- (1.) BY this Application, Applicant Rajendrasinh has sought following directions: (I) Direct the Respondent Gujarat Maritime Board to stop coal handling unit located at Navlakhi Port on southwest end of the Gulf of Kutch in Hansthal Creek. (II) Direct the State Pollution Control Board to do the assessment of the damage done to the environment to the marine life of the coastal area by the Gujarat Maritime Board by illegally operating the coal handling units. (III) Direct the Gujarat Maritime Board to restore the area on the basis of polluter pays principle. (IV) Direct the State Pollution Board to initiate proper action against the Gujarat Maritime Board for violating the environmental laws and polluting the environment.
(2.) THE Application is filed under Section 14, 15 read with section 18 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. Main grievance of the Applicant is against port activities of "Navlakhi Port" operated by Gujarat Maritime Board (Respondent No. 2).
(3.) BRIEFLY stated, the Applicant's case is that without obtaining required lawful consent under provisions of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Navlakhi Port is handling coal units, dumping coal near open areas and transportation thereof in the nearby places which results into Air and Water Pollution. Thus, the Respondent No. 2 is causing violation of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as well as that of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and guidelines provided for coal handling. The Respondent No. 1 -Gujarat Pollution Control Board is a regulatory body which is legally bound to control the Air and Water Pollution. The Navlakhi Port imports coal from foreign countries on large scale. The Port has installed coal handling capacity of 8.05 million tons per annum (MTPA) which is mainly is imported and huge stock of coal is collected in open area. Thus, coal stocking activity results in coal dust emission. The Port is lighterage Port. Therefore, big vessels cannot enter the port for the purpose of unloading the coal. So, big vessels are anchored away from where the coal is transported through small vessels to Navlakhi Port where it is unloaded and stacked in huge heaps. Thereafter, it is loaded in trucks for supply to various consumers. The coal handling without proper management system is causing Air Pollution. It also leads to health hazard viz. breathlessness, eye soar etc. amongst the workers, residents of nearby area and passersby. The Maritime Board has not provided water fogging and sprinkling system in the coal handling area. There is no compound wall around the coal yards. The nearby agriculture fields are adversely affected due to emission of the coal dust which is spreading due to the wind and hurricane. The Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) noted several deficiencies in the coal handling of Navlathi Port and gave directions from time to time. The consent to operate was also denied on two occasions, yet, the coal handling system of Navlakhi Port did not show any improvement. Consequently, the Applicant filed present Application seeking the directions as mentioned above. By filing Affidavit -in -reply, Respondent No. 1 (GSPCB) resisted the Application. According to GSPCB, consent to operate Navlakhi Port was granted which is valid till 23rd April 2018, subject to various conditions. It is averred that due to non -compliance of certain conditions, the request for extension of the consent to operate had been rejected on 18th April 2009 and 3rd November 2010. It is further stated that GPCB informed Respondent No. 2 to comply with the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 as well as the Hazardous Waste Management Rules. The GPCB had pointed out deficiencies in the coal handling at Navlakhi Port. The GPCB noticed Air Pollution caused due to unscientific handling of the coal loading and the unloading at Navlakhi Port and as such, the Maritime Board was given directions to improve the coal handling system. The stance of the GPCB is that it had issued closure directions U/s. 31(A) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 on 28th April 2013 for certain period and thereafter inspections were carried out from time to time. The Maritime Board undertook improvement work by providing water sprinkling in the area, construction of pave blocked platform of 16000 sq. mtrs. and RCC road in the port area and therefore, the closure order was partly stayed. The GPCB noticed certain deficiencies during inspections between period of May 2011 till November 2011 and had issued Show Cause Notices to the Maritime Board. It had taken required measures to ensure due compliances of Air Act and the Water Act. The GPCB has filed supporting documents alongwith the Affidavit in reply.;