Case at a Glance
A transport workers’ federation told the National Green Tribunal that drivers and helpers were exposed to heavy dust while coal, cement and stone chips were loaded and unloaded at Dankuni Railway Yard and other sidings of the Eastern Railway. The Tribunal found that the Railway Board’s own 2018 directions and the West Bengal Pollution Control Board’s 2022 directions had not been fully complied with. It rejected the Railways’ argument that third-party transport workers were not its responsibility, calling it “absurd”. It ordered short-term and long-term dust controls, PPE and periodic medical check-ups, and an inspection of all railway sidings in West Bengal, with reports due within three months.
The applicants, a federation of road transport workers and its office-bearer, filed the application under Sections 14, 15 and 18(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. They said truck drivers, helpers and other workers were suffering health hazards from dust generated during the handling of coal, cement and stone chips at Dankuni Railway Yard and several other sites in the Eastern Railway network. A Railway Board committee had reported on the problem on 16 August 2017, and the Board issued directions on 16 April 2018.
The West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) inspected the Dankuni siding on 10 November 2022. On 23 December 2022 it directed water sprinklers, mist cannons, dust screen walls, a green belt, air-quality monitoring, periodic health check-ups for transport workers and a bank guarantee of Rs 20 lakh. The Railways claimed the bank guarantee had been exempted. WBPCB said it had no record of any exemption. A contract for pollution-control works at the Dankuni Goods Shed was awarded only on 14 November 2024, with a 12-month timeline. The Railways also argued that transport workers were not railway staff and that it was not liable for their health check-ups.
The Key Question Before the Court
Had the Railways and the State Pollution Control Board complied with existing dust-control directions at railway goods sidings, and can the Railways disclaim responsibility for the health of third-party transport workers who handle goods there?
What the NGT found and why it rejected the Railways’ stand
The Tribunal held that the directions issued by the Railway Board and WBPCB had not been fully complied with. It noted that the affidavits filed dealt only with Dankuni and said nothing about the other sites listed in the application. It also criticised the Railway Board, the Divisional Railway Manager (DRM), Howrah, and WBPCB for not checking compliance, observing that WBPCB had treated its duty as discharged merely by issuing an order. It expressed “displeasure regarding such ineffective and indifferent approach”. It warned that officers could be prosecuted and made liable to pay compensation as “abettors” if the negligence continued.
The Tribunal described as “absurd” the Railways’ position that transport workers were not its employees. It directed that contracts with third-party agencies must include conditions requiring PPE and health check-ups, with periodic compliance reports, and that non-compliant agencies could face termination or blacklisting. It drew on its earlier orders on railway-siding pollution, including Shivansh Pandey v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Dinesh Sharma v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Mukesh Kumar Chouhan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, in which the right to clean air was linked to Article 21.
What the Court Actually Held
- The Railway Board must ensure that Eastern Railway complies with its directions of 16 April 2018 at Dankuni and at the other sidings in West Bengal.
- DRM, Howrah must carry out short-term measures (anti-smog guns, cleaning, water sprinkling, covered trucks) and long-term measures (upgrading the siding and goods shed, paved roads, mechanised handling), and file a report within three months.
- DRMs must ensure mechanical loading and unloading where possible, PPE, and periodic medical check-ups for workers. Third-party contracts must carry these conditions.
- WBPCB must inspect all railway sidings in West Bengal, act against violations (including revoking consent or closing non-compliant sidings), upload compliance information on its website and report within three months.
Why This Judgment Matters
- Thousands of truck drivers and loaders work at goods sidings. The order makes their health part of the Railways’ pollution-control duty even when they are hired through contractors.
- It reminds pollution control boards that issuing directions is not enough. They must follow up on compliance.
- Officers were warned that continued inaction could expose them to prosecution and compensation as abettors.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Workers and Unions
- Contract and transport workers at sidings can seek PPE and periodic medical check-ups through the NGT.
- Compliance reports must be filed before the NGT Registrar in Kolkata, and the matter can go back to the Bench if they are not filed on time.
- WBPCB is to put compliance information on its website, which unions can track.
For Counsel
- Plead the regulator’s own earlier directions and show non-compliance site by site. Affidavits limited to one site were found inadequate.
- Cite earlier NGT railway-siding orders such as Mukesh Kumar Chouhan v. State of Uttar Pradesh on clean air under Article 21.
- Seek directions that bind third-party agencies through contract conditions.
Key Takeaways
- The Railways cannot disown the health of transport workers at its sidings because they are third-party workers.
- Both short-term dust controls and long-term infrastructure upgrades were ordered for Dankuni and other sidings.
- WBPCB must inspect every railway siding in West Bengal and report within three months.
- Officers were warned of prosecution and compensation as “abettors” for continued inaction.
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the NGT order at Dankuni Railway Yard?
Anti-smog guns, cleaning and water sprinkling, covered trucks, an upgraded siding and goods shed, paved roads and mechanised handling. DRM, Howrah must file a compliance report within three months.
Are railways responsible for contract workers’ health at sidings?
The NGT rejected the Railways’ stand that they were not, calling it “absurd”. It directed that PPE and health check-up conditions be put into contracts with third-party agencies.
Does the order apply beyond Dankuni?
Yes. The Railway Board’s 2018 directions must be implemented at other sidings in West Bengal, and WBPCB must inspect all railway sidings in the State.
Conclusion
The NGT disposed of the application with a time-bound compliance plan rather than a fine. Its message to both the Railways and the State Board was that paper directions are not enough, and that workers at the loading point are within the zone of responsibility.
Practical takeaway: Where pollution affects contract workers, ask the Tribunal for directions written into the contracts themselves, with PPE, health check-ups and blacklisting for non-compliance, and for site-wise compliance reports.
For more judgments, legal opinions and case analysis, visit courtkutchehry.com