| File Note: |
Subject: Proceedings of the personal hearing given to M/s Omaxe Ltd., India Trade Tower, Project: Omaxe Green at Vill. Jharmari, Mohali (Regd. Office: First Floor, Chandigarh-Siswan Road, New Chandigarh, Mullanpur, Distt. SAS Nagar) w.r.t SCN for varied consent to operate applied under the Water Act, 1974 and the Air Act, 1981 before the Chairman of the Board on 25/6/2024
The following were present:
From Board's side:
1) Er. G.S. Majithia, Member Secretary
2) Er. Lavneet Kumar, Sr. Environmental Engineer (ZP-1)
3) Er. Rajeev Gupta, Environmental Engineer (ZP-1)
From Project Proponent side:
Sh. Dalip Modgil, Advisor
The officers of the Board brought out that the project proponent was granted Environmental Clearance vide letter no. 21-408/2007-IA.III dated 8/5/2008 for the construction a residential colony on a plot area of 62,120.99 sqm. The total built up area is 97,456.96 sqm (having 660 apartments – 3BR-450, 2 BR-150 and EWS -60). The total water requirement proposed is 526 KLD (fresh water 297 KLD). The capacity of STP proposed is 400 KLD. Treated waste water will be used for flushing of toilets 148 KLD, horticulture 81 KLD and balance 171 KLD will be used for irrigation of surrounding fields.
Earlier, the project proponent company was granted consent to Operate under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 vide no. CTOW/ Renewal/SAS/2021/ 16073045 dated 14/10/2021 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 vide no. CTOA/Renewal/SAS/2021/16071428 dated 12/8/2021, valid upto 31/3/2022 for occupancy and operation of 450 dwelling units out of 584 dwelling units in the project with subject to suitable conditions mentioned therein.
Thereafter, the project proponent had applied for obtaining renewal of consent to operate under Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 & Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
The project was visited by the officer of the Board on 12/04/2022 and observed as under:
1. The project proponent has completed structure work of 9 nos. towers at the site & having total no. flats @ 584.
2. The Project proponent has completed structure/ finishing work of 9 no. towers. The detail of towers consisting as GT-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 @ 71 nos. flats each towers & GT-8 @ 55 no. flats, GT-9 @ 39 no. flats, GT-7 @ 64 no. flats.
3. Presently, there are 410 no. families are residing in these flats as informed by representative of the project.
4. The promoter company has installed STP of capacity 250 KLD to treat the domestic effluent and same was in operational at the time of visit. As per the record maintained by the operator of STP, it has discharged around 180 KLD of treated effluent on an average.
5. The project proponent has not yet upgraded its STP to 400 KLD as per the conditions of consent to operate earlier granted to it; however, work regarding excavation of land for starting construction of the same was under progress at site.
6. The re-use of treated effluent for flushing purpose is only being done in 04 no. towers GT-4, 6, 8 & 9, therefore, maximum of around 53 KLD can be utilized for flushing purpose (considering that all dwelling units in the said towers are occupied & taking flushing water demand @ 45 ltr/person/day.
7. The project proponent has provided separate flow meter for dual plumbing line, for usage in construction area and plantation area; but was not maintaining regular record regarding the same, therefore, verification of the water balance submitted by it could not be carried out.
8. The project proponent has installed 05 no. DG sets of capacity @ 250 KVA each. All are equipped with canopy, however, stacks are only provided with 03 no. DG sets and no stacks provided with 02 no. DG sets. The representative of the project was advised to immediately provide the stacks with the 02 no. DG sets in compliance to the condition of ‘consent to operate’ earlier granted to it under the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981.
9. The project proponent had installed 02 no. borewells (one dysfunctional & one functional) and installed flow meters on the pipeline of the both borewells & its readings were noted as 55501 m3 and 65202 m3. Further, the project proponent is maintaining record of ground water abstracted as per the record maintain by it the project had abstracted an average of 272.09 m3/ day from first borewell and 234.48 m3/day from 2nd borewell.
