NGT warns Odisha officials of prosecution over waste management lapses in Bargarh
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) Eastern Zone Bench, Kolkata, has issued notices to the State of Odisha, the Bargarh District Collector, and the municipal authorities of Bargarh town, seeking an explanation as to why prosecution should not be initiated against them for failing to comply with its 2023 directives on municipal waste management and for allowing continued pollution in the region.
The Bench, comprising Justice Sudhir Agarwal (Judicial Member) and Dr. Arun Kumar Verma (Expert Member), expressed strong dissatisfaction with what it termed the 'lackadaisical approach' of the authorities. It observed that the repeated non-compliance could attract penal action under Section 26 of the NGT Act, 2010.
The matter stems from a petition filed by Ramakanta Rout, a resident of Bargarh, who alleged that land in Ward 15 of Bargarh Municipality was being used as an unscientific dumping ground. He further raised concerns about severe contamination of the Jeera River - a critical drinking water source for the town - due to untreated municipal waste discharge.
In its judgment dated March 23, 2023, the Tribunal had directed the State to deposit over ₹1.84 crore into an ESCROW account for environmental remediation. It also mandated the installation of five Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) and completion of bio-mining of legacy waste by December 31, 2023. Additionally, the Amasranga waste facility was to be brought into compliance with environmental norms.
However, an inspection by the Odisha State Pollution Control Board (OSPCB) in January 2025, and a subsequent affidavit filed earlier this month, revealed substantial non-compliance. The report stated that the penalty amount had not been deposited, STPs remained uninstalled, and bio-mining was incomplete. Untreated sewage was continuing to pollute the Jeera River, and water samples from the river and nearby groundwater sources indicated contamination beyond permissible limits.
In an affidavit dated May 12, 2025, the District Collector of Bargarh cited progress, including the receipt of ₹1.21 crore for bio-mining and a revised proposal for a single wastewater treatment plant. However, the Tribunal found these claims inadequate, stating that the directions issued in 2023 had remained largely unimplemented even after more than two years.
The Bench has granted the respondents - namely the State of Odisha, the District Collector, and Bargarh Municipality - one month to show cause why prosecution should not be initiated under Section 26 of the NGT Act. This provision allows for imprisonment of up to three years, a fine of up to ₹10 crore, or both, for failure to comply with Tribunal orders.
Further, the Member Secretary of the OSPCB has been asked to explain why no penal action or environmental compensation has been imposed on the violators despite the documented breaches.
The matter is listed for the next hearing on July 28.
Shankar Pani, counsel for the petitioner, noted that it was a rare instance of the Tribunal contemplating prosecution against government functionaries for repeated defiance of its orders.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
a day ago
- The Hindu
Have publicly pledged to refuse post-retirement jobs: CJI BR Gavai
Chief Justice of India BR Gavai has said that he and his colleagues in the Supreme Court have publicly pledged to not undermine the public's trust in judicial integrity by accepting post-retirement roles or positions from the government. Speaking at a round table in the U.K. Supreme Court, Chief Justice Gavai said a judge contesting elections for political office immediately after retirement or resignation could lead to doubts about the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, 'as it may be seen as a conflict of interest or as an attempt to gain favour with the government'. 'If a judge takes up another appointment with the government immediately after retirement, or resigns from the Bench to contest elections, it raises significant ethical concerns and invites public scrutiny… The timing and nature of such post-retirement engagements could undermine the public's trust in the judiciary's integrity, as it could create a perception that judicial decisions were influenced by the prospect of future government appointments or political involvement,' Chief Justice Gavai said during a discussion on 'Maintaining Judicial Legitimacy and Public Confidence'. The Chief Justice referred to the striking down of the National Judicial Appointments Commission in 2015 as a counter-action to government's efforts to dilute judicial independence, saying 'there may be criticisms of the Collegium system, but any solution must not come at the cost of judicial independence. Judges must be free from external control'. 'Judiciary acts as a counterbalance against the arbitrary exercise of power… Certain fundamental principles, such as democracy, rule of law, and the separation of powers, are inviolable and cannot be altered,' the CJI said. Chief Justice Gavai acknowledged the recent incidents of corruption in judiciary but said the path to handling judicial misdemeanour and re-build the path to public trust was 'swift, decisive, and transparent action'. 'In India, when such instances have come to light, the Supreme Court has consistently taken immediate and appropriate measures to address the misconduct,' the CJI said even as the Parliament is expected to bring a removal motion against High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma. The Chief Justice also referred to the voluntary disclosure of assets by the judges of the Supreme Court to promote greater accountability and ethical leadership, live streaming of court proceedings, real-time information on case pendency offered on the National Judicial Data Grid, translation of apex court judgments to regional languages and broader access to justice for vulnerable communities through the public interest litigation system. 'Article 32, which guarantees all citizens the fundamental right to approach the Supreme Court, has been referred to as the 'soul' and 'heart' of the Constitution,' the CJI noted. Chief Justice Gavai highlighted the importance of courts having an independent power of judicial review while examining the constitutionality of laws. The court is currently seized of a challenge to the amendments to the waqf law. 'Courts must have the power of independent judicial review, allowing judges to assess the constitutionality of laws and government actions that conflict with the provisions of the Constitution or established constitutional principles,' the CJI said.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Illegal shops set up along Galleria Market Road, NGT serves notice to govt agencies in Gurgaon
