By PTI
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Thursday said that adherence to environmental and pollution norms cannot be compromised for factual misunderstandings or due to “cryptic determination”.
It also said the public interest would warrant action against polluting units and orders which have direct repercussions on the right to a clean environment must be the outcome of scrutiny and substantive deliberation as per the applicable facts.
The top court observed while setting aside an order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) which had said that an application pending before it does not require adjudication in light of the order passed while disposing of another plea in a matter about two stone crushers in a village in Nainital district of Uttarakhand.
ALSO READ | Air pollution: Traffic Police bans entry of trucks in Delhi
“There can be no quarrel with the proposition that public interest would warrant action against polluting units. This is equally applicable to those industrial units which have been functioning since long,” a bench of Justices R Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy said in its 14-page judgement.
“Adherence to the environmental and pollution norms cannot be compromised for factual misunderstandings or due to cryptic determination. Orders which have direct repercussions on the right to clean environment must surely be the outcome of scrutiny and substantive deliberation, as per the applicable facts,” the apex court said.
The bench said that the NGT was required to address the grievance on the adverse health impacts on the local populace by the stone crushers.
It said the tribunal itself had recognized that orders were necessary to resolve the issue.
“The factual determination had reflected the need to ensure heightened compliance with the environmental norms for the concerned area,” it said.
ALSO READ | Uttar Pradesh’s first anti-air pollution tower starts operating in Noida
The bench delivered the verdict on an appeal against the August 2019 order of the NGT.
The appellant in the apex court had contended that as per an April 2014 report, the two stone crusher units were operating in violation of the statutory environmental norms, in close vicinity of the village, schools, and colleges.
The bench noted that the application, which was registered in pursuance of the adverse government report against the stone crushers and was disposed of by the NGT by an order which is under challenge before it, was never adjudicated on merits.
It said the contesting parties before it was in agreement on the aspect that the NGT should have decided the application on merit, instead of closing the proceeding, as a disposed of the matter.
“We are therefore of the opinion that the view taken in the impugned order to the effect that the OA no….does not require adjudication, does not appear to be in order and the same is therefore set aside,” the bench said.
It restored the application and ordered that it be adjudicated on merit.
It said that the tribunal should render its decision without being influenced by the observations made in the judgement.
The top court noted that the appellant before it, along with his father, had initially moved the NGT for relocating the two stone crushers alleging unbearable sufferings due to noise and air pollution emanating from those units.
