Shri Sudip Narayan Tamankar vs Union Of India And Ors

This Application projects somewhat - interesting question which pertains to discharging of sewage and garbage generated due to Casino activities on Cruises operated in River water.

There is no dispute about the fact that Respondent Nos.6 to 12, were granted Consent to Operate Casinos mounted on their Ships which were being anchored in Mandovi River during day time and used to be sailed through the River during dusk to dawn for the purpose of running the Casinos in full swing.

This Application is filed under Section 14 and 15 r.w. Section 18 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The Applicant alleges that the sewage and garbage generated by the Casinos on the Cruises causes pollution of the water in River Mandovi, since it is discharged in the River without any treatment and in flagrant violation of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Municipal Solid Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 2000.

The chronology of events as submitted by the Applicant in this Application is as follows:

In December, 2000, first Offshore Casino mounted ship was anchored in River Mandovi. Subsequently in the year 2008, four (4) such ships with Casinos were anchored in River Madovi. In February 2009,complaints related to the discharge of untreated sewage and garbage generated from these Casino activities in River Mandovi, were made to Authorities. In March 2009, Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB) took action against these Casinos. In December, 2010, the Captain of Ports directed all these Casinos to make arrangements for disposing sewage by building storage tanks on the Ships and disposing it offshore for treatment through tankers. Applicant relies on the newspaper articles while making allegations regarding disposal of untreated sewage and garbage in relation to Mandovi by Casino operators. He alleges that the sewage generated by these Casinos is not scientifically treated on the Ships. The untreated sewage along with garbage is being thrown directly in river Mandovi. He alleges that there are six (6) Casinos which are in operation in middle of narrow stretch of navigation channel of River Mandovi. They are as follows:

i. M.V. THE Leela from 03-04-2008

ii. M.V. Pride of Goa from 17-05-2008

iii. M.V. Casino Royale from 24-10-2008

iv. M.V. San Somino from 17-12-2008

v. M.V. Boa Sorte from 22-02-2010

vi. M.V. Horseshoe from 26-5-2013

GSPCB - Respondent No.3, had issued directions on March 18th, 2009, directing all six (6) offshore casinos to suspend their operations on the ground of causing pollution. Subsequently, Captain of Ports i.e. Respondent No.4, on December 30th, 2010, directed all the offshore Casino mounted Ships anchored in River Mandovi to make separate arrangements for disposal of sewage generated by them. The owners of these offshore casinos were asked to build holding tank, aboard for storing of waste and disposing it on the shore for further treatment, instead of polluting the river. GSPCB had frequently issued show cause Notices to these casinos for unloading garbage and sewage in River Mandovi.

The Applicant further submits that operation of these casinos also lead to several problems onshore, including traffic congestion and it is, therefore, claimed by the Applicant that Casino activities are adversely affecting environment, ecology and human health of the residents of Panaji. It also causes damage to aquatic life which impairs livelihood of fishermen who are dependent on River Mandovi for their survival. It is the claim of the Applicant that though several newspaper articles have been published regarding pollution of River Mandovi and though, the Authorities including GSPCB and Captain of Ports are aware of the fact that the Casinos were disposing untreated sewage and garbage in River Mandovi and they had even taken action including suspension Casino operators, yet, the operators have not been stopped discharging untreated sewage and garbage in the river. This is causing pollution of river which is observed from the report of National Institute of Oceanography, which shows higher concentration of bacteria and pathogens in River Mandovi. It is, therefore, the claim of the Applicant that casino operations are flouting environmental norms and also regulatory authorities are not taking preventive actions to stop such operations and therefore the Applicant has made following prayers:

a. declare as null and void retrospectively all licenses, registrations, permissions, renewals, granted/ renewed by Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in favour of Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 for operation and establishing Offshore Casinos in the River Mandovi, Goa, In contravention of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.

b. Order that Offshore Casinos operated by Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 shall henceforth and with immediate effect cease to operate in River Mandovi, Goa, unless all statutory requirements are complied with and Environment Impact Assessment study is conducted.

c. direct a macro EIA by a suitable agency on Offshore Casinos operated by Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 on River Mandovi, Goa.

d. direct Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 not to grant any further approval/permission/license/renewal to establish and operate Offshore Casino in the River Mandovi, Goa the Environment Impact Assessment Studies are carried out by a suitable agency.