10. The adjoining land which was earlier found stagnated with wastewater, was found in arid condition. The representative informed that during rainy season, the effluent/ storm water from Vill. Jharmari gets collected in the said land which is channelized to the storm water drain passing from the front side of the project through underground pipelines laid down by the promoter company. The project proponent has provided electric meter pump to transfer the effluent from storm water drain to another storm water drain across the road/ slip road loading towards Ambala (Haryana).
11. The project proponent has not provided any earmarked area for collection & segregation of solid waste at site. He further informed that the solid waste is being collected by private contractor.
12. Further, it has not yet installed any mechanical composter as per the condition of ‘consent to operate’ earlier granted to it.
13. The project proponent has not yet developed area of 0.5 acre area as per karnal technology, as the same was found in a disturbed state and lot of wild vegetation was observed in that pocket; as per the condition of ‘consent to operate’ earlier granted to it.
A telephonic message was received from O/o SDM, Dera Bassi regarding complaint of local villagers alleging disposal of wastewater from the project namely M/s Omaxe Greens into their agricultural fields. Accordingly, the site of the project was visited alongwith Sh. Kuldeep Singh, Tehsildar, Sh. Harinderjit Singh, Naib Tehsildar & Ms. Ravneet Kaur, BDPO on 20/7/2022. During visit, the the Committee found that project proponent does not have adequate arrangements for disposal of wastewater being generated from its project. Although, during visit, no outlet was found by the team for direct disposal of wastewater onto land for stagnation in the area on backside of the project. It is clear that the project proponent does not have adequate disposal arrangements for treated wastewater and thus, it was deduced that the project proponent might be discharging its treated wastewater onto said land for stagnation, where already rainwater of adjoining area gets stagnated.
An original application had been filed in the Hon’ble NGT by Sh. Ajit Singh i.e. OA No. 803 of 2022 and the said case is listed for hearing on 1/8/2024.
The joint committee constituted in OA 803/2022 visited the project site on 4/10/2023 and contacted Sh. Harjot Singh Narang (Deputy Manager of Project Proponent) and submitted its report based on the observations made at the project site.
The case was heard by the Hon'ble NGT and the relevant part of the orders dated 15/1/2024 passed by the Hon’ble NGTis reproduced as under:
3. In the previous proceedings, the Tribunal had noted that the project proponent had obtained Environmental Clearance (EC) in 2008 and validity of the EC was five years, meaning thereby, the EC had expired in 2013. It was further noted that the project was not completed. Therefore, the project proponent was required to explain, if after the expiry of EC, he could proceed with the project. Accordingly, notice was issued to the project proponent.
4. Learned Counsel appearing for the PPCB has informed that the Consent to Operate (CTO) has not been issued to the project proponent and the project proponent is not coming for hearing for the purpose of deciding the issue of CTO which is pending before the PPCB. She has also submitted that project proponent is not submitting the application along with the requisite documents.
5. EC dated 08.05.2008 issued by the MoEF&CC to the project proponent has been placed on record and the conditions thereto clearly reflect before commissioning of the project for operation, installation of STP should be certified by an independent expert and report should be submitted before the Ministry. The condition incorporated in this regard in the EC is as under:
“II. Operation Phase
i) xxx ………………………….xxx……………………….xxx
ii) The installation of the Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) should be certified by an independent expert and a report in this regard should be submitted to the Ministry before the project is commissioned for operation. Treated affluent emanating from STP shall be recycled/reused to the maximum extent possible. Treatment of 100% grey water by decentralised treatment should be done. Discharge of unused treated affluent shall conform to the norms and standards of the Punjab Pollution Control Board. Necessary measures should be made to mitigate the odour problem from STP.
6. Learned Counsel for the MoEF&CC has informed that the above condition has not been complied with. That apart, for the purpose of drawing ground water, the permission from the competent authority was required by the project proponent as in the EC following condition was incorporated:
“II. Construction Phase
i) to (xvii) xxx………………………….xxx……………………….xxx
(xviii). Permission to draw ground water shall be obtained from the competent Authority prior to construction/operation of the project.”
7. We have been informed that even the said permission has not been obtained. Though the project proponent has been issued notice and is represented through the Counsel but no response has been filed by the project proponent till now.
