Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2017) 09 NGT CK 0014

S. Mohan Daniel vs District Environmental Engineer And Ors

National Green Tribunal · Decided on 20 September 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
P. Jyothimani, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Application No. 24 Of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 923 words
1.

We have heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant as well as respondents including the private respondents who are Ready Mix Concrete (RMC) plant owners. The prayer of the applicant who is resident in the area, is to refrain the RMC plants from polluting the residential locality at Seneerkuppam Village, Poonamallee Taluk, Tiruvallur District. The main grievance of the applicant is that large number of RMC units have come up in the area without following siting criteria and without undertaking pollution control measures with the result, dust pollution is causing heavy environmental and health damage.

During the pendency of the application, we have directed the State Pollution Control Board (Board) to find out as to whether any statutory guidelines have been framed in respect of functioning of the RMC Plants in the State. The learned counsel appearing for the Board has produced a copy of the Guidelines dated 16.08.2017 issued by the Board on RMC plants. Even though it is stated in the contents that it is "Draft Guidelines for RMC Plants in Tamil Nadu", the learned counsel on instructions submits that it is already finalised and should be read as "Final Guidelines". A reference to the said guidelines shows particularly in respect of siting criteria, that no RMC plant shall be permitted to be established within 250 m from the nearby residential area and the minimum distance between two RMC plants is also 250 m. In fact, the main grievance of the applicant is that large number of RMC plants are located within the same area and some more RMC Plants are in the process of being started in the same locality. The guidelines also speaks about the measures to be taken by the RMC Plants which are already in existence. The siting criteria for existing RMC plants makes it very clear which is as follows:

1.

All existing RMC plants shall not undertake expansion activity without prior consent of the Board. If the unit applies for consent of the Board for expansion activity, it is to be considered as a proposed industry and recommending siting criteria to be adhered with.

2.

The existing RMC plants which are not meeting the siting criteria shall provide a compound wall /Tin sheet coverage/Barricades to a height of 20 feet all around the periphery of the unit premises.

In addition to the siting criteria to be followed regarding the existing RMC Plants, the guidelines contemplate strict implementation of Air pollution control measures as well as Water pollution Control measures apart from strictly following the Solid Waste Management Rules.

It is also clear from the guidelines that the existing RMC Plants will have to immediately adhere to the guidelines without waiting to approach the Board either for expansion of activity or for renewal of consent. Therefore, the criteria prescribed for existing RMC Plants are to be scrupulously implemented without waiting for either renewal or expansion. We make it clear that the Board shall inspect all the existing RMC Plants and ensure that various conditions prescribed in the guidelines are strictly implemented.

We also make it clear that the said guidelines shall be implemented in respect of private respondents viz. Respondent Nos.2 to 4. In our order dated 10th August, 2017 when it was brought to the notice of this Tribunal that the 2nd respondent viz. Raymix Concrete India Pvt. Ltd. No.49, Sakthi Garden, Phase I, Sennneerkuppam Chennai in addition to the RMC Plants, he is also operating vehicle parking site in the residential area. In fact, the learned counsel appearing for 2nd respondent has given an undertaking that the 2nd respondent will shift the vehicle parking. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that in respect of the undertaking, the vehicle parking site has not been removed and still using the parking area and also undertaking maintenance of vehicles causing pollution in the area. The learned counsel appearing for 2nd respondent submits that vehicle parking at the site will be stopped if sufficient time is given. We direct the 2nd respondent to remove the vehicle parking in the area concerned within a period of one month from today. The Board shall ensure compliance of the same and if there is any violation of such undertaking, the Board shall take appropriate action to seal the premises in so far as it relates to vehicle parking and maintenance.

In the order dated 10.08.2017 we have directed the Board to find out as to whether any other RMC Plant is coming up in the area. The learned counsel appearing for the Board would submit that there is no new RMC Plant which is to be started in the area . However, the Board shall ensure that even any new RMC Plant is to be started, the guidelines will have to be strictly implemented before passing any order of giving consent.

The siting criteria in respect of the existing plants and the conditions contained which are extracted above shall be complied with by the private respondents in this application, within a period of 2 months from today. The Board shall ensure compliance of the same in the above said manner and regarding the guidelines for RMC Plants propounded by the Board shall be implemented in respect of all the said plant owners.

We also make it clear that the Board shall upload the guidelines in the Website of the Board if not yet done, so as to make available in public domain.

With the above direction, the application stands closed. There shall be no order as to cost.