‘Narmada Being Pious River Must Be Protected’, NGT Issues Slew Of Directions To Check Pollution

“Violation of environmental norms needs to be taken as seriously as preventing crimes of homicide and assaults. It is more serious as the victim may be wide spread and unidentified. The consequences may even affect the future generation. The compliance status is directly linked to effectiveness of the monitoring which requires that the key office bearers of statutory regulators and oversight bodies are qualified, competent and reputed specially dedicated to such work instead of devoting part time while simultaneously holding other position,” observed the bench of Justice Sheo Kumar and Dr. Afroz Ahmad.

These observations were made while hearing the plea filed by Samyak Jain, a resident of Madhya Pradesh seeking legal proceedings against the state and authorities for causing severe pollution and failing to stop the release of untreated sewage into the river.

Jain submitted that illegal constructions upon riverbeds, banks and hills causing harm to the environment of the river, polluting natural water and damaging water bodies, defacing the beauty of the river and damaging its environment, hills and the heritage sites are irreversible and permanent.

After hearing the parties and considering the material available on record, the Tribunal opined that, “...the Narmada river being a pious river must be protected and the quality of the water must be maintained up to the parameter laid down by the CPCB.”

The Tribunal further added that being an integral part of the river, floodplain of the river requires protection. “Floodplains play significant role in maintaining the bio-diversity and aquatic life of the river. It‟s significance cannot be overlooked, in terms of environment and ecology.

There are numerous dimensions involved while identifying the floodplains. It is required to categorize it into different zones, namely, No Development Zone, Regulated Zone and a Free Zone for development,” it added.

In the light of the above the Tribunal issued a set of five directions, which includes the following.

i) To ensure that there should not be any encroachment on the water bodies and there must be demarcation of the river bed with identification marks and in case there is any encroachment in violation of environmental laws, necessary legal action as well as the imposition of Environmental Compensation must be acted upon.

ii) The Collector(s) of the District/City situated on the bank of river are directed to ensure that there should not be any encroachment on the river bodies or on the bank of the river and if any encroachment is found, necessary legal action must be initiated.

iii) Action plans for reuse of treated water should be finalized and prepared expeditiously and the treated water should be utilized for gardening purposes, agricultural purposes, industrial purposes or any other purposes which may be decided by the Expert Body.

iv) The capacity utilization of existing STPs may be improved by identifying the bottlenecks and plugging them in each case and the operation and maintenance of STPs/CEPTs / ETPs and their respective distribution system should be improved for optimum results.

v) Progress of in situ remediation as an interim measure must be taken into account.

The Tribunal also accepted the recommendation of the joint committee and further directed the state authorities to utilize capacity of the existing STP expeditiously and to ensure that,no untreated sewage effluent is discharged in any water body.

Consequently, the plea was disposed of stating that, “The Chief Secretary at the State level and the CMC at the National level will periodically monitor the progress and also consider development of an appropriate app to enable easy filing and redressal of grievances with regard to illegal discharge of sewage/effluents.”

Appearance for petitioner: Samayak Jain (Applicant in Person)

For Respondents: Sachin K. Verma, Adv. Prashant M. Harne, Adv.
Om Shankar Shrivastava, Adv. Ms. Parul Bhadoria, Adv.
Harshita Tejwani, Adv.
Sanjeev Mehra, RO, MPPCB, Shahdol Vikas, DM, Dindor.

Case Title: Samayak Jain & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.