8. In the circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the concerned authority should not permit the project proponent to take any action which is illegal and contrary to law.
9. When the matter was substantially heard, learned Counsel for the project proponent has appeared through virtual mode and has sought time to file response.
10. Hence, we grant three weeks’ time to the project proponent to file the reply, subject to deposit of cost of Rs. 25,000/- before the Registrar General of the Tribunal.
11. The Tribunal has also received the communication on 13.01.2024 through e-mail, purported to be by the President, Omaxe Green Welfare Association, seeking permission to withdraw the complaint. No one is present for the Omaxe Green Welfare Association to support such a prayer.
12. That apart, the facts which are noted above clearly indicate that the grievance has not been redressed till now, therefore, we do not deem it proper to accept such a prayer.
13. Hence, we appoint Mr. Shashank Singh, Advocate (enrollment No. D/1882/2011) as Amicus Curiae in this OA to assist the Tribunal who will be paid remuneration amounting to Rs. 25,000/- per hearing by the PPCB from the funds of environment compensation deposited with it.
The project proponent is operating without the valid consent of the Board since 31/3/2022 and has failed to obtain renewal/ varied consent to operate from the Board. The project proponent has constructed total of 584 flats. However the Environmental Compensation was obtained for 660 flats and no clarification has been submitted by the promoter, whether they will carry out further construction in the project, even after expiry of the Environmental Clearance.
During questioning in the matter the officer of the Board was present in the court and the Hon’ble Court pointed out that the project has carried out the construction like providing new STP, new RWH pits despite the fact that the EC granted to the project has expired in May-2013. Further, the project has not provided dual plumbing in all the towers and has also not submitted permission for abstraction of ground water in compliance to the conditions of EC granted to it. As such, the project is not complying with the Environment Clearance and is liable for action. Even the Hon’ble court in its order has pointed out that the authority should not permit the project proponent to take any action which is illegal and contrary to law.
The project proponent was given personal hearing before the Hon’ble Chairman of the Board from time to time and lastly on 13/3/2024 and it was decided as under:
1) The project proponent shall apply for consent to operate of the Board as required under Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 along with requisite documents & consent fee to the Board within 7 days.
2) Environmental Engineer, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, SAS Nagar shall calculate EC which is to be imposed upon the project proponent w.r.t. violations made by the project proponent as well as w.r.t. operating outlet without valid consent to operate of the Board as required under Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
3) Environmental Engineer, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, SAS Nagar shall initiate the process to launch prosecution against the project proponent, as development of project continued even the expiry of Environment Clearance in year 2013.
4) Environmental Engineer, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, SAS Nagar shall contact Amicus Curiae in the matter of OA no. 803/2022 to enquire about his presence during date of hearing in the Hon'ble National Green Tribunal dated 04/03/2024 and accordingly do the needful to pay remuneration amounting to Rs. 25.000/- from the funds of Environment Compensation.
The project proponent has now applied for obtaining varied of consent to operate under Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 for 584 dwelling units along with requisite documents.
The site of the project was visited by officer of this office on 24/4/2024 and it was observed as under: -
1) The project proponent has completed structure work of 9 nos. towers at the site, having total no. flats @ 584.
2) The project has installed 02 no. STPs based on MBBR Technology of capacity 250 KLD & 180 KLD to treat the domestic effluent generated from its premises. On the day of visit, these STPs were found operational. Both the STPs are based on MBBR Technology and have been provided with UV followed by UF membrane for use of treated effluent for Karnal Technology and dual plumbing purpose. However, during visit ultra-filtration with 180 KLD of STP was not in operation.
3) The STP has provided 1 plate and frame filter press and 2 sludge drying beds for dewatering of STP sludge.
4) The project proponent has installed 02 no. tube well in its premises and as per record of flow meters maintained by the project proponent, around 525 KLD of fresh water is being abstracted. The Project Proponent has now provided electromagnetic type flow meters in place of mechanical type flow meters as advised during previous visit.
4) As per record of flow meter installed at outlet of STP and as per record about 340-350 KLD of effluent is being treated daily in the STPs.
