God Bless You with a Long Life

If there’s a single phrase that might...

Inclusive and expansive: A Bharatiya narrative for climate change

While the Western viewpoint often seeks to...

The Importance of Elon Musk

The woke-liberal dream of eventually shaping the...

NGT imposes fine on UP Chief Environment Officer

Legally SpeakingNGT imposes fine on UP Chief Environment Officer

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 on Chief Environment Officer of Uttar Pradesh for failing to adhere to the tribunal’s directive to levy environmental compensation on individuals and entities polluting the Ganga River in Varanasi.

The Tribunal was hearing a case concerning the discharge of domestic and industrial wastewater into the river at various locations in the eastern Uttar Pradesh city, a popular destination for devotees and tourists.

Earlier, on February 16 this year, the tribunal took note of a report from the Municipal Corporation of Varanasi stating that 100 million litres per day (MLD) of sewage water were being discharged into the river.

Following observations that the water downstream of the Ganga River in Varanasi was unfit for bathing, the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (UPPCB) declared that environmental compensation (EC) would be imposed on defaulting parties within four weeks.

A bench of NGT, chaired by Justice Prakash Shrivastava, noted that the UPPCB had submitted a fresh action taken report dated April 2, indicating that the water quality samples taken at various locations exceeded the prescribed parameters. The report was issued by the Chief Environment Officer, Ghanshyam of Circle-6 (Varanasi, Gorakhpur, Azamgarh, and Basti) of the state.

Despite the UPPCB’s assurance of imposing EC within four weeks, the concerned authority failed to take action. When questioned, the UPPCB informed that the tribunal’s decision was duly communicated to the relevant authorities.

Additionally, the report highlighted that some notices were issued in compliance with another tribunal order from 2020.

Consequently, the tribunal remarked, “Hence, we are of the view that there is clear inaction on the part of the Chief Environment Officer…There was a serious lapse on the part of the above officer in complying with the order of the tribunal which has perpetuated harm to the environment.”

Instead of opting to prosecute the officer for non-compliance, the tribunal decided to impose a fine of Rs 10,000, taking a lenient view of the matter.

- Advertisement -

Check out our other content

Check out other tags:

Most Popular Articles