Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

P.S. Mani v. Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board

National Green Tribunal
Feb 25, 2020
Smart Summary (Beta)

Structured Summary of the Provided Legal Opinion

Factual and Procedural Background

The application arises from complaints about unscientific dumping of municipal solid waste by the side of the Buckingham Canal near Navalur Village, Thiruporur Taluk, Kancheepuram District. The applicant alleges that landfill storage is uncovered, waste is left in the open and burnt, and the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 are not being followed by respondents numbered 10 and 11. Complaints to authorities allegedly produced no effective action, prompting this application seeking reliefs including permanent restraint on respondents 10 and 11 from continuing storage/processing/disposal at the present site without requisite clearances and authorization, closure of the offending facility, directions to shift the facility elsewhere only after compliance with statutory requirements and stakeholder hearings, and remediation/compensation for environmental damage and non‑compliance with earlier Tribunal orders.

Multiple respondents (including local bodies, state authorities and other agencies) filed counter statements describing inspection findings, denial or qualification of some allegations, institutional roles and responsibilities (including references to CRZ Notification 2011 and Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016), and steps taken or proposed (such as notices, segregation activity, and efforts to identify alternative dump sites). The Tribunal recorded that the manner of dumping by respondents 10 and 11 is not in conformity with the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and that the present status of the dumping ground is unclear.

To ascertain current facts and implementation, the Tribunal constituted a joint committee comprising specified district and departmental officials to inspect the disputed area and report on status, compliance with SWM Rules and earlier directions (including those of the Principal Bench of the NGT in O.A. No. 606 of 2018), legacy waste, environmental damage, remedial measures (short and long term) with timelines, environmental compensation if any, and identification of persons responsible. The committee was directed to submit a status and action taken report within two months, and the matter was posted for consideration on 15.05.2020.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether respondents 10 and 11 should be permanently restrained from carrying out garbage and solid waste storage, processing and disposal at the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur without obtaining prior Environmental Clearance, authorization under the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, and other mandated permissions.
  2. Whether the offending garbage and waste disposal facility at the present site should be closed and the activity relocated to a place approved and demarcated by respondents 3, 7, 8 & 9.
  3. Whether government authorities should be directed to permit storage and disposal of garbage elsewhere only after strict compliance with mandatory legal requirements and after hearing local residents and stakeholders.
  4. Whether respondents 10 and 11 should be directed to remediate environmental and ecological damage and comply with prior Tribunal directions (common order dated 16.08.2016 in multiple applications) relating to Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.

Arguments of the Parties

Applicant's Arguments

  • Respondents 10 and 11 are dumping garbage by the Buckingham Canal in an unscientific manner affecting groundwater, surface water and causing air pollution.
  • The landfill is uncovered, waste is left in open air and burnt; Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 are not being followed.
  • Complaints to authorities produced no effective action, compelling the applicant to seek Tribunal reliefs (listed in the application).

Respondents 1 and 12 (TNPCB / related) — Counter Summary

  • Inspection on 30.06.2017 found the site receives about 5 tonnes per day of municipal solid waste, with segregation into biodegradable and non‑biodegradable components in sheds using Self Help Groups; biodegradable waste segregated separately.
  • Balance non‑recoverable wastes were dumped on land belonging to Navalur Panchayat, and a heap had formed on the banks of Buckingham Canal; remnants of municipal solid waste remained on the applicant's site.
  • Based on the complainant's complaint, the heap on the complainant site was cleared and pushed towards the Buckingham Canal by Navalur Panchayat; burning of waste was not observed during inspection; no obstruction to canal flow was observed.
  • Navalur is fast developing; existing facilities predate new residences and are inadequate due to lack of sufficient land; representations were forwarded online to the Commissioner, Thirupporur Panchayat Union for action under Local Body acts.

Second Respondent — Counter Summary

  • Echoed the inspection findings similar to respondents 1 and 12: 5T/day received, segregation in sheds, balance dumped on Panchayat land, heaps on canal banks, remnants left behind, no burning observed, no obstruction to canal flow, crematorium nearby.
  • Reiterated that dumping in CRZ is prohibited by para 3(vii) of CRZ Notification 2011 and that enforcement/monitoring is vested in DCZMAs, PWD, TNPCB and local bodies; complaints are referred to concerned authorities for further action.

