National Green Tribunal points out gaps in Uttar Pradesh govt report on STPs, sewage waste management
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has raised serious objections to the Uttar Pradesh government's report on the status of Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) and Sewage Waste Management (SWM) submitted to the tribunal.
Directing the government to fill the gaps, a three-member bench of NGT comprising chairperson Justice Prakash Shrivastava, Justice Sudhir Agarwal and expert member A. Senthil Vel passed the order on May 26.
The tribunal also handed over a prescribed format to the state government in which details have to be submitted before the next hearing on July 28.
'Report dated 16.04.2025 filed on 24.5.2025 disclosing the status of solid and liquid waste management does not point out gaps plugged thereby not complying with SWM Rules, Water Act and order of the Supreme Court,' the tribunal said.
Anomalies pointed out by tribunal
Against disclosure of 95% waste processing facilities (19,014 TDP or tons per day), the quantity of segregated waste is 74% (14,884 TPD). This anomaly needs to be clarified. No clarification was given on the operation of waste processing plants without authorisation under the SWM Rules. The report discloses figures of waste generation in 762 local bodies, but does not reveal the actual waste processed by urban local bodies. The report says there has been 100% remediation of legacy waste at 60 sites but no material has been placed on record in support of this claim. Figures disclosed indicate 60 sites remediated and only 26 sites are left with legacy waste. Since, in other ULBs, waste processing facilities do not exist, specific disclosure of legacy waste in such ULBs should be pointed out. No disclosure has been made on the operational status of waste-to-energy plants.
Legacy waste
Legacy waste refers to accumulated solid waste that has been improperly collected and stored for an extended period, often in landfills or dumpsites. It is essentially a backlog of waste that was not managed effectively and has created a significant environmental problem.
Sewage management
In view of sewage generation of 5,500 MLD (million litres per day) and installed treatment capacity of 4,651 MLD (but treating only 3,122 MLD), the gap in treatment comes to 2,378 MLD. Untreated sewage is being discharged into the environment, which is evidenced by the disclosure that only 21.08 lakh households (HH) are connected to the sewerage system out of 52.17 lakh houses in 17 municipal corporations.
STPs have been designed in excessive capacities compared to sewage generation in Agra, Bijnor, Anupshahar, Chirakoot Karwi, Pilkhuva, Kannauj, Bela, Pratapgarh and other cities. But many urban local bodies do not have STPs, including Bahraich, Banda, Deoria, Fatehpur, Gonda, Hathras, Sambhal and Bhadohi.
THE CASE
In 2018, the Supreme Court in the 'Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors' case issued key directions regarding environmental protection, particularly river pollution and industrial waste treatment. The top court made it compulsory for industries to install and maintain functional primary effluent treatment plants (PETPs) within a specific timeframe. SC directed the municipalities to operate existing STPs and established timelines for setting up of common effluent treatment plants (CETPs) and STPs. The apex court also emphasized on the responsibility of municipalities to ensure public health, sanitation, and solid waste management. The Supreme Court permitted Uttar Pradesh to approach NGT with an application regarding the feasibility of the time lines set by the top court. The NGT was tasked with monitoring compliance with the Supreme Court's directions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Assam to use 75-yr-old law to push back illegal migrants
Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court , while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967. Guwahati: Assam govt is preparing to use a 75-year-old previously overlooked law to pushback illegal migrants from the state without any judicial intervention immediately after their identification. CM Himanta Biswa Sarma on Saturday said a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act (October, 2024), had said there is no legal requirement for the Assam govt to always approach the judiciary to identify foreigners and "we are examining this". "There is an old law called the Immigrants Expulsion Order (1950), and during hearing on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court said this Act is still valid. Under its provisions, even a district commissioner can issue an order for immediate pushback of illegal immigrants," he added. "For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us about this, and we weren't aware of it either," Himanta added. He said in the past few days, the entire matter has come to light and the state govt will now discuss it seriously. "The process of identifying foreigners, which had paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be sped up a bit. This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner and we don't send them to a tribunal. We will straightway push them back. Preparations for this have been ongoing over the last few days," he said. He underlined that those who have moved courts will not be pushed back for now. The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 (IEAA) empowers the central govt to order expulsion of any person or class of persons who have come into Assam from outside India, either before or after the commencement of this Act, and whose stay in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or any Scheduled Tribe in Assam. Sarma was referring to the five-member Constitution Bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud on October 17, 2024 which upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act in a 4:1 majority with Justice JB Pardiwala giving the sole dissenting opinion. