the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

    River Ganga is mainly polluted by two sources: one is the industrial waste/effluents and the other is domestic sewage. The first aspect has been referred to this Tribunal; while the latter has been retained by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 29th October, 2014. As far as industrial pollution is concerned, there are only nine States which are primarily concerned with causing industrial pollution in the River Ganga. They are the States of Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, NCT of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, and West Bengal. The States of Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar are unrepresented today despite notice. Issue notice to the Secretaries of these States, returnable on 15 December, 2014.

    Having heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the parties and the States and in view of the deliberations that took place with the concerned Secretaries of the Government of India, the Chief Secretaries, senior Officers of the respective States and the Chairman, CPCB and State Pollution Control Board, in the Chamber of this Tribunal, we are of the considered view that effective directions need to be passed in this case to prevent and control pollution of River Ganga, resulting from indiscriminate discharge of industrial effluents into the River. Thus, we pass the following directions:—

    1. In order to comply with the directions that we propose to pass hereinafter, it is necessary to constitute appropriate Committees at different levels to ensure proper implementation of the orders of the Tribunal, as well as, for getting proper feedback with regard to the steps taken and work executed at site. Therefore, we constitute the following Committees:—

    (i) The Principal Committee

    (a) Sectary, the MoEF.

    (b) Secretary or Addl. Secretary of Ministry of Water Resources.

    (c) Chief Secretaries of the State of Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, NCT of Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, and West Bengal.

    (d) Chairperson of the CPCB.

    (e) Joint Secretary of MoEF and Member Sectaries of the respective concerned State Pollution Control Boards.

    (f) Financial Advisor of the MoEF.

    (g) A senior representative of the Finance Department of the Ministry of Water Resources dealing with the National Ganga River Basin Authority.

    (ii) Implementation Committee

    (a) Chief Secretary of the State of UP.

    (b) Chief Secretary of the State of West Bengal.

    (c) Principal Secretaries of Department of Environment of all the concerned States.

    (d) Member Secretary of the CPCB.

    (e) Member Secretaries of the concerned State Pollution Control Boards.

    The Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh would be entitled to co-opt for any Member or Bodies as the case may be, that he deems fit and proper for being the Member(s) of this Committee.

    (iii) State Level Committee

    (a) Secretary, State Dept. of Environment & Forest or Secretary having portfolio of Environment for the State.

    (b) Member Secretary of concerned State Pollution Control Boards and DPCC.

    (c) Representative of Local Bodies under the Ministry of Urban Development.

    (d) Representatives of Industries Departments.

    (e) Representatives of Water Supply and Sewage Board.

    (f) Scientists from the MoEF.

    (g) Eminent Professors from reputed educational institutions in the field of Environment Engineering.

    (h) Director of NEERI. All these Committees shall perform different functions.

    2. The Implementation Committee and the State Level Committee shall be responsible for implementation of the orders of this Tribunal. They shall report jointly or severely to the Principal Committee in regard to the various facets of compliance to the orders of this Tribunal and its progress from time to time. These Committees would operate at the District Level as well as at the State Level. Inspection by these Committees would specifically indicate the impact on and improvement, if any, in the water quality of the River Ganga and its tributaries.

    3. All District Level and State Level Authorities in all the above mentioned States shall render full assistance and cooperation to the Committees afore-constituted. It shall be their responsibility to ensure that these Committees can function smoothly and free of any obstruction or interference from any quarters.

    4. These Committees, at the first instance, shall, within one week, provide a comprehensive list of all the seriously water polluting industries in all these States, particularly, the State of Uttar Pradesh, which are directly or indirectly discharging their trade/industrial effluents into the River Ganga or its tributaries and are operating without consent of the Boards, without ETP or without any anti-pollution devices and are discharging untreated effluents.

    5. The Principal Committee shall be entitled to suggest policy decisions and action plans that are required to be taken in the interest of environment. It shall have overall control over the State Level and the Implementation Committees. It shall be responsible for submitting monthly reports to the Tribunal with complete data that is prepared and collected, during the intervening periods, during which orders are passed by the Tribunal from time to time.

    6. The Committees would ensure that proper criteria for identifying seriously water polluting industries is put on the website of the MoEF, of the respective States, CPCB and the concerned State Pollution Control Boards. Determination of this aspect need not be quantity-based but be quality-based.

    This is for the reason that a smaller unit of the above industries/units, operating without consent and without having any ETP, may cause even much greater pollution than a bigger industry, which is operating with ETP and consent or a unit which is a ‘no discharge unit’ or a ‘zero discharge unit’.