Third Respondent — Counter Summary

  • Adopted submissions similar to second respondent regarding CRZ clearance process, prohibition of dumping in CRZ under CRZ Notification 2011, and that monitoring/enforcement is vested with DCZMAs/Public Works Department/TNPCB/local bodies.

Fourth Respondent (CRRT) — Counter Summary

  • Identified as Project Officer of Chennai Rivers Restoration Trust; noted that 10th and 11th respondents along with the sixth respondent are the line departments responsible for removal of solid waste and maintaining the river body respectively.

Fifth Respondent (Inland Waterways Authority of India) — Counter Summary

  • Contended it is neither a necessary nor proper party; the IWAI Act does not contemplate any role or obligation in relation to the subject matter; reliefs sought do not fall within IWAI's statutory purview.
  • Denied knowledge of facts alleged and denied acting contrary to any applicable law; prayed for deletion from array of parties.

Sixth Respondent (Public Works Department / Water Resources) — Counter Summary

  • Confirmed factual description of Buckingham Canal and provided historical purpose; recorded the prayers sought by the applicant.
  • Stated that 10th & 11th respondents have been continuously dumping and burning garbage on canal banks; PWD inspected and issued notice to stop dumping (letter dated 05.09.2017).
  • Requested complete removal of dumped wastes and deposit at an alternate location (e.g., Perungudi Dumping Yard); PWD proposed to construct a protective wall after government sanction to prevent future dumping.

Seventh Respondent — Counter Summary

  • Contended responsibility for collection, segregation and disposal lies with the tenth and eleventh respondents who must comply with Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016; claimed it is an unnecessary party.

Respondents 9, 10 and 11 (Local Panchayat / Dumping Site Operators) — Counter Summary

  • Stated the lands used are classified as "Canal Poramboke" per revenue records and lie at the corner of the land without affecting or obstructing canal flow.
  • Represented that steps are being taken to change the dump yard location; Tahsildar and Village Administrative Officer identified four available poramboke sites but these were unsuitable as classified "Odai, Buckingham kaalvai and Navalur thaangal".
  • Indicated efforts to find a common dump yard with nearby villages; sought more time to relocate; stated present dump yard is temporary until alternate land is allocated by District Collector.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Common order dated 16.08.2016 in Application No. 14/2012 (SZ) and Application Nos. 13, 42, 44, 63, 107, 108, 234 & 264/2013 (SZ); Application Nos. 90, 133, 163, 179, 189, 190 & 209/2015 (SZ); Application Nos. 34, 104, 133, 180 & 181/2016 (SZ) Directions pertaining to implementation of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and related compliance obligations (as referenced in the application). The Tribunal noted the applicant's reliance on non‑compliance with that common order and referred to it as part of the context for assessing whether respondents have abided by SWM Rules and prior Tribunal directions; the Tribunal instructed the joint committee to consider implementation of those directions.
Order / directions of the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal in O.A. No. 606 of 2018 Directions binding on local bodies regarding management/disposal of solid waste (as referenced by the Tribunal). The Tribunal stated that local bodies are bound to follow the directions issued by the Principal Bench in O.A. No. 606 of 2018 and directed the joint committee to examine the nature of implementation of those directions in the area under inspection.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Tribunal proceeded by reviewing the pleadings and counter statements. Key findings and analytical steps recorded in the opinion include:

  1. Assessment of factual assertions: The Tribunal observed from respondents' counter statements and inspection reports that the manner of dumping by respondents 10 and 11 is not in conformity with the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. Several respondents acknowledged heaps of dumped waste on the banks of Buckingham Canal and remnants of municipal solid waste at the applicant's site.
  2. Identification of responsibility: The Tribunal reaffirmed that disposal and management of municipal solid waste is the responsibility of the local bodies, which are bound to follow the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and to implement directions issued by higher forums (specifically citing the Principal Bench NGT order in O.A. No. 606 of 2018).
  3. Finding of factual uncertainty: The Tribunal recorded that the present status of the dumping ground was not clearly known from the record before it, and the applicant alleged continued dumping and worsening conditions.
  4. Need for fact‑finding: Given unresolved on‑site facts (extent of legacy waste, environmental damage, compliance status, encroachments, remedial steps), the Tribunal concluded that a direct fact‑finding inspection by a multi‑disciplinary joint committee was warranted to obtain an objective status and action‑taken information.
  5. Composition and mandate of the joint committee: The Tribunal constituted a joint committee including the District Collector (Chengalpet), Commissioner of Thiruporur Panchayat Union, Navalur Panchayat representatives, Superintending Engineer PWD and Water Resources Organisation, and Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. The committee was directed to inspect the area and report on multiple specified matters: present status, implementation of waste collection and disposal, adherence to SWM Rules, implementation of NGT O.A. No. 606/2018 directions, extent of legacy waste, remedial measures (short and long term) with timelines, environmental compensation for violations (if any), identification of persons responsible, and whether any encroachment exists and action taken to remove it.
  6. Logistical directions: Superintending Engineer PWD and Water Resources Organisation were appointed nodal agencies for coordination and logistics. Registry was directed to communicate the order to the committee members by e‑mail immediately.
  7. Timeline and further proceedings: The committee was to submit a status and action taken report within two months by e‑mail to the Tribunal; the matter was listed for consideration on 15.05.2020.

Holding and Implications

Holding: The Tribunal directed that a joint committee be constituted (naming District Collector, Chengalpet; Commissioner, Thiruporur Panchayat Union; Navalur Panchayat; Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department and Water Resources Organisation; and Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board) to inspect the disputed area along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur and submit a comprehensive status and action taken report within two months. The Tribunal posted the matter for further consideration on 15.05.2020.

Implications:

  • The direct effect on the parties is the mandated on‑site inspection and reporting obligation imposed on the specified public authorities and agencies, with PWD/Water Resources as nodal agencies for logistics and coordination.
  • The committee's report will inform any subsequent orders, including potential remedial measures, timelines, environmental compensation, and identification of responsible persons, but the present opinion does not itself order remediation beyond requiring the inspection and report.
  • This opinion does not announce or record the setting of a new legal precedent; it directs a fact‑finding exercise and compliance assessment with existing statutes, CRZ Notification 2011 and prior Tribunal directions, and orders further listing for consideration of the committee's report.

Note: This summary is strictly confined to information expressly contained in the provided opinion and does not add, infer or interpret facts or law beyond that text.

Show all summary ...

The grievance in this application is regarding dumping of garbage in an unscientific manner by the side of water bodies viz. Buckingham Canal, affecting the ground water quality, surface water as well as causing air pollution. The landfill storage area is uncovered and waste garbage is left in open air and burnt. They are not following the procedure provided under Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. This is being done by the respondents 10 and 11. Though complaints have been made to authorities regarding the same, no effective action has been taken. So, the applicant was compelled to file this application, seeking the following reliefs:

“(1) Permanently restrain the 10th& 11th respondents from carrying out garbage and solid waste storage, processing and disposal in any manner from the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur without first obtaining the prior Environmental Clearance, authorization under Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and other permissions from the concerned authorities as mandated by law.

(2) Direct the 10th & 11th respondents to close down the offending garbage and waste disposal facility from the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur and carry out in a place approved and demarcated by respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8 & 9 for such activity.

(3) Direct the respondents-Government authorities/Departments to issue the necessary permission to the 1Ch& 11th respondent to start storage and disposal of garbage and solid wastes elsewhere away from the existing site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur and carryout such activity only after strict compliance of all the mandatory requirements of law and also after hearing the grievances of the local residents, stakeholders including the applicant herein.

(4) Direct the 10th & 11th respondents to set right the environment and ecological damage occasioned by their willful acts of violation of law and non-abidance to the order of this Hon'ble Tribunal (common order) passed on 16.08.2016 in Application No. 14/2012 (SZ); Application Nos. 13, 42, 44, 63, 107, 108, 234 & 264/2013 (SZ); Application Nos. 90, 133, 163, 179, 189, 190 & 209/2015 (SZ); Application Nos. 34, 104, 133, 180 & 181/2016 (SZ) pertaining to the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and its implementation.”

2. Respondents 1 and 12 filed their counter statement contending as follows:

“The area in question is located at S.F. No. 46/1, 46/2 (part), 46/2F, 46/2G, 47, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 61 situated at Navalur Village, Thirupporur Taluk, Kancheepuram District was inspected by the TNPCB officials on 30.06.2017. During inspection the following were observed and ascertained.