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra in their joint order said the provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 "shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." They noted that the IEAA grants "Central Government the power to direct the removal of immigrants who are detrimental to the interests of India." "If there is any other piece of legislation such as the IEAA, under which the status of an immigrant can be determined, we see no reason as to why such statutory detection shall also not be given effect to, for the purposes of deportation. We thus hold that the provisions of IEAA shall also be read into Section 6A and be applied along with the Foreigners Act, 1946 for the purpose of detection and deportation of foreigners," the judges noted in their order. WHAT IS IEAA Enacted even before the immigrants from West and East Pakistan were considered foreigners under Foreigners Act The Statement of Objects and Reasons states the Act was enacted to deal with the large scale immigration of migrants from East Bengal to Assam Other statutory enactments to address the influx of immigrants in Assam Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 and the Passport Act, 1967.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
FIR now must if plaint clearly discloses cognizable offence
Mumbai: The State Police Complaints Authority (SPCA) on Thursday directed all police stations and chowkeys in the state via the Director General of Police, Maharashtra, that the registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the criminal procedure code if the information disclosed to the police by the victim at the first instance clearly shows commission of a cognizable offence, wherein no preliminary inquiry is permissible. "If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence, but indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not. If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR must be registered," the authority has stated in its order citing similar orders from the Supreme Court in the past. The order came upon a case wherein a central government employee had approached Satara police over a serious physical abusive assault by his senior in th office. However, despite it being a cognizable offence upfront, and that being incumbent upon the police to register an FIR, the local police did not follow the law, and on the contrary, registered an NC. The SCPCA has not only directed the DG to file compliance of the order within next two weeks, but also directed the home department to initiate disciplinary or legal actions against the four police officials who did not file FIR. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose reasons in brief for closing the complaint and not proceeding further, the authority stated further. "Accordingly, it was mandatory that preliminary inquiry should be made time-bound and in any case, it should not exceed fifteen days generally, and in exceptional cases by giving adequate reasons, six weeks time is provided. The fact of such delay and causes of it must be reflected in the General Diary entry," stated the copy of the order obtained by TOI. The order was issued by the three-member authority led by retired Justice Shrihari Davare as chairperson along with Umakant Mitkar and Vijvay Satbir Singh as the members. "The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering an offence if a cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a cognizable offence," the order stated further pointing out that the scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or otherwise of the information received but only to ascertain whether the information reveals any cognizable offence.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Uttarakhand High Court asks state govt to explain delay in phasing out revenue police system
DEHRADUN: Uttarakhand High Court has asked the state government to respond within four weeks to a contempt petition that accuses it of ignoring earlier court orders to phase out the revenue police system and set up regular police stations in certain areas. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari of the single-judge bench heard the petition filed by Haldwani resident Amit Kholia. He alleged that the state government has not implemented the court's May 2023 order to end the revenue police system. "The government had assured the court that it would take steps to establish regular police stations in areas where the revenue police system is currently in place. However, no significant progress has been made in this regard," Kholia's petition stated. The petition pointed out that the Supreme Court had, back in 2004, underlined the need to do away with the revenue police system, as its personnel lacked proper training and modern facilities. "Revenue police personnel are not trained like civil police and lack basic facilities like forensic investigation, DNA testing, and fingerprint analysis," it stated. The High Court had issued similar directions in 2018, but those too were not followed. The matter has drawn renewed attention after the Ankita Bhandari murder case, which raised serious concerns about the effectiveness of the revenue police. In response, Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami had ordered steps to quickly transfer control from the revenue police to the regular police. The revenue police system, which still exists in some parts of Uttarakhand, dates back to the British era. Under this system, local revenue officials have to perform police duties, including maintaining law and order and investigating crimes. Critics argue that the system is outdated and ineffective, and that regular police forces are needed for better law enforcement.
