The document discusses a case before the National Green Tribunal regarding a waste-to-energy plant in Delhi. [1] The interim application argues that the plant is causing pollution and health hazards. [2] Monitoring has found the plant exceeding emission limits for particulate matter, dioxins, and nitrogen oxides. [3] The Tribunal orders the plant to bring emissions within limits within 3 weeks and implement proper waste segregation, or face closure.
The document discusses a case before the National Green Tribunal regarding a waste-to-energy plant in Delhi. [1] The interim application argues that the plant is causing pollution and health hazards. [2] Monitoring has found the plant exceeding emission limits for particulate matter, dioxins, and nitrogen oxides. [3] The Tribunal orders the plant to bring emissions within limits within 3 weeks and implement proper waste segregation, or face closure.
The document discusses a case before the National Green Tribunal regarding a waste-to-energy plant in Delhi. [1] The interim application argues that the plant is causing pollution and health hazards. [2] Monitoring has found the plant exceeding emission limits for particulate matter, dioxins, and nitrogen oxides. [3] The Tribunal orders the plant to bring emissions within limits within 3 weeks and implement proper waste segregation, or face closure.
M.A. No. 562 of 2013 In Original Application No. 22(THC) of 2013
Sukhdev Vihar Residents Welfare Association & Ors. Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SWATANTER KUMAR, CHAIRPERSON HONBLE DR. D.K. AGRAWAL, EXPERT MEMBER HONBLE PROF. (DR.) P.C. MISHRA, EXPERT MEMBER HONBLE DR. R.C. TRIVEDI, EXPERT MEMBER
Present: Applicant: Appearance not given Respondent No.2: Mr. Sumeet, Mr. Pushkerna, Advocate, Mr. Balendu Shekhar, Advocate and Ms. Meenakshi Midha, Advocate Respondent No.3: Mr. P. L. Gautam , Advocate Respondent No.5: Mr. B. Mahapata Advocate, with D. Jindal, Law Officer Respondent No.6: Ms. Alpana Poddar, Advocate Respondent No.7: Mr. Sangram Patnaik, Advocate along with Mr. Swam Sidha and Mr. Deepak, Advocate Respondent No. 8: Ms. Neelam Rathore, Advocate along with Mr. Vikramjeet, Advocate Ms. Savitir Pandey, Advocate State of UP
Date and Remarks Orders of the Tribunal
Item No. 13 September 10, 2013
M.A. No. 562 of 2013 in Original Application No. 22(THC) of 2013
This interim Application has been filed in the main Application where prayer had been made that the waste to energy plant at Okhla should be closed, construction thereof should be stopped and removal of the existing plant. The averments in this Application are that the plant in question is causing serious environmental pollution and is resulting in health hazards to the residents living around the area of this Plant. Closure of the plant is prayed by the interim application on the premises that it is causing pollution, health hazards and there is no proper segregation of the municipal waste collected prior to it being put into the plant for its disposal. It is contended that the parameters as indicated in a Report dated 04 th April, 2013, are violative of the prescribed parameters and they read as follows:
Parameter Date of sampling Permissible limits Measured emission
value Particulate Matter Stack 2(mg/Nm3) 28-3-2012 150 1414.86 1721.51 Dioxins & Furans Stack 1 (ng TEQ/Nm3) 31-3-2013 0.1 12.413 Dioxins & Furans Stack -2(in ng EQ/Nm3) 31-3-2013 0.1 2.758 Oxides of Nitrogen as No2 Stack 2 (mg/Nm3) 28-3-2012 450 896.11
It may be noticed at the very outset that this plant came into existence as a result of a decision being taken by the Ministry of Non-conventional Energy Resources to establish pilot projects dealing with the municipal waste. The Honble Supreme Court of India vide its Order dated 16 th
May, 2007 had directed as under:-
In view of the report of the Committee and having regard to the relevant facts, we modify the order passed by this Court earlier and permit Ministry of Non- conventional Energy Sources (MNES) to go ahead for the time being with 5 pilot projects chosen by them, keeping in view the recommendations made by the Expert Committee and then take appropriate decision in the matter. List the application for further orders after six months.
Thereafter, a Writ Petition was filed by the Applicants before the High Court on 12 th August, 2009. The learned Addl. Solicitor General informed the High Court that the Project in question was one of the pilot projects recommended by the Expert Committee appointed by the Honble Supreme Court of India and two similar pilot projects at Vijaywada and Hyderabad, as recommended, have started functioning. Further, in the Order dated 15 th
January, 2012, the High Court noticed that it was apparent that though technology for the project was approved by the Honble Supreme Court of India, the site of the MSW was neither approved by the Honble Supreme Court of India and
to that extent the Order of 12 th August, 2009 passed by the High Court was given. As is evident that the project technology was approved by the Honble Supreme Court of India but not the site, this plant has already been commissioned and is under operation undisputedly from the 2012, and it deals with the entire municipal waste collected from the city of Delhi. We must notice that this plant admittedly has been granted environmental clearance by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF). There is no challenge in the Writ Petition to the grant of environmental clearance and other incidental steps taken in finalization of the same in terms of the EIA Notification 2006. Learned counsel appearing for Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) submits that the inspection was conducted on 09th July, 2013 by the joint Team of Experts of CPCB and Delhi Pollution Control Committee. Upon that Inspection Report, it has been found that Stack 1 particulate matter emission is 171 mg/Nm3 against prescribed limit of 150 mg/Nm3 while for stack 2, it is 75 mg/Nm3 against prescribed unit of 150 mg/Nm3. As far as Dioxins and Furans, in Stack 1, it is 1.43 mg/Nm3 against prescribed limit 0.1 mg/Nm3 while stack 2 it is 1.22 mg/Nm3 against prescribed limit of 0.1 mg/Nm3. In the inspection so conducted, the inspecting team has not made any adverse comments in regard to emissions but in regard to segregation, it was noticed that the industry is required to meet its function. We may notice that vide the Order of the Tribunal dated 28 th May, 2013 under directions C, it was specifically directed that project can install Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) segregation plant in accordance with Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000. Apparently, it has not been done as yet. In view of the circumstances aforeindicated, in the interest of justice and taking note of precautionary principle, we pass the following Order on this Application :- a) As an interim measure, we decline the request of the Applicant for closure of the Plant. b) The Project Proponent shall, within a period of three weeks from today, ensure that all the above said parameters are brought within the prescribed limits c) Complete steps should be taken to ensure automatic
and proper segregation of MSW before it is put to the plant for its disposal in accordance with Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000.
We make it clear that in the event of Project Proponent now defaulting in compliance of the directions of the Tribunal, the Tribunal would be compelled to direct the closure of this industry on an appropriate Application, now moved by the Applicant. The Inspection Team shall inspect this Unit after the expiry of three weeks and put a Report to the Tribunal before the next date of hearing. The Executive Director, Mr. Rakesh Kr. Agarwal shall be personally responsible for executing the directions contained in this Order. In the event of default, he shall be liable to be proceeded against under the provisions of the National Green Tribunal Act. With the above directions, M.A. No. 562 of 2013 is disposed of without any order as costs. List the main matter for arguments on 10 th October, 2013.