Gurgaon: National Green Tribunal (NGT) has initiated proceedings against CPCB, HSPCB, deputy commissioner, MCG commissioner and others over illegal commercial activities and environmental violations on a plot of land along the road leading to upscale Galleria market in in Sector 27. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Shops, eateries and workshops have been set up illegally on the land by private respondents without obtaining approvals, including land-use clearance, building plans or environmental consents, a complaint filed by local resident Shiv Kumar Dubey said. Dubey, who claimed the unauthorised operations were causing severe pollution and endangering public health, filed the application under sections 14, 15 and 18 of the NGT Act, 2010, highlighting "rampant violations" in areas situated near Hamilton Court and Galleria Market. The plots in question include khasra numbers 446/1/1, 446/1/1/3, 458, 459 and 460. Saying the matter raises critical environmental concerns, the NGT bench — comprising Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi and expert member Dr Afroz Ahmad — on May 30 directed issuance of notices to the concerned respondents, asking them to submit replies before the next hearing on July 4. The complaint alleges these establishments engage in activities such as the illegal use and sale of diesel generator (DG) sets, open dumping and burning of waste, untreated sewage discharge and unregulated use of heavy vehicles. These operations, he says, have severely degraded air quality and increased noise pollution in the area. An inspection carried out by DHBVN (Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam) on Feb 21 had confirmed illegal electricity connections and unauthorised power resale by two landlords. Following this, the electricity supply was disconnected, but the accused parties allegedly continued operations using DG sets in violation of environmental norms. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Dubey, who works in the vicinity, said on Wednesday the pollution from construction materials, vehicular dust and untreated waste has led to serious health issues among residents and workers. He claims that several complaints made to civic and environmental authorities since August 2024 have gone unanswered. The petitioner has sought immediate sealing of illegal operations, penalties on violators, cancellation of licences and a zoning audit to assess the scale of damage. He also invoked Article 21 of the Constitution, saying the right to a clean environment is an essential part of the right to life.
The Hindu
3 days ago
- The Hindu
No contempt if Parliament, legislatures simply make laws: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has said any law made by Parliament or a State legislature cannot be held to contempt of court. A Bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma made the observation while disposing of a 2012 contempt plea filed by sociologist and former Delhi University professor Nandini Sundar and others. The contempt plea alleged failure of the Chhattisgarh government to comply with its 2011 directions to stop support to vigilante groups such as Salwa Judum and arming tribals in the name of special police officers (SPO) in the fight against Maoists. The petition contended that there has been contempt of the order of the apex court as the Chhattisgarh government has legislated the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011 which authorised an auxiliary armed force to assist security forces in dealing with Maoist/Naxal violence and legalising existing SPOs by inducting them as members. Besides accusing the Chhattisgarh government of not acknowledging the directions on Salwa Judum, the petitioners said instead of "desisting" from using SPOs and disarming them, the State government passed the "Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011" regularising all SPOs with effect from the date of the top court order on July 5, 2011. They alleged that the State government has also not vacated all school buildings and ashrams from the occupation of the security forces nor has it compensated the victims of Salwa Judum and SPOs. The top court on May 15 said the passing of an enactment subsequent to the order passed by the top court by Chhattisgarh cannot be an act of contempt. Delicate balance The top court said in order to ensure that rule of law permeates to fulfil constitutional objectives of establishing an egalitarian social order, the balance between the respective sovereign functionaries must always be delicately maintained. "Every State Legislature has plenary powers to pass an enactment and so long as the said enactment has not been declared to be ultra vires the Constitution or, in any way, null and void by a constitutional court, the said enactment would have the force of law." The Bench added, "However, if any party wishes that the said Act be struck down for being unconstitutional, then legal remedies in that regard would have to be resorted to before the competent court of law." Considering the situation prevailing in Chhattisgarh over decades, the Bench outlined the need for "specific steps" to bring peace and rehabilitation in the affected areas through coordinated measures of the State and the Central government. "It is the duty of the State of Chhattisgarh as well as the Union of India, having regard to Article 315 of the Constitution, to take adequate steps for bringing about peace and rehabilitation to the residents of State of Chhattisgarh who have been affected by the violence from whatever quarter it may have arisen," the court said. Judiciary is vested under the Constitution with the power to resolve interpretive doubts and disputes about the validity or otherwise of an enacted law by Parliament or any state legislature, the Bench added. "However, the interpretative power of a constitutional court does not contemplate a situation of declaring exercise of legislative functions and passing of an enactment as an instance of a contempt of a court," it noted. The verdict pointed out that central to the legislative function was the power of the legislative organ to enact and amend laws. "Any law made by the Parliament or a State legislature cannot be held to be an act of contempt of a court, including this court, for simply making the law," the Bench said. The top court underlined the legislature's powers to pass a law; to remove the basis of a judgment or in the alternative, validate a law which has been struck down by a constitutional court by amending or varying it so as to give effect to the judgment of a constitutional court which has struck down a portion of an enactment or for that matter the entire enactment. "This is the core of the doctrine of separation of powers and must always be acknowledged in a constitutional democracy such as ours. This doctrine also emphasises on the principle of checks and balances under our Constitution which is a healthy aspect of distribution of powers, particularly legislative powers." The order went on, "Any piece of legislation enacted by a legislature can be assailed within the manner known to law and that is by mounting a challenge against its validity on the twin prongs of legislative competence or constitutional validity."