The site in question is surrounded by Navalur Panchat Bio degradable Waste Processing facility & Vacant land belonging to Navalur Panchayat on the Eastern side and Vacant Land on the Western side, Road & Crematorium Ground on Northern side and vacant land on the Southern side. Next to the Site the Navalur Panchayat land is located and next to Navalur Panchayat land lies Buckingham Canal.

It was ascertained that daily 5T of Municipal Solid waste is received. The received waste is segregated into bio degradable and Non bio degradable waste, Plastic wastes in the Solid waste Segregation shed provided using Self Help Group. The Bio degradable waste is segregated in another separate shed provided for the purpose. The Balance non recoverable wastes are dumped in the land belong to the Navalur Panchayat. Dumping of solid waste now created a heap on the banks of Buckingham Canal.

It was ascertained that based on complaint from the complainant the heap of wastes which are dumped on the complainant site were cleared and pushed towards the Buckingham Canal side by Navalur Panchayat.

During inspection, it was observed that remnants of the Municipal Solid Waste are left behind in the applicant's site.

During inspection the Bio degradable sold waste segregation area was dumped with bio degradable waste segregatged from Municipal Solid Wastes and two heaps of Solid Waste are found on the banks of Buckingham canal. There is no obstruction for the flow of the Buckingham Canal near the site. The dump site is surrounded by Crematorium. During inspection, waste burning was not observed.

It is ascertained that Navalur is a fast developing area and the residential population has increased many fold in the recent past and the facilities were present long before the new residences have cropped up and the existing facilities are unable to meet the requirement due to lack of sufficient land to the Navalur Village Panchayat.

The representations received regarding dumping of waste were forwarded through online to the Commissioner, Thirupporur Panchayat Union to take necessary action under the Local Body acts.”

3. Second respondent filed counter statement contending as follows:

“It is respectfully submitted that the site in question is located at S.F. No. 46/1, 46/2(part), 46/2F, 46/2G, 47, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 61 situated at Navalur Village, Thirupporur Taluk, Kancheepuram District was inspected by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board officials on 30.06.2017. During inspection the following were observed and ascertained. The site in question is surrounded by Navalur Panchayat Bio degradable Waste Processing facility & Vacant land belonging to Navalur Panchayat on the Easter side and Vacant Land on the Western side, Road & Crematorium Ground on Northern side and vacant land on the Southern side. Next to the Site the Navalur Panchayat land is located and next to Navalur Panchayat land lies Buckingham Canal.

It is respectfully submitted that it was ascertained that daily 5T of Municipal Solid waste is received. The received waste is segregated into bio degradable and Non bio degradable waste, Plastic wastes in the Solid waste Segregation shed provided using Self Help Group. The Bio degradable waste is segregated in another separate shed provided for the purpose. The Balance non recoverable wastes are dumped in the land belongs to the Navalur Panchayat. Dumping of solid waste now created a heap on the banks of Buckingham Canal.

It is respectfully submitted that, it was ascertained that based on complaint from the complainant the heap of wastes which are dumped on the complainant site were cleared and pushed towards the Buckingham Canal side by Navalur Panchayat.

(i) During inspection, it was observed that remnants of the Municipal Solid Waste are left behind in the applicant's site.

(ii) During inspection the Bio degradable solid waste segregation area was dumped with bio degradable waste segregated from Municipal solid wastes and two heaps of Solid waste are found on the banks of Buckingham Canal. There is no obstruction for the flow of the Buckingham Canal near the site. The dump site is surrounded by Crematorium. During inspection, waste burning was not observed.

It is respectfully submitted that Navalur is a fast developing area and the residential population has increased many fold in the recent past and the facilities were present long before the new residences have cropped up and the existing facilities are unable to meet the requirement due to lack of sufficient land to the Navalur Village Panchayat. The representations received regarding dumping of waste were forwarded through online to the Commissioner, Thirupporur Panchayat Union to take necessary action under the Local Body acts.

It is respectfully submitted that the applicant has prayed that the 10th and 11th respondents abstain from carrying out garbage and solid waste storage, processing and disposal in any matter from the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur Village.