    7. We also direct the Regulatory Authorities to issue guidelines in relation to the ‘zero discharge units’. A ‘zero discharge unit’ must essentially be a unit which does not discharge any amount of liquid effluents, not even treated effluents. It may be as a result of complete recycling of its effluents or evaporation or because of adoption of any other mechanical process, like incinerator etc. In other words, if by adoption of any scientific process known to environmental jurisprudence, the unit does not discharge any effluent, then it should be called a ‘zero discharge unit’ and not otherwise.

    Industrial pollution of the River Ganga arises mainly from seven types of industries in these different States, viz. Paper and Pulp industry, Sugar, Distillery, Tanneries, Dyeing, Printing and Slaughter Houses.

    8. We are not oblivious of the limitations on the working of these Committees, but certainly a situation has come when it is inevitable to ensure compliance of these directions on priority basis and with utmost seriousness.

    Thus, we direct that the State Level Committees shall submit or cause to be submitted, a drainage map of all the water polluting industries and industrial clusters, within the jurisdiction of the respective States to the Tribunal before the next date of hearing.

    9. The State Level Committees shall also submit a separate plan specifying the points where the drains or direct discharge into River Ganga or its Tributaries, is identified. It could be framed on the lines of the report as was prepared by the CPCB in regard to the River Kali.

    10. It is evident that there may be highly polluting units which are unable to put up any ETP or anti-pollution devices because of their economic or allied limitations. However, they had been operating for years and closing them at the first instance may amount to infringement of their rights. Thus, it is necessary to direct the State Level Committees and wherever necessary, the Implementing Committee to identify the points where the CETPs/ETPs can be installed on the drains and nalas, where they join River Ganga or any of its Tributaries.

    11. Estimated costs for installation of such plants are also to be stated in these reports.

    12. All industries in these States, carrying on the activities of Tannery, Paper and Pulp, Sugar stand alone, Sugar-cum-Distillery, Dyeing, Printing and Slaughter Houses, which are;

    (a) Discharging their untreated industrial/trade effluents directed or indirectly into the River Ganga and/or any of its tributaries;

    (b) Operating without consent of the concerned Boards; and

    (c) Have not installed any ETP or any requisite pollution control devices;

    shall be directed to stop their business/industrial activity forthwith and not permitted to operate, in any manner whatsoever, except with the specific order of this Tribunal which shall be complied with without delay and default. If necessary, the Committees, Boards and all other concerned Authorities shall seal the premises of such units. The Police Authorities are hereby directed to provide the required help to the concerned Committees for implementation of this Order.

    The units so closed, shall be at liberty to move the Central/State Pollution Control Boards, for obtaining consent within two weeks from today. If such application is filed, the same shall be dealt with expeditiously and the consent order should be declined and/or issued with such conditions as the concerned Board may deem fit and proper in the facts of the case. The concerned industry shall install ETP or such anti-pollution devices as may be directed by these Boards, in order to ensure that the effluents discharged by it, is within the prescribed limits. After grant of such consent by the Board, the concerned unit can restart its operation in accordance with law.

    The Committees shall exercise due care and caution in implementation of this order. We make it clear that this order will not apply to those industries in the aforementioned States, which are carrying on their industrial activities having installed ETPs and have obtained consent of the respective Boards, but their parameters are found not to be strictly in compliance with the prescribed standards. Such units shall be given one month time by the respective Boards, Committees, Governments and Authorities to bring the effluents discharged by them within the prescribed standards. Such units would be required to ensure within that period that their ETPs and anti-pollution devices are performing efficiently and regularly. They shall submit the analysis reports to the respective Boards/Authorities and also request them for conducting inspection of their units.

    We are seriously concerned with the pollution of the River Ganga, caused by the Tannery industries at Kanpur, Paper and Pulp industries, Sugar industries and Distilleries on the belt of River Kali and Yamuna which ultimately join the River Ganga at Allahabad.

    The Committees shall also consider passing of directions requiring industries to install online automatic monitoring systems, not only in relation to their trade effluents and working of CETP, but even in regard to the parameters for which effluents are treated, with consideration to the operations of the industries as a unit, including its total water requirement. The Committees will also provide complete details in regard to the points, where CETP and/or ETP are required to be installed. It will also provide the capacity of such units to ensure that the industrial effluents are properly treated. The Committees which met on 11th November, 2014 shall hold a meeting on 12 December, 2014 to consider the modalities. The case will be listed before the Tribunal for submission of the Reports and issuance of further directions on 15th December, 2014. The Officers are informed accordingly.

    The respective States are also directed to publish this Order in news media through advertisements.

    The times have come when an enforceable action plan for controlling and preventing the pollution, as well as restoring purity and wholesomeness of the River Ganga should be framed and all the Authorities, without fail, should be directed to implement them vigorously.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.
    Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

    Comments

    Krishan Kant Singh v. Hindustan Cocacola Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
    (Nov 17, 2014)