5) The effluent samples were collected during the visit and as per analysis results all the parameters are found within limits prescribed by the Board.
6) The project proponent has provided dual plumbing arrangement only in four towers out of nine towers for the re-use of treated water for flushing purpose, which was verified during the visit. However, no separate record regarding the same is being maintained by the project proponent.
7) The project proponent has provided fixed pipe line for reuse of treated water in green areas developed within the premises of the project.
8) The project proponent has developed plantation area of 0.5 acre as per Karnal Technology for use of treated water for irrigation purpose.
9) The project proponent has carried out agreement for another 1.5 acre land behind the project which has been developed as per Karnal Technology and the project proponent has provided dedicated pipeline for carrying the treated effluent to the said area. The plantation area was completely dry during the visit. Also, the said pipeline was found broken during the visit and the area behind the residential colony was found stagnated with effluent.
12) The project proponent has now provided 05 no. of RWH pits in its premises.
13) The project proponent has installed mechanical composter of 700 kg/day, which is adequate, as required under the Environmental Clearance. Further, the project proponent has also provided 04 honeycomb compost pits for composting of wet waste.
13) The project proponent has installed 6 nos. D.G sets of capacities 1x500 KVA & 5x250 KVA. All are equipped with canopies and adequate stack heights.
The project proponent is not complying with the conditions of EC granted to it i.e. non-compliance of EC conditions is under:
i) The project proponent has not submitted latest ground water and soil samples.
ii) The project proponent has not obtained authorization under the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016.
iii) The project proponent has not submitted permission from PWRDA regarding ground water abstraction.
iv) The dual plumbing has been provided in 5 towers only out of 9 towers.
v) The project proponent has not submitted adequacy certificate of 250 KLD STP. Also, the completion certificate submitted by the pp is for 200 KLD instead of 180 KLD for the new STP installed by it.
vi) The project proponent has not submitted permission from PWRDA regarding ground water abstraction.
The project proponent has failed to comply with the provisions of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as well as compliance of EC conditions earlier granted to it. It was proposed to refuse varied consent to operate applied by the project proponent under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 after affording an opportunity of show cause-cum- personal hearing.
Thereafter, the project proponent was served show cause notice for refusal of varied consent to operate applied under the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 vide Board's letter no. 1186-87 dated 30/5/2024 alongwith an opportunity of personal hearing before the Chairman of the Board on 7/6/2024.
But, the project proponent vide its e-mail dated 4/6/2024 requested to give another date of hearing.
The request of the project proponent was considered by the Competent Authority of the Board and decided to give another opportunity of personal hearing to the project proponent before taking further action in the matter.
Therefore, the project proponent was given another opportunity of personal hearing vide Board's letter no. 1398-99 dated 14/6/2024 before the Chairman of the Board on 25/6/2024.
The representative of the project proponent attended the hearing and submitted written reply which was taken on record. He informed during hearing that the compliance of EC conditions have already been at the project site. He also informed that dual plumbing has already been provided in five towers for reuse of treated wastewater for flushing purposes. But, in other four towers dual plumbing is not possible at this stage. In this regard, the project proponent has taken additional land of 10 acres from Panchayat on lease where plantation will be developed to utilize treated trade effluent onto land for plantation.
After hearing the officers of the Board and the representative of the project proponent, the Chairman of the Board decided as under:
1) Environmental Engineer, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, SAS Nagar shall visit the project site immediately to verify the contentions of the project proponent w.r.t compliance of EC conditions and thereafter send the report alongwith recommendations within 7-days.
2) The consent applications applied under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 will be decided on merits after the receipt of report from Environmental Engineer, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, SAS Nagar.
3) It was made clear to the representative of the project proponent that if any non-compliance will be observed by the visiting officer at the site, the project proponent shall be bound to deposit bank guarantee amounting to Rs. 5.0 Lakhs as an assurance to comply with Environmental norms.
If approved, proceedings of the personal hearing as above may be conveyed to the project proponent and Environmental Engineer, PPCB, RO, SAS Nagar for compliance and sending the report, respectively.
|
