By Dr. Armin Rosencranz and Dushyant Kishan Kaul
National Green Tribunal (NGT) is a special tribunal formed by the Parliament to deal with environmental issues.
On 24th January 2017, the Supreme Court of India directed the principal bench of the NGT to monitor governments actions on the cleaning of river Ganga.
A bench comprising of Chief Justice J.S. Khehar and Justice N.V. Ramana, asked the NGT to supervise the discharge of municipal sewage. The bench has also directed the NGT to submit a report in six months on the governments progress. Earlier, the Court had asked the NGT to monitor the treatment of industrial effluents. The lack of initiative by the civic authorities has prompted the Court to put their actions under the scrutiny of the NGT as well.
Has the multi-fold increase in spending worked?
[su_pullquote]The approval of Rs 20,000-crore for the next five years marks a significant five-fold increase in the spending on the cleanup.[/su_pullquote]
The central government updated the Court on the work being done under the Ganga Action Plan. Since receiving cabinet’s approval, Rs. 20000 crores were disbursed last month through this plan. The Prime Minister had approved this increase in funds under the flagship program for the rejuvenation of the river in May 2015. The approval of Rs 20,000-crore for the next five years marks a significant five-fold increase in the spending on the cleanup.
The Centre has incurred an overall expenditure of approximately Rs 4,000 crore for Ganga rejuvenation since 1985.
The Centre has incurred an overall expenditure of approximately Rs 4,000 crore for Ganga rejuvenation since 1985 | Picture Courtesy – The Indian ExpressThe Solicitor General stated that the Centre had entrusted the task of assessing 118 identified towns to five PSUs. The Centre prioritised sewage treatment plants and annuity-based hybrid models in this initiative. This was after receiving reports from 84 of these 118 towns. The government had also suggested Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) from Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPs) as an environmentally sustainable form of treating such effluvia.
Most of the tanneries were not dismantled and norms were not complied with. Prescribed pollution standards were constantly ignored. Large amounts had been allocated for Phase I and II of the Ganga Action Plan. However, little has been done to effectively use these funds.
Lone warrior: M.C. Mehta has shown the way
M.C. Mehta, an acclaimed public interest lawyer and an active social worker, had first filed a PIL in 1985 on the basis of a newspaper report alleging that Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) was discharging industrial effluents in Bhadrabad (near Haridwar) into the Ganga. The court took cognizance of many such industries located near the riverbank that were polluting the river. It instructed all of them to abide by the standards set out by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). Interim orders were passed and 20 tanneries were directed to shut down when they were found discharging untreated waste into the river.
On January 12 1988, the court lashed out at Municipal Councils and instructed them to set up sewage treatment plants to effectively manage untreated wastes. Furthermore, the Court recognized the findings of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report that found massive mismanagement of the Ganga cleanup funds and other resources in the Centre, as well as the States.
For thirty years, M.C. Mehta has been leading the charge against environmental degradation of the Ganga, which flows in eight states in India. Since the 1980s, landmark orders against almost 50,000 polluting industries have been passed.
Mehtas sustained efforts have led to the installation of around 250 sewage treatment plants across towns and cities on the banks of the river, and the shutting down of several tanneries. His non-profit organization launched the National Rivers Protection Campaign in 1998 in many towns and cities through which the Ganga flows. This was an attempt to involve local people and other concerned citizens in spreading awareness.
NGT to the rescue: Has the tribunal proven itself?
Mr. Mehta has condemned the pathetic attitude of successive governments in 108 hearings spanning over 32 years. He criticized the tall claims made by the government on making the river pollution free.
Citing time constraints, the apex court said that the NGT was the most suitable authority to monitor the progress of the Ganga on a regular basis. Mr. Mehta questioned the compliance mechanism of the tribunal. To this, the Court clarified that under Chapter VI (S.26 and S.27) of the NGT Act 2010, the tribunal could impose penalties, and even imprison offenders. Carte blanche was given to Mr. Mehta for approaching the tribunal henceforth to address his grievances.
[su_pullquote align=”right”]The National Green Tribunal has consistently shown that it can pursue entities that seek to pollute the environment.[/su_pullquote]
The National Green Tribunal, which has been hearing the Ganga case since 2014, has consistently shown that it can pursue entities that seek to pollute the environment. This is evident from its inclination to impose fines and collect damages from various polluters. It passed two landmark orders. These made a mark and reminded the government and the industries that they cannot pollute with impunity.
The National Green Tribunal, which has been hearing the Ganga case since 2014, has consistently shown that it can pursue entities that seek to pollute the environment | Picture Courtesy – The Economic TimesRounding up the culprits: NGT setting examples
The Alaknanda Hydro Power Co. case is a good example. In this case, the tribunal ordered the company to pay Rs. 9.26 crores to the victims of the Uttarakhand floods in 2013, since the dam built by them contributed to the floods in the region. Similarly, the NGT slammed a Rs.100 Crores fine on Panama-based Delta Marine Shipping Co. This fine was a result of sinking of one of the ships on the coast of Mumbai.
NGT has hauled the government and private organizations to pay up for malpractices caused because of their neglect or ignorance. Because of the NGT, the burden to recompense is no longer only on the government, but also on liable private parties.
The Supreme Court’s decision of delegating the monitoring of the Ganga to the NGT is remarkable. The central government has failed to take major action for more than 30 years. This is despite the constant reproach of the judiciary. One can only hope that such a move wakes the government up and stirs it to action.