NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
                                             NEW DELHI
                                 APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2010

                       (ARISING OUT OF APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2008)


Deepak Kumar Rai                                                               Appellant/Petitioner
S/o Hari Shankar Rai
R/o Village & P.O. Asawar,
District Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh

       Versus

   1. M/s Prabhu Nath Rai Eent Bhatta Udyog Ltd.
      Respondents/Opp. Parties
      R/o Village & P.O. Asawar,
      District Gazipur, Uttar Pradesh
      Through its Proprietor Smt. Chama Devi


   2. Special Secretary,
      Department of Environment,
      Government of U.O., Lucknow

   3. Member Secretary,
      UP Pollution Control Board,
      PICCUP Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Vibhuti Khand,
      Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

   4. District Magistrate,
      Gazipur, Uttar Pradesh.

                                                     ORDER

For Petitioner - In Person For Opp. Parties - None PRESENT:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Justice A.S. Naidu (Judicial Member) Dr. G. K. Pandey (Expert Member) 7th July 2011

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice A.S. Naidu

1. The petitioner is a resident of Village Asawar in the District of Gazipur of Uttar Pradesh.

2. He approached the National Environment Appellate Authority (herein after referred to as NEAA) with a prayer to set aside the No Objection Certificate granted in favour of M/s Prabhu Nath Rai Eent Bhatta Udyog Ltd. (Respondent No. 1) to establish a brick Kiln. The appellate authority by order dated 18th February, 2009 allowed the appeal and set aside the permission. The grievances of the appellate/petitioner in this case is with regard to non implementation of the orders passed by NEAA. He has filed this petition praying as follows:

i. Summon and prosecute the respondent no. 1 for willfully violating the other of this Hon'ble Authority dated 25.05.2009. ii. Pass any order, writ or direction which the Hon'ble Authority may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Bereft of unnecessary details the facts which are necessary for effectual adjudication of this petition are as follows:

Admittedly Respondent No.1 Ms. Prabhunath Rai Eent Bhatta Udyod filed an application before the Regional Officer, U.P. Pollution Control Board, Varanasi for grant of permission under Section-21 of Air (Prevention and Control Board) Act, 1981 for establishing and running a brick kiln. After compliance with necessary paraphernalia the Regional Officer, U.P. Pollution Control Board, by order dated 20th November, 2002 granted consent/permission/NOC to the said Respondent to establish the brick kiln. Being aggrieved by the said order the present appellant/petitioner approached the U.P. , Pollution Control Board and raised certain objections. After going through the objections raised the Secretary, U.P. Pollution Control Board in exercise of the power vested upon him under Section 31-A of the NEAA Act directed to stop setting up of the brick kiln. The said order dated 3rd May, 2006 passed by the Member Secretary of U.P., Pollution Control Board, was challenged before the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court of Civil Misc Writ Petition No. 29099 of 2006. The said Writ Petition was remitted back to the Member Secretary with a direction to consider the matter de-novo and pass fresh orders after taking into consideration the objections raised by the the petitioner. It appears, the Respondent No.1 thereafter made fresh representation and the Member Secretary of the Board after considering the objections raised by order dated 5th December, 2006 rejected the representation filed by Respondent No.1. Consequently, the NOC granted in favour of Respondent 2 No.1, under Section 21 of the Air (Prevention and Control Board) Act 1981 stood withdrawn.

4. Respondent No. 1 assailed the order passed by the Secretary of the Board before State of Uttar Pradesh, Department of Environment, Lucknow under Section-31 (2) of the 1981 Act. The said appeal was registered as Appeal No.1 of 2007. The forum by order dated 8th September, 2008 set aside the order dated 15th December, 2006, passed by the Member Secretary U.P., Pollution Control Board.

5. The said order was assailed by the Petitioner/Appellant under Section-11 of National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997 before the NEAA and the same was registered as appeal of No. 12 of 2008. The Appellate Authority allowed the appeal by order dated 18th September, 2009.

6. The order of the Appellate Authority was assailed by Respondent No.1 before the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc Writ Petition No. 2785 of 2010. It appears that initially an order or Interim Stay was granted, however, by afflux of time the said order spent its force as no order or extension was passed by the High Court. The Petitioner has filed the present misc. application before the NEAA inter lia praying to prosecute the Respondent No.1 under Section -19 of the National Environment Appellate Authority Act, for violating the orders passed by NEAA.

7. While matters stood thus NEAA Act 1977, has been repealed by National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act, and the National Green Tribunal was constituted. The Misc. petition filed by the petitioner therefore, came up for hearing before this Tribunal.

8. The petitioner has appeared in person before this Tribunal. In course of hearing he has fairly admitted that in the meanwhile by judgment of 28th April, 2010 the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad has allowed the writ petition and has set aside the orders passed by the NEAA. The petitioner, as has been stated earlier was aggrieved by non implementation of the directions issued by the NEAA in their 3 order dated 18th May, 2009, but then in the meanwhile the said order passed by the NEAA has been set aside by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition Order No. 27865 of 2010, and do not exist any more.

9. In view of the aforesaid clear position of both facts and Law we are satisfied that no relief can be granted to the Petitioner in this case. Accordingly, we dismiss the misc. petition. Parties to bear their own cost.

I agree



Dr. G.K. Pandey                                                    Justice A.S. Naidu
Expert Member                                                      Member Judicial




National Green Tribunal
July 7th, 2011 (Durga)




                                                                                               4