Respondent No.1 is the Ministry of Environment and Forests, which do not have a direct role in the present matter, however, it has the supervision and final responsibility for ensuring implementation of environmental laws. The Respondent No.1 has not filed affidavit in this case, however, it is not necessary to ensure such affidavit, since it has no direct role envisaged in the present Application. Respondent No.2, is State of Goa. Respondent No.3 GSPCB, has filed its affidavit. Respondent No.4 is Captain of Ports, who is responsible for development of works of inland water ways and minor ports of Goa, Respondent No.4 is also responsible for management and control of inland vessels and registration of vessels. Respondent No.5 is Municipal Authority of city of Panaji and Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 are offshore casino operators/owners.

Respondent No.3- Goa State Pollution Control Board (GSPCB), filed first affidavit in October 2013, through its Member Secretary. It is stated that GSPCB grants Consent to Operate under Section 25 and 26 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and under Section 21 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, to the Offshore Casino vessels operating in the River Mondavi. Further, GSPCB also grants authorization under the Hazardous Waste (MH&TM) Rules, 2008 to said Casino vessels. GSPCB further submits that these consents stipulate that the sewage generated by the Respondent Offshore Casino vessels, should be stored in sewage collection tanks/holding tanks of adequate capacity aboard, which must be subsequently transported by the Public Works Department (PWD) authorized tankers to sewage treatment plant of PWD located at Tonca, Tiswadi, Goa. Further, outlet pipe from the sewage collection tank/holding tank should be sealed and it should be ensured that sewage is not discharged into the river. The GSPCB submits that the quantity of sewage and salvage is prescribed in the consent order and the Respondent's - vessel operators, are required to submit a monthly statement of generation of sewage and receipts issued by the PWD for collection treatment and disposal of the same. The consent order further stipulates that all the solid waste generated in theCasino Vessels shall be properly segregated into bio-degradable and non-bio-degradable waste by a specified quantity per month and the same shall be disposed off by handing it over to any Agency (emphasis supplied).

A monthly statement indicating quantity of bio-degradable and non-bio-degradation waste generated by the Respondent Vessels and the name of the agency collecting the said waste, is required to be submitted. The affidavit goes on to mention that by corrigendum issued to the consent to operate order, the Board has further mandated that the Respondent's vessels, are required to install/establish machinery/equipment/ facility for converting bio-degradable/organic waste into compost onshore. GSPCB further claims that its officers are regularly inspecting Respondent's vessels and verifying compliance of the consent conditions including the record submitted by the Respondent's vessels in this regard. It is, therefore, submitted by the GSPCB that contention of the Applicant that the vessels of Respondent Nos. 6 to 12 are operating without approval under the Water and Air Acts, is not true. According to the GSPCB, the sewage and solid waste generated in these Casino vessels, is being adequately treated and disposed as per conditions stipulated in the consent orders issued by it.

The GSPCB has carried out inspection of these vessels as per order of the Tribunal dated September 30th, 2013 and status report was submitted by the Board. The Board submits that on perusal of the record of last months, (May to September, 2013), the number of customers visiting the Respondent No.8, is 346, Respondent No.9, is -205, Respondent No.11, is -61 and Respondent No.12 is -259 per day and therefore, the affidavit goes on mentioning that the vessels have adequate capacity of holding tanks for storage of sewage and the Respondent's vessels are sending this sewage to the Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) of PWD by the special tankers and maintain the record. The status report is generally indicative that there are some non-compliances like the DG set capacity, non-submission of hazardous waste forms, non-availability of water meters, non- availability of owner's onshore composting facility etc. GPCB generally observed that the vessels are disposing of sewage to STP at Tonca and the solid waste to M/s C-Farm Ltd.

The Respondent's Casino vessels have submitted individual affidavits. We are not inclined to deal with each affidavit separately as more or less, the affidavits are on the common stand that the Casino vessels are being operated with all the necessary statutory permissions including consent from GSPCB. The Casino vessel operators are taking all the measures to fully comply with the statutory conditions including GSPCB's consent conditions like sewage holding tank, disposal of sewage to STP, disposal of solid waste to onshore facility and most importantly, non-disposal of sewage/solid waste in river Mandovi. It is also the claim of these Respondents that there is no scientific study or finding that the operations of these vessels are causing pollution of River Mandovi. It is also submitted that there are several vessels which are using channels/waterways of River Mandovi. The vessel operators have also affirmed and assured that they are open and willing to implement any additional measures/suggestions given by the GSPCB to make their operations more environmental friendly, provided adequate time is provided for such implementation. It is the case of these Casino operators that whenever GSPCB or Captain of Ports have given any directions or suggestions, they have complied with it in letter and spirit, and they are more than willing to operate these Casinos in environmentally sound manner. It is also claim of the vessel operators that their activities are tourist oriented and are helping the State by generation of revenue as well as employment.