It is respectfully submitted that the Tamil Nadu State Coastal Zone Management Authority (TNSCZMA) considered applications seeking clearance under CRZ Notification 2011 by following all the procedures, norms, guidelines indicated in the said notification and after scrutinizing connected documents.

It is respectfully submitted that the clearances are issued for permissible activities subject to several specific conditions indicated by the expert members of the TNSCZMA during the deliberations conducted periodically.

It is respectfully submitted that dumping of city or town wastes including construction debris, industrial solid wastes in Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) area is prohibited activity vide para 3(vii) of CRZ Notification 2011.

It is respectfully submitted that dredging of the canal, maintenance of bund, widening of canals, prevention of illegal discharge of sewer and eviction of encroachments are vested with Public Works Department, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and local bodies concerned.

It is respectfully submitted that the Government of Tamil Nadu have constituted District Coastal Zone Management Authority (DCZMA) for all the Coastal district in G.O.Ms. No. 163, Environment and Forests Department Dated 09.06.1998. As per the said Government Order, vide para 6(i), the DCZMAs are responsible for monitoring and enforcement/implementation of the provisions of the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification and accordingly all the complaints on the development activities in CRZ area are referred to concerned authorities viz., DCZMAs/Greater Chennai Corporation/Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority for taking further action.”

4. Third respondent filed counter statement contending as follows:

“I humbly submit that the applicant has prayed that the 10th and 11th respondents abstain from carrying out garbage and solid waste storage, processing and disposal in any manner from the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur Village.

I humbly submit that the Tamil Nadu State Coastal Zone Management Authority (TNSCZMA) considered applications seeking clearance under CRZ Notification 2011 by following all the procedures, norms, guidelines indicated in the said notification and after scrutinizing connected documents.

I humbly submit that the clearances are issued for permissible activities subject to several specific conditions indicated by the expert members of the TNSCZMA during the deliberations conducted periodically.

I humbly submit that dumping of city or town wastes including construction debris, industrial solid wastes in CRZ area is prohibited activity vide para 3 (vii) of CRZ Notification 2011.

I humbly submit that dredging of the canal, maintenance of bund, widening of canals, prevention of illegal discharge of sewer and eviction of encroachments are vested with Public Works Department, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and local bodies concerned.

I humbly submit that the Government of Tamil Nadu have constituted District Coastal Zone Management Authority (DCZMA) for all the Coastal District in G.O.Ms. No. 163, Environment and Forests Department dated C9.C6.1998. As per the said Government order, vide para 6(i), the DCZMAs are responsible for monitoring and enforcement/implementation of the provisions of the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification and accordingly all the complaints on the development activities in CRZ area are referred to concerned authorities viz., DCZMAs/Greater Chennai Corporation/CMDA for taking further action.”

5. Fourth respondent filed counter statement contending as follows:

“I humbly submit that I am the Project Officer of Chennai Rivers Restoration Trust (CRRT) and I am well acquainted with the facts of the case from the records available and I am filing this reply in my official capacity on behalf of fourth respondent.

I humbly submit that the applicant has requested 10th & 11th respondents from carrying out garbage and solid waste storage, processing and disposal in any manner from the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur Village.

I humbly submit that the 10th and 11 respondents along with the sixth respondent are the line departments responsible for removal of solid waste and for maintaining the river body respectively.”

6. Fifth respondent filed counter statement contending as follows:

“At the outset, it is submitted that the above titled application is a gross abuse of the process of law in as much as the answering respondent is neither a necessary nor a proper party in the above titled application as would be borne out from the bare perusal of the subject matter of the above titled application.

It is submitted that the above titled application does not disclose as to how and in what manner the answering respondent is either a necessary or a proper party in the present proceeding. The subject matter as contained in the said application also does not attribute any role/obligation/responsibility qua the answering respondent. The applicant has filed the above titled application “seeking the Hon'ble Tribunal intervention in passing suitable orders and directions so as to prevent Air and Water Pollution caused by the dumping of solid waste, staking and burning of garbage in an open-air landfill by the 11th respondent on the banks of Buckingham Canal and disposal into the canal is gross violation of environmental laws, near to the lands belonging to the applicant.…”

It is submitted that the answering respondent i.e. Inland Waterways Authority of India (IWAI) was established pursuant to the enactment of IWAI Act. Pertinently, the scheme of the said Act does not contemplate any role or responsibility or obligation or duty, upon the answering respondent in relation to the subject matter contained in the above titled application.