Considering rival pleadings and also submissions oflearned Counsel for the parties, following issues arisefor adjudication of the present Application.

Whether Offshore Casino vessels in River Mandovi, are being operated in compliance with environmental norms?

Whether the sewage and solid waste generated from Casino Vessel operations is adequately treated and safely disposed of ?

Whether the concerned Respondent Authorities are exercising necessary safeguards for ensuring environmentally sound operations of offshore Casino vessels in river Mandovi ?

The Casinos on the Vessels have been promoted in the State of Goa as tourism development activity. These Casino Vessels are anchored in river Mandovi from where tourists are taken aboard. The operations of these Casinos generate domestic sewage and solid waste, which needs to be appropriately treated and disposed of, so as to avoid pollution of river. The vessels as such, operate on fuel and the operation of vessels need to be environmental friendly in terms of air emissions, fuel loading, paints applied on the vessels etc. However, these considerations are not only applicable for the Casino Vesselsbut also for all the vessels being operated in river Mandovi as such.

It is observed that GSPCB is granting consent under the provisions of Water and Air Acts, to these Casino Vessels. It is observed from the pleadings that Casino Vessels are in operation since year 2000 and in 2008, totally about six (6) Casino Vessels were in operation. However, the complaints related to pollution have been reported since February, 2009. It is not clear when the GSPCB has made it mandatory for the Casino Vessels to obtain consent and also, when they have complied with present conditions related to providing for sewage holding tank and also, disposal of sewage to STP ofthe PWD. This is important as the Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) at Tonca has been commissioned only in August, 2013, as GSPCB has conducted STP performance study to ascertain the quality of treated waste, in order to take a decision on second RA Bill of the contractor. Under these circumstances, we posed a query to GSPCB officers present during arguments as to what were the sewage disposal arrangements prior to August, 2013 and also, whether theSTP is presently performing as per the consent standards. We were surprised to get response from these officers that they are not aware of situation prior to August, 2013 and neither, they are aware of present performance of STP as they have not visited the same. It is difficult to accept the contention that from year 2009, when GSPCB issued first directions to these Casino operators till August 2013, there existed sewage treatment and disposal mechanism and that the GSPCB was able to ensure compliances of its own consent conditions so as to avoid entry of untreated sewage into river Mandovi. It is also not clear whether even today sewage which has been transported by these Casino Vessels is adequately treated in the STP or it is just bypassed through STP, back into river Mandovi. We had directed GSPCB in September 2013 thata status report should be submitted. What was expected was, the entire sewage and solid waste management of these casino operators will be reviewed by the GSPCB. However, we are constrained to note that the conduct of GSPCB in the present case is far from satisfactory and not based on sound technical and scientific basis. They have only visited the Casino ships and not ascertained what is final fate of the sewage/solid waste generated by these operations.

Similar is the casein respect of solid waste management. It is claimed that the GSPCB has stipulated condition of segregation of waste of bio-degradable and non-bio-degradable waste and operators were directed to install their own solid waste processing plant onshore for its safe disposal. However, in some consents, we have noticed that solid waste disposal is shown as to M/s C-Farm Ltd. When we inquired with the officers present in the Tribunal, as to whether C-Farm has been inspected by GSPCB officers and what are operations carried out at M/s C-Farm, surprisingly, GSPCB officers informed that M/s C-Farm is a piggery and they have neither inspected it nor they are aware about consent status of the unit. GSPCB officers were also not able to give clear information whether GSPCB has issued any specific time bound directions for installation of solid waste plant by Casino Vessels.

Main contention of the present Applicant, is about uncontrolled disposal of untreated sewage and solid waste in river Mandovi and its adverse impact on the ecology, including water quality of river Madovi. Noting that the Applicant is mainly relying on newspaper articles, we had asked the Applicant to furnish specific reports, documents or expert opinion regarding the pollution caused due to such recreational activities. However, the Applicant has not submitted the same.

Also, none of the earlier affidavits of GSPCB had referred to water quality of river Mandovi and therefore, we had directed GSPCB on January 16th, 2014, to submit water quality details of river Mandovi. GSPCB has submitted a report identifying various water pollution sources finally discharging wastewaters in river Mandovi, and also, water quality of the river based on the special sampling done after the Tribunal's order. It is observed from the report that fecal coliform concentrations are sometimes exceeding the standards. However, GSPCB has attributed this excessive concentration to discharge of untreated sewage from various localities which is finally meeting the river. GSPCB has categorically submitted in this affidavit on April, 2nd2014 that Casino Vessels are complying with the conditions as contained in the consent to operate, issued by the Board under the Water Act, with regard to disposal of sewage through tankers for treatment at the STP of the PWD at Tonca. In view of above observations particularly non-availability of performance data of STP and solid waste disposal, we deem it proper to record finding on Issue No.1 and 2 in the 'Negative'.

It is observed from the report submitted bythe GSPCBthat it has identified various sources of water pollution meeting river Mandovi. The water quality of river Mandovi is also observed to be deteriorated, in terms of fecal coliform. GSPCB has also submitted that there are regular water quality monitoring stations on bank of River Mandovi, and the trend of water quality is said to be similar. It is, therefore, now necessary that GSPCB shall take necessary action to stop these polluting sources from releasing untreated waste waters in to the river.

The growth of recreational boating, along with the growth of coastal development in general, has led to an increased awareness of the need to protect the environmental quality of our water-bodies and waterways. Because such recreational boats and marinas are located right at the water's edge, there is a strong potential for such water body to become contaminated with pollutants generated from various activities that occur at recreation boats/ships and also, their berthssuch as boat cleaning, fueling operations and marine head discharge or from the entry of storm water runoff from parking lots and hull maintenance and repair areas into water bodies. We would like to refer the documents available on USEPA website related to water quality initiatives, more particularly National Management Measures to Control Non-point Source Pollution from Marinas and Recreational Boating (EPA 841-B-01-005, November 2001).

It can be noted from all above discussions that though the casino vessels now have consent from GSPCB, it is established that they were not treating the sewage and solid waste till August, 2013, beforethe STP commissioning was verified by GSPCB. Also, even today GSPCB could not establish that the sewage which is transferred to STP is treated adequately. Similarly, the consent condition related to establishing the own MSW facility is also not complied. All the above findings, clearly establish that the casino vessels were discharging their sewage, directly or indirectly in river Mandovi, till August 2013. The vessel operators have also not taken efforts to verify whether the STP where they are transferring the sewage is operational and was/is as per the required standards. Similar case is with the solid waste disposal. We are of the opinion that the response of authorities and the casino vessel operators is dissatisfactory, in terms of compliance to environmental norms. And, therefore, the finding on Issue No.3 framed earlier is also recorded in 'Negative'.

In the present case, the response of the regulatory authority is not comprehensive, and based on the records available. So, we intend to give directions for time-bound compliance. However, the major concern is effective implementation of the proposed directions. We intend to form monitoring committee of experts consisting both government officials and also, the independent experts for a particular duration, so that the directions of the Tribunal are implemented in time and in effective manner. There are several instances where the Apex Court and also various High Courts have formed such monitoring committees for effective implementation of directions. Hon'ble Madras High Court in the matter "M. Ramasamy& Others Vs. The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu and others (2012(8)MLJ 628)"observed:

A public interest litigation is for the betterment of the public at large. That is why in public interest litigation, role of the Court is more assertive than in the traditional litigations. i.e., the Court plays a positive role with the responsibility for organization of the proceedings, moulding the relief and also supervising the implementation thereof. The Court is entitled to often seek the assistance of Expert/Panels/Commissioners/Advisory Committees and Monitoring Committees. This wide range of responsibilities and the relief granted is on a large scale redressing the grievance of all the affected persons. Apex Court in "M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. (2004)12 SCC 118", a matter related to Aravali Hills also thought it expedient to form a monitoring committee as under;

With a view to monitor the overall eco-restoration efforts in the Aravalli Hills and to provide technical support to the implementing organizations and also to monitor implementation of recommendations contained in reports referred herein, it is necessary to constitute

a Monitoring Committee. The heads of the following departments would be members of the MonitoringCommittee:

Regional Officer of State Pollution Control Board.

Forest Department

District Administration

Department of Mining & Geology

Irrigation Department

Regional Officer of CGWB

Agriculture Department

District industry Department.

Chairman - CPCB.