It is further submitted that the reliefs as prayed for in the above titled application also do not fall within the purview of the roles and responsibility attributed to IWAI under the IWAI Act, and as such the reliefs qua answering respondent, as claimed by the applicant, if granted, would be in contravention of legislative intent enshrined in the said Act.

In addition to the above, it is submitted that, the answering respondent does not have any knowledge of the facts alleged in the above titled application and as none of the facts stated in the application relate to the answering respondent, it is not in a position to comment on the same. However, it is vehemently denied that the answering respondent has acted/omitted in any manner contrary to any applicable law as alleged in the above titled application.

The applicant has in a sweeping manner roped in the answering respondent as respondent No. 5 in the Memo of Parties filed long with the above titled application.

In view of the above submissions, it is prayed that no direction qua respondent No. 5 as prayed for in interim reliefs may be granted to the applicant and further that the respondent No. 5 may be deleted from the array of parties as not being either a necessary or a proper party in the above titled application.”

7. Sixth respondent filed counter statement contending as follows:

“I am the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Water Resources Department having my office at P.W.D. Campus, Chepauk, Chennai-6CC CC5 and I am acquainted with the facts of the case from records. I am filing this affidavit on behalf of the sixth respondent herein.

With regard to the averments made in paragraph 3 of the application, it is respectfully admitted that the Buckingham Canal is a 426 km (264.7C miles) long salt water navigation canal, running parallel to the Coromandel Coast of South India stretching from Peddaganjam in Andhra Pradesh to Marakkanam backwaters in Tamil Nadu. The canal connects most of the sea months along the coast to the Port of Chennai (Madras). It was constructed during the British Rule for the purpose of navigation.

It is respectfully submitted that the applicant herein has filed this application before this Hon'ble Tribunal praying for direction to

(a) Permanently restrain the 10th & 11th respondents from carrying out garbage and solid waste storage, processing and disposal in any manner from the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur without first obtaining the Environmental Clearance, authorization under Solid Waste Management Rules, 2C16 and other permissions from the concerned authorities as mandated by law.

(b) Direct the 10th & 11th respondents to close down the offending garbage and waste disposal facility from the present site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur and carry out in a place approved and demarcated by respondent Nos. 3, 7, 8 & 9 for such activity.

(c) Direct the respondents-Government authorities/Departments to issue the necessary permission to the 10th & 11th respondent to start storage and disposal of garbage and solid wastes elsewhere away from the existing site along the Buckingham Canal at Navalur and carryout such activity only after strict compliance of all the mandatory requirements of law and also after hearing the grievances of the local residents, stakeholders including the applicant herein.

(d) Direct the 10h& 11th respondents to set right the environment and ecological damage occasioned by their willful acts of violation of law and non-abidance to the order of this Hon'ble Tribunal (common order) passed on 16.08.2016 in Application No. 14/2012 (SZ); Application Nos. 13, 42, 44, 63, 107, 108, 234 & 264/2013 (SZ); Application Nos. 90, 133, 163, 179, 189, 190 & 209/2015 (SZ); Application Nos. 34, 104, 133, 180 & 181/2016 (SZ) pertaining to the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and its implementation.

It is respectfully submitted that the averments putforth in para 3 of the affidavit pertains to this Department. The 10th & 11th respondents have been continuously dumping the solid waste and burning the garbage in the open air on the banks of the Buckingham Canal. The site under threat was inspected by PWD and subsequently, the 10th and 11th respondents were given notice to stop their dumping activities further (vide letter No.AE/CW/F.9/2017/dated 05.09.2017).

With regard to the averments putforth in para 6 of the affidavit, it is respectfully submitted that the petitioner has alleged that the area contiguous to the Buckingham Canal is contaminated by garbage, fine particles, inert street sweepings, chemicals, domestic hazardous waste, residuals, combustible materials and has become blockade to the free flow of water in the Buckingham canal and this stagnation causes breeding of mosquitoes and disease vectors. It is respectfully submitted that the 10th and 11th respondents must completely remove the dumped wastes and garbage heaps adjoining the Buckingham Canal at the Navalur Village and deposit it at an alternate location like Perungudi Dumping Yard. It is also submitted that after the complete removal of the dumped wastes and garbage adjoin the Buckingham Canal near Navalur Village, PWD will protect its boundary by mans of constructing a Protective wall after obtaining sanction from the Government to prevent future dumping of solid waste and garbage in the Buckingham Canal at the Navalur Village, Thiruporur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to take on record the above submissions and pass appropriate order/further orders as deemed fit and necessary in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.”