Hon'bleSupreme Court in "D.K.Joshi vs. Chief Secretary, Stateof U.P.: AIR 2000 SC 384" where petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India as public interest litigation alleging that supply of drinking water in Agra city is being contaminated with pollutants and causing health problems, consumption. The Supreme Court called for status reports from the Government of Uttar Pradesh and based on reports, went on giving various directions pursuant to which the State Government took definite steps. However, when the Court found that the steps taken by Agra Municipality are inadequate, the Court appointed a monitoring committee to be headed by the Commissioner of Agra Division, a representative of the Pollution Control Board, Chief Medical Officer, Agra and others. The Committee was directed it meet once in every two months and prepare plan for steps to be taken and State Government was directed to take appropriate action as per law. These directions were given 'with a hope that the, monitoring committee will try its best to achieve maximum results for providing unpolluted water to the citizens of Agra.'

In another well documented matter, the Apex Court in "Research Foundation v. Union of India & Others, WP 657/1995 (2003.10.14)" in its orders dated 14.10.2003 thought it fit to constitute a monitoring committee for efficient hazardous waste management in the country as under; 66. It appears from the Report that about 80% of country's hazardous waste is generated in the State of Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. This may also show good industrial growth in those States. Be that as it may, to ensure that the generation of hazardous waste is minimum and it is properly handled in every State including the aforesaid States, in particular, it is necessary to appoint a Monitoring Committee to oversee the compliance of law, directions of this Court and Rules and Regulations.

Sum total of the foregoing discussion is that discharge of sewage and garbage from Casinos was probably being done without proper segregation of degradation and non-bio-degradation waste. It appears that the status report submitted by the GSPCB, would show that cruisers have not yet complied with certain conditions like installation of proper DJ sets, installation of water meters, installation of composting facility. So also, it appears that solid waste is disposed of at M/s C-Farm, which is a piggery. In fact, there is hardly any material to show that there is appropriate solid waste management facility at M/s C- Farm to deal with solid waste. Considering these aspects, though we find that presently the Respondent Nos.6 to 12 cannot be directly held responsible for causing water pollution yet due to their previous acts of negligence, and before installation of proper facilities on the Ships and at the bank of River Mandovi, the sewage and garbage was improperly treated by them. Consequently, the Application is to be partly allowed, in following terms:

(I) the Casino operators, while operating the Casinos on the Ships/Cruises shall ensure compliances of consent conditions in respect of disposal of sewage and solid waste generated as a result of operation of the Casinos/recreation facility. They shall improve the solid waste management system within period of six (6) weeks hereafter and if so directed by the GSPCB shall install equipment for dis-infection of the solid waste on the Ships.

(II) The GSPCB shall regularly visit the STP at Tonca and monitor the operation of STP to ensure effective working thereof, in accordance with the consent conditions and shall ensure that the MSW and sewage is scientifically treated.

(III) The Respondent Nos.6 to 12, shall pay Rs. 2 lakhs each being cost of environmental damage caused due to faulty disposal of the MSW/sewage/garbage. The amount shall be deposited with the Collector, North Goa within period of two (2) months hereafter.

(IV) The Collector, North Goa, shall utilize the above amount for updating of improvements of environmental activities in the area and if necessary for up gradation of the STP, which is being operated by the PWD.

(V) A Committee consisting of the Director of National Institute of Technology (NIT) Goa, or any of his nominee, representative by Environment department Govt. of Goa, Director of National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) or any of his nominee, Captain of Ports, Goa and the Member Secretary of GSPCB, is constituted to oversee the compliances of the MSW Rules by the Casino operators. The Committee shall inspect the Cruises at least once in a four (4) Months and examine the management of sewage treatment, discharge of sewage/garbage including operation of the STP at bank of River Mandovi and actual operation thereof. The Committee shall submit the report of site inspection to this Tribunal for each four (4) months' period. The first such report shall be submitted on or before 1st September, 2014, so on and so forth. The second such report shall be submitted on 1st January, 2015, so on and so forth.

(VI) The Respondent Nos.6 to 12, shall deposit the amount of Rs.1 lakh to meet the cost of incidental expenditure required for work of monitoring by the Committee constituted, as above. This amount shall be deposited within period of two (2) months hereafter with the Collector, North Goa. The Collector, North Goa, shall submit the compliances of these directions within period of two (2) months.

(VII) The Respondent Nos.6 to 12, shall also pay cost of Rs. 15,000/- to the Applicant and shall bear their own costs.

The Application is accordingly disposed of.