8. Seventh respondent filed counter statement contending that it is the responsibility of the tenth and eleventh respondents to comply with the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 in respect of collection, segregation and disposal of waste collected in their area. They are unnecessary party to the proceedings.

9. Respondents 9, 10 and 11 filed counter statement contending as follows:

“I humbly state that the lands comprised in S. No. 242, Navalur Village, Thiruporur Taluk, Kancheepuram District is classified as “Canal Poromboke” as per the Village Revenue Records. It is pertinent to mention that the lands used by the respondent though falls under the S. No. mentioned above They lie in the corner of the lands and does not affect or obstruct the flow of water in the canal in any way.

It is humbly stated that the respondent has been taking suitable steps to change the place of the dump yard. And has tasked the Tahsildar, Village Administrative Office of Navalur to identify suitable lands to be used as dump yards vide letter Lr. No.NA/ka/No. 24-2C17-A1 dated 2.2.2C17.

It is humbly stated that Tahsildar and the Village Administrative Officer, Navalur have forwarded to this respondent a list of 4 available poramboke sites which are the only sites at the disposal of the Administration vide the proceedings dated 4.9.2C17. But these lands cannot be used as they are classified as “Odai, Buckingham kaalvai and Navalur thaangal”.

It is humbly stated that the respondent has taken necessary and suitable steps in order to find a common dump yard together with the other nearby villages such as Kelambakkam, Padur, Muthukadu, Siruseri as it is a common problem for all the mentioned villages. Therefore, the respondent respectfully seeks more time in order to find a suitable location to shift the present dump yard. The respondent also respectfully submits that the present dump yard is a barren land and is not a water body. It is situated at the corner of the above mentioned Serial No. And does not affect or obstruct the flow of the water in the canal situated some distance away from the dump yard.

The respondent humbly states that the above lands are presently used as a temporary dump site till a suitable alternate land is allocated by the District Collector.”

10. It is seen from the counter statements that the manner in which dumping of garbage is being done by respondents 10 and 11 are not in conformity with the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. In spite of the fact that they were certain directions given earlier by the authorities, no steps have been taken to shift the place to avoid dumping being done in such a way which is affecting the Buckingham Canal. It is also not known as to what is the present status as well. According to the applicant, it still continues and the condition is more pathetic.

11. There is no dispute regarding the fact that the responsibility of disposal of waste management is with the local bodies and they are bound to follow the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 strictly and implement the same in its letter and spirit. They are also bound to follow the directions issued by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No. 606 of 2018. Present status of the dumping ground is not known. Considering the circumstances and in order to ascertain the present status, we feel it appropriate to constitute a joint committee comprising of District Collector, Chengalpet, Commissioner, Thiruporur Panchayat Union, Navalur Panchayat, Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department and Water Resources Organisation and Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to inspect the disputed area in question and submit the present status including the nature of implementation of waste collection in these areas and disposal of the same and implementation of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, implementation of the directions given by the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal at New Delhi in O.A. No. 606 of 2018, the extent of legacy waste available in that area and what steps have been taken by the local bodies to dispose of the same, whether any environmental damage has been caused on account of the unscientific manner in which the garbage is being collected and disposed of by the local bodies and if so, the remedial measures to be taken for abating the same by providing short term as well as long term measures with shorter time lines and imposing of environmental compensation for violation, if any, identifying the persons responsible for the same. They may also ascertain as to whether there is any encroachment in the water body and if so, what action is taken to remove the same and submit the status as well as action taken report within a period of two months to this Tribunal through e-mail @ ngtszfiling@gmail.com. Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department and Water Resources Organisation shall act as nodal agency for co-ordination and providing necessary logistics for this purpose. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the above officials by e-mail immediately so as to enable them to comply with the directions.

For consideration of the report, post the matter on 15.